influence – Page 2

Is it any good? Tips for how to analyse policy proposals

Being able to analyse policy proposals is an essential skill for anyone seeking to influence policy.

One of the most important skills that anyone involved in influencing policy needs to have is the ability to analyse and interpret changes in national policy. Whether it is examining bills and legislation, white papers, national guidance or consultation documents, being able to spot potential issues and, importantly, solutions, is an essential competence for anyone seeking to influence the policy agenda.

I was prompted to write this post having spent a few days recently trying to understand the implications of the Government’s energy price scheme.

Being able to understand what policy or decision makers want to achieve, and what they are thinking about, is a really important skill.

There are lots of academic papers and public policy theories that try to describe the policy analysis process – you simply need to run a quick Google search to find lots of those. While those are useful and helpful, in this post, I thought it would be helpful to think about it a little more practically. So here are my top five tips for policy analysis.

Tip 1: Think about the context

As a starting point, it’s important to consider the context, and what is being presented, as this will affect the approach that you might need to take. Are you being asked a question, or given an answer? For instance, is it a consultation where your views are being sought, or a policy statement or decision that has already been taken?

Tip 2: What is the policy trying to achieve, and will it work?

The next step is to work out what it is that the policy is intended to achieve. What problem are policy makers trying to fix? And will it deliver what it is that the policy maker intends? Are there any unforeseen consequences that might not have been properly considered? Your expert knowledge here is going to be particularly helpful, as you will probably know more about your stakeholders and their needs than the policy makers do.

Most ‘bad policy’ decisions are the result of not properly considering the unintended consequences – the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is probably the best example of that in practice. By adopting an approach based on breed and looks, rather than behaviour, it is widely criticised for failing to address the problem it was designed to fix which was to reduce the incidence of dog attacks.

Tip 3: Will it have a positive, negative or neutral impact? And will those impacts be fair?

You also need to consider whether the policy is likely to have a positive, negative or neutral impact. In other words, from your perspective, is this a good, bad or indifferent policy? And don’t forget that you’ll need to evidence your assessment, so also think about the mix of evidence that you will need to draw on to back up your judgment.

It’s also really important to think about equality as part of your analysis. In most cases, policy change goes through a process of ‘equality impact assessment’ to determine whether it might have a disproportionate unintended effect on equality, and to ensure compliance with the public sector equality duty. In reality, those assessments are not often particularly robust. It’s often an important gap to fill.

Tip 4: The financial impact

As big part of your analysis will probably centre on the cost effectiveness or financial implications of the policy change being proposed. Is it an efficient way of achieving the policy intentions? Are there alternative solutions available that might be more cost effective? And, of course, are there financial implications for the stakeholders that you are speaking for? A cost-benefit analysis is a very useful tool.

Tip 5: Can you change it?

How the policy, or policy proposal, is being presented will determine the answer to the question of whether it’s possible to change it if needed. A clause in a parliamentary bill (which will be subject to debate, amendment and parliamentary process) will be much easier to influence and change than, for example, a piece of statutory guidance from an arms-length body. This will also help determine the tactics that you might need to deploy to get any change that might be needed.

Alongside your analysis, it’s also worth thinking about what your stakeholders, beneficiaries, or local community might need to know about the change. This is important for two reasons. First and foremost, because people will need to know what the change is and how it will affect them. And secondly, because if change is needed, you can also think about how to mobilise your networks to push for that change. For example, mobilising people to write to their MP about a bill before Parliament. In this sense, policy analysis is, itself, a core component of the policy influencing process.

Policy analysis is an essential tool for anyone wanting to influencing government policy. It’s vital to be able to critically appraise policy proposals, to identify any unintended consequences, and ultimately to help ensure that the policy has a positive, rather than negative or disruptive, effect.

What is your experience of policy analysis? What would you add to these tips? Let me know your thoughts in the comments section below.

If you or your organisation are looking to do more policy influencing work, and would like some pro bono advice, I’d be happy to have a chat. Just drop me a line via the ‘Contact’ link above, or email me at hello@thepolicycoach.co.uk

Using the media as a policy influencing tool

We’ve all seen how the policy agenda can be forced to follow the media agenda. The media can be a powerful policy influencing tool

The media can be a powerful policy influencing tool. We’ve all seen the extent to which the political and policy narrative can be forced to follow an agenda set by the media (and vice versa, of course).

Anyone who has studied, or who is currently studying, public policy will be very aware of the power and role of the media as a policy actor in its own right. But that theory often has little to say on some of the practical ways in which you can use the media as a policy influencing tool.

Using the media in this way is not always going to be the best strategy. There are definitely times when the more quiet, behind-the-scenes tactics will be more fruitful. But on occasion, using the media can, for example, help to unblock particularly difficult issues, force the hand of policy makers, or change the narrative entirely.

In this post, I take a look at how valuable the media can be as a policy influencing tool, and offer some tips and tricks based on my experience. When writing this post, I have in mind what you can describe as the ‘traditional’ media. I’ll return to the power of social media as a policy influencing tool in a future post.

Tip 1: Work with the experts

If you are fortunate enough to work in an organisation that has media or communications capacity, get their advice and support in using the media to support your policy influencing work. Media relations and communications more widely is a highly specialist skill, and they will have a huge amount to offer to make sure that you are successful as possible.

Tip 2: Boil complex issues down to their very essence

As policy and public affairs professionals, we have an innate tendency to want to explore complex issues from all angles. This can sometimes mean that we find it difficult to distil such complexity down. However complicated the issue might be, you’re going to need to be able to describe it in just a few well-chosen words. Think of it in terms of summarising a 20 page piece of policy analysis down to a single sentence, and you will get the idea. Your media or communications colleagues will help (and challenge you!) with this. It can be a bit of an uncomfortable process on occasion. Which leads on to tip three.

Tip 3: Be clear on what needs to change

In all policy influencing work, it’s vital to be clear about what it is that needs to change. For example, what it is that you need government to do (or not to do), or who it is in the system that needs to do something differently (as discussed in a previous post). This is also true when deploying the media as an influencing tool.

Tip 4: Have something new to say and some new evidence

If you’re trying to get your issue in to the news agenda, then you’re going to need to have something new to say. That might be a new report, some new statistics, or a unique angle. Being clear about the policy outcomes that you are hoping to achieve will help you structure something that is fresh and unique which is much more likely to be picked up. You can also use some of your other policy influencing activities as a hook for media work – such as a forthcoming debate in Parliament, or on the back of the publication of a report by an All-Party Parliamentary Group, for instance.

Tip 5: Use case studies

As I have discussed previously, you should never underestimate the power of a good case study. This is also the case when using the media as a policy influencing tool. Case studies, particularly those that bring a human dimension to an issue, are critical for the media.

Tip 6: Integrate it with other influencing tactics

It’s a really good idea to link any media work on a policy issue with other policy influencing tactics. For example, you might want to follow up with a letter to a Minister, or think about how to connect and engage with parliamentarians. I was once trying to persuade policy decision makers to support a particular piece of work that we wanted to do, but were coming up against something of a brick wall. A well-placed piece on the front page of one of the most influential broadsheets (as much by luck as design) unsurprisingly resulted in a face to face meeting with the key decision maker which got us where we needed to be.

Tip 7: Recognise the risk

There is, of course, no way of knowing how the issue that you are raising might ultimately be framed or how any quote might be used. You will rely on the skill and expertise of your media and communications colleagues on this, but ultimately it’s beyond anyone’s direct control. This is important to recognise. I recall one example of this when we were engaged in particularly sensitive negotiations with the government which had reached a critical point. It was that moment that a newspaper that we had been talking to informally about the issue decided to run a story using an old quote from me which had the potential to cut right across those negotiations. It required some late-night contact with the Minister’s private office to calm potentially troubled waters. I can assure you that was quite a restless night!

Tip 8: Think about the outlet you’re talking to

How your issue might be framed in a piece will vary according to the world view of the outlet that you are talking to. The Spectator or The Telegraph will frame things quite differently to The Guardian or The Independent. It much the same way that framing your policy influencing agenda needs to take in to account the different perspectives of political parties, the same is true when using the media as an influencing tool. Think carefully about how to frame your message.

I would add at this point that you should also not disregard tabloids. Journalists working on tabloids are among the sharpest in the business – it takes enormous skill to be able to take difficult and complex issues and present them in a very accessible way for their readership.

Tip 9: Don’t underestimate the power of the informal chat

Informal conversations with journalists are incredibly important. Not only does it allow you to get a feel for their appetite and interest in an issue, it also gives you an insight in to the angle that they are likely to take. Importantly, it also allows you to describe some of the background and inevitable complexity to an issue.

Tip 10: Listen to the experts

For the final tip, I return to where I started this list – largely to emphasise just how important it is. Listen to your media and communications colleagues – they are the experts in how best to work with the media, and will be best placed to help guide you.

What is your experience of using the media as a policy influencing tool? If you work in media or communications, what would your advice be to those seeking to influence policy?

Westminster Hall – the unsung hero of parliamentary debates

Westminster Hall is one of the most historic parts of the Parliamentary Estate – and in policy influencing terms, it’s home to some of the most valuable debates too.

When most people think about debates in Parliament, they often think of the cut and thrust of debate in the House of Commons chamber. But there is another type of debate that happens on days when Parliament is sitting. And those debates can be a really effective way to raise an issue and get a response from a government minister.

What are Westminster Hall debates?

Westminster Hall is one of my favourite parts of the Parliamentary estate – steeped in so much history and national significance. At the time of writing this post, it is currently also the location in which Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is lying-in-state.

However, despite their name, Westminster Hall debates don’t actually take place in the historic Westminster Hall, but in the Grand Committee Room just off Westminster Hall.

Compared to debates in the main chamber, Westminster Hall debates have the huge advantage that they have more time available to delve into an issue in more detail than is normally possible elsewhere. They are also less combative in tone compared to debates in the main chamber, allowing a more nuanced debate to take place. This makes them a really effective vehicle for organisations seeking to influence the policy agenda to give their issue some meaningful airtime.

The format of a Westminster Hall debate

In a similar way to Early Day Motions, the motion for debate in a Westminster Hall debate is presented as a neutral statement – beginning ‘That this House has considered…’. Debate topics can either be local or national issues.

How topics are selected

Debates in Westminster Hall can be on a variety of topics. Any MP can request a debate in Westminster Hall, and debates are selected in a variety of ways, according to the Parliament’s Standing Orders. Some debate topics are drawn from the petitions that the public can choose to support (for debates on Mondays). Other debate topics may be selected by a ballot arranged by the Speaker’s office (for debates on Tuesdays and Wednesdays), while the Backbench Business Committee will select debates on Thursdays.

Work with a supportive MP

Westminster Hall debates are a really good way for individual MPs to raise issues that they are particularly passionate about.

If your organisation wants to see a debate in Westminster Hall on a particular issue, you’ll first need to approach a supportive MP that you have a good relationship with. You may have developed that relationship through an All-Party Parliamentary Group, via their support for an Early Day Motion, as part of your public affairs strategy to identify parliamentarians who are sympathetic to your cause, or, of course, at a constituency level.

They will probably ask you to help their parliamentary staff to draft the motion for debate. Once that is done, they will submit it through the appropriate channel. It’s then a case of waiting to see if their motion is selected for debate.

Prepare good briefings

If and when the motion is selected for debate, you’ll need to produce some good briefing materials for the sponsor of the debate, and for other MPs who might take part.

At this point, some people make the mistake of using the same briefing document for the debate sponsor and for other MPs. In my opinion, it is good practice to offer the sponsor a more detailed background briefing with some unique points for them to raise.

The briefing should summarise the key issues, outline what you think should change, and offer up some key speaking points. (I’ll return to the question of what makes a good parliamentary briefing in a future post.)

Encourage MPs to take part

You will also want to encourage other MPs to take part in the debate – after all, it won’t be much of a debate if only a few people turn up! It’s a really simple and effective call to action to ask MPs to take part in Westminster Hall debates. If you’ve got supporters and campaigners at constituency level, they can also ask their local MP to take part too, which will also help give them some relevant constituency perspective too.

The debate itself

The length of a Westminster Hall debate will depend on the topic for debate. Typically, for a debate on a national issue where there may be a lot of MPs keen to speak, the debate can last for an hour and a half. For debates on local issues, the debates normally last for 30 minutes.

MPs speaking in Westminster Hall debates are normally eager to bring local perspectives – reflecting what they are seeing or hearing in their constituency.

In my opinion, debates in Westminster Hall tend to be more thoughtful and reflective than debates in the main chamber, making them ideally suited for more complex issues and topics.

The government’s response

All debates in Westminster Hall end with a reasonably detailed response from the relevant government minister. This is one of the things that makes Westminster Hall debates such a useful influencing tool. The Minister will have had to have been briefed on the topic, which means that their officials will have had to do their research. If you’re fortunate to have a good relationship with the officials, this can add significant value.

Having a formal government response on record is incredibly valuable. It gives you a solid foundation on which to follow up with relevant officials, especially where the government may have committed to take specific steps.

A valuable influencing tool

Westminster Hall debates are, in my opinion, an unsung hero of Parliamentary process in the policy influencing world. They provide space both for meaningful discussion of complex topics and local constituency issues which would be hard to find elsewhere. They are a fantastic way to build relationships with MPs – either as potential sponsors or debate participants. And with a formal government response on record, they provide a really valuable platform for any organisation trying to shape the policy agenda.

What is your experience of Westminster Hall debates? Share your comments below.

If your organisation is looking to do more policy influencing work, and would like some pro bono advice, I’d be happy to have a chat. Just drop me a line.

Early Day Motions – parliamentary graffiti, or a useful influencing tool?

Early Day Motions are a way for backbench MPs to raise an issue. Are they an effective tool for influence, or just background noise?

Among the mechanisms available for backbench MPs to make their voices heard are Early Day Motions. In this post, I’ll take a look at what they are, and how they are sometimes used (and misused) as a policy influencing tool.

What are Early Day Motions?

Early Day Motions (or EDMs) are a way for backbench MPs to propose an issue for debate in the House of Commons. Their ‘Early Day’ title means that there is no day yet set aside for debate, and the request is that the motion gets debated on an ‘early day’. In reality, very few EDMs actually ever get debated in the Commons chamber.

They have a strange format

Early Day Motions have a very peculiar format. They need a short descriptive title, followed by a single sentence of no more than 250 words, which must begin with the phrase ‘That this House…”. The sentence will then normally continue with a statement of support, regret, disappointment, welcome etc. What this means in reality is that those tasked with crafting text for an EDM will end up making prolific use of semi-colons as a way of packing in as much content as possible! Having drafted several proposed EDMs over the years, I know that putting them together is a real art!

EDMs as party political or cross-party tools

Some EDMs are used to make party political points – either in support of government policy or position, or opposed to it. These motions will be drafted in such a way that only MPs from a particular party or persuasion are likely to support it. They may start with a statement of either support or regret for action that the government has or has not taken, for example. These EDMs are, in my view, the very least useful to engage with as a tool for influence as their primary purpose is political point-scoring.

Other EDMs will often be so niche or local that they will only ever get the support of one or two MPs. They may be celebrating a local development, for example. This is one of the reasons that the EDM system is often criticised.

In contrast, some EDMs will be written in such a way to maximise the likelihood of cross-party support. From an influencing perspective, these are the most useful, as they can demonstrate a sense of cross-party consensus on a particular topic which is harder to dismiss than a motion which is overtly political in nature. These are also the EDMs that are most likely to get the highest number of signatories.

It’s worth noting that ministers, whips, and parliamentary private secretaries do not normally sign EDMs, and the Speaker and Deputy Speakers will never sign EDMs as they need to maintain their impartiality.

How much do they cost?

While there is no direct charge for EDMs, there is a cost to the taxpayer, and the system costs Parliament a substantial sum of money. This is another reason that the EDM system is frequently criticised. In answer to a Freedom of Information request in September 2016, the Parliamentary authorities clarified that a total of £400,000 had been spent on the system in the 16 months since the May 2015 election. When you stop to think that there are, in an average year, over 1,200 EDMs that are tabled, it’s easy to see how those costs quickly mount up. On my very back of an envelope calculation, it puts the average cost of each EDM at around £250.

Are they effective?

The answer to this question depends largely on what you want to achieve. If your goal is to raise awareness of an issue, or to be able to demonstrate (particularly cross-party) support, then they can be a useful tool. I suspect that this is why they are commonly used to mark awareness weeks and other similar events. And as a building block for an emerging public affairs strategy, they can be a useful way of working out which backbench MPs might be open to a further conversation about the issue that is important to you.

If, however, your goal is policy influence and change, then I don’t think that Early Day Motions are particularly useful. Very few get debated, and most get disregarded. There are other more effective tactics that you can deploy.

On balance, I am deeply sceptical about the value of Early Day Motions as a route to policy influence. While I can understand their appeal, as a tool that it is relatively easy to use and to be able to ‘demonstrate’ MP support for an issue, their overall impact is marginal at best.

They have received quite a lot of criticism over the years, not just on the basis of their cost to the taxpayer. They have famously been described as ‘parliamentary graffiti’.

They can often be seen as a vehicle for external organisations and interest groups to be seen to be ‘doing something’. For campaign groups, it’s tempting low-hanging fruit to go for an easy way to ‘quantify’ the support of parliamentarians to your cause.

Using an EDM as an influencing tool

If you think that an EDM could be a useful way of raising an issue of importance to you and your organisation, the first step will be to find a supportive MP who would be prepared to table the motion. If you have a good existing relationship with either a local MP or an MP who has supported your cause (such as through your engagement with an All-Party Parliamentary Group), this is normally a good place to start. They will often ask you to help draft the motion and to work with their parliamentary staff to finalise the wording.

If you’re looking for good cross-party support, it’s a good idea at this point to also line up MPs from other parties to be co-signatories to the motion. The first six signatories will be the sponsors of the motion, so a cross-party spread of those initial signatures will be more likely to encourage other MPs to sign up too.

Once the motion has been tabled by the MPs office, it remains open for signatures for the remainder of the parliamentary session. As you build relationships with MPs from across the Commons, asking them to sign the EDM can be an easy and straightforward ask to get them involved.

Are they worth the effort?

While I remain sceptical about the value of EDMs, they do have a role to play. They can be a simple way to generate some cross-party support for an issue, and can be a good way for an organisation to build relationships with MPs. As a tool for influencing policy however, they are not effective. Very few EDMs are ever debated on the floor of the House, and even fewer have any meaningful effect on the policy agenda.

What is your experience of Early Day Motions? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

If your organisation is looking to do more policy influencing work, and would like some pro bono advice, I’d be happy to have a chat. Just drop me a line.

Dipping your toe in the water – making a start in the policy influencing space

As an organisation wanting to develop its policy influencing work, where do you start?

Photo by Christopher Sardegna on Unsplash

One of the most common questions for any organisation wanting to influence the policy agenda is how on earth do you make a start?

For smaller organisations in particular, it can be quite daunting. Resources are often tight, and there may not be specialist staff capacity to dedicate to the emergent influencing work.

This post is primarily directed at those organisations wanting to do more to influence the policy agenda, but not knowing quite where to start.

Influencing policy, and more importantly knowing the tactics that will be successful, rather than just visible (a topic for a future post), is a highly skilled function in any organisation. Afterall, commercial organisations pay many hundreds of thousands of pounds to ‘expert advisors’ to guide them.

But not every organisation needs to be spending huge sums of money recruiting policy influencing specialists – far from it. Your organisation may not be at the size or scale to realistically expect to need an in-house resource. But that doesn’t mean that your organisation, however small or local, doesn’t have a great deal to offer in the policy development process.

Here are my top tips for organisations keen to enter the policy influencing space, but not quite knowing where to start.

Tip 1: Set realistic ambitions

It’s so important to set realistic ambitions, and to walk before you run. If you’re starting from scratch, you’re unlikely to be out there shaping legislation, publishing policy research, or working with parliamentarians if the only capacity you have is 10% of somebody’s time on top of their (probably very busy) day job. Which leads me on to tip two.

Tip 2: Start small

There are lots of things that you can start to do that will be manageable and achievable, and that will help to build your confidence and experience in influencing policy. Writing letters to ministers and officials on topical issues that are important to your organisation, for example, can be a surprisingly effective way to start in the policy influencing space without huge investment of time or capacity.

Tip 3: Work with others

In a previous post, I talked about how important it is to work with others to influence the policy agenda. This holds true for all organisations seeking to shape the policy agenda, but perhaps even more so for those organisations who are just starting out on their influencing journey. You will know the other organisations who operate in a similar space to you, and probably already have good relationships with them. It’s a great idea to work with them to explore some opportunities for joint influencing work. You might, for example, work together to produce a joint briefing or report, or to host a briefing event for MPs. Working together can help share the workload and help you achieve much more than you could on your own.

Tip 4: You don’t necessarily need to recruit an in-house specialist

There can sometimes be a sense that the first thing that an organisation needs to do to move into the policy influencing space is to recruit an in-house specialist, such as a policy or public affairs officer. If you have the capacity and resources to do so, that is obviously a great thing to be able to do, although the point above still applies that you need to be clear about what your ambitions are. (In a future post, I’ll be taking a look at the skills and competencies that you should be looking out for when recruiting a policy specialist).

But there are lots of different ways that you can build and grow your capacity in policy influencing that don’t start with recruiting to a brand new role. For example, if your ambition is to do more parliamentary work, then a conversation with one of the many public affairs agencies could be a good option – whether you’re looking for one-off support for a specific piece of work (such as an engagement event with parliamentarians), or something a little longer term (such as helping to support an All-Party Parliamentary Group), they will have a range of options available to organisations of different shapes and sizes (and budgets).

Alternatively, you could look to partner with other organisations who are active in your space to pool some resources. That might allow you to do some specific activities or work, or even allow you to have a shared policy influencing role (this works particularly well at a local or regional level).

Tip 5: Aim for some early wins

When your organisation is starting out on its policy influencing journey, it’s going to be important to be able to demonstrate some early wins. This will not only boost your confidence but will also make it easier to make a future business case for investment to be able to go even further. This is where starting small, and having some clear objectives, is vital.

If your organisation is looking to do more policy influencing work, and would like some pro bono advice, I’d be happy to have a chat. Get in touch via the comments box below.

Using evidence to support your case for change

Building a persuasive case for change depends on having the right evidence and presenting it in the right way.

The public policy theory of rational decision making would suggest that politicians and decision makers weigh up the available evidence, and take decisions to achieve the maximum benefit at the lowest possible (not just financial) cost. This implies that they have access to the full range of information needed to make the best possible decision, and that they take a long-term view of change.

In reality, there are a lot of drivers behind policy decision making, including ideology, power, and political expediency, among many others. And in the UK system, most governments struggle to take anything longer than a five-year view.

So, for those of us trying to influence policy, the question becomes one of how we can deploy the best and most persuasive evidence available.

Here are my top tips for using evidence to support your policy influencing work.

Tip 1: Demonstrate the need for change

Before you can hope to demonstrate why your proposals are the best way forward, you first need to show what problem it is that you’re trying to solve. Depending on the nature of the issue, you will need to use different types of evidence to make your case. If it’s about public expenditure, for example, you’re going to need to focus on financial and economic evidence. If it’s about the impact of a problem to people’s lives, then you’ll probably want to focus more on case studies and stories. In reality, you’re going to need a mix of evidence to be able to demonstrate that this is a problem that needs to be solved.

Tip 2: Be realistic about costs and benefits

Over the years, I have seen so many attempts to influence policy fall at the first hurdle by brandishing around outlandish and unrealistic estimates of cost or benefit. There is a huge temptation to put your biggest and scariest numbers front and centre, but there are risks involved in that. It might lead people to question the robustness of your analysis. It might also make the issue or problem that you’re trying to solve appear just too big and too complicated for any government to feel able to tackle. Break things down in to manageable and realistic chunks, and don’t make unrealistic claims about the benefits (financial or otherwise) of any particular course of action. Which brings me to tip three.

Tip 3: Economic evidence

It’s tempting to assume that economic or financial evidence is the most powerful and persuasive. Don’t get me wrong, it does play a really important role, but it’s not always the most important thing. We can all think of many examples of policy decisions that have been taken by governments that seem to have taken scant regard to the financial implications. It’s really important to think about who it is that you are trying to persuade. If your target of influence is HM Treasury, then focusing on the economic or financial evidence is obviously going to be key. If, however, you’re trying to raise awareness of a particular issue or problem, stories are likely to be just as powerful.

Tip 4: Don’t underestimate the power of people’s voices

As I mentioned in a previous post, real life stories and case studies can be among the most powerful forms of evidence. In the search for the best evidence to support your case for change, it’s all too easy to forget the importance of people’s voices. If a picture paints a thousand words, a story paints a novel. If you’re trying to build a case for change, being able to articulate both the problem that you’re trying to solve and the impact that your recommended solution will have on people is key.

Tip 5: Demonstrate how popular your proposals are

There are a number of different ways that you can do this. You might want to show cross party support (such as the endorsement or support of an All-Party Parliamentary Group). You could also think about public (voter) polling to test out the popularity of your suggestions. Two notes of caution on public polling however. Firstly, a lot depends on how you phrase the question. Working with a reputable polling company means you will be able to make sure that your results are genuinely representative of the sample you want to test. Secondly, being able to demonstrate public support for a suggestion is not, on its own, sufficient. Just because an issue may be popular with the public, it doesn’t mean that it’ll be politically achievable in policy terms. Think of the popularity of issues like the reintroduction of the death penalty for the most serious of crimes, the nationalisation of rail, or the decriminalisation of assisted dying, and you’ll see what I mean.

Tip 6: ‘Unpublished’ and ‘grey’ literature is perfectly OK

There can be a certain snobbishness among some parts of the academic community to so-called ‘unpublished’, or ‘grey’ literature (both terms that I really dislike). The subtext of this is often that such data or evidence is somehow ‘not as good’ as the published and peer-reviewed studies that appear in journals. In policy influencing terms, this is quite a naïve position to take, and demonstrates a lack of understanding in how decisions are made. This is not to denigrate academic research – it plays an absolutely vital role (a topic I may return to in a future post). What I have learnt over the years is that politicians and decision makers frequently don’t make decisions based only on the best available published literature (and are even not averse on occasion to making decisions that appear to go against the weight of published evidence!). They are just as likely to use academic evidence retrospectively to justify the decisions that they make. With this in mind, so-called unpublished data and evidence definitely has a role to play in the policy influencing toolbox.

Tip 7: Use evidence from other countries

It’s a good idea to draw on what works from other countries around the world. Are there countries or systems that have already implemented some of the ideas that you are proposing? What has their experience been, and what evidence now exists? Don’t forget that we have four countries within the UK, so there is likely to be learning close to home too.

Tip 8: Cite your sources

Citing your sources helps to build confidence in what you’re saying. How you cite your sources will depend on what it is that you are producing. For example, written evidence to a select committee will need a more rigorous approach to citation than, for example, a simple policy briefing.

Tip 9: What have you got that’s new?

If part of your strategy to influence is to utilise media coverage, the first question that your communications colleagues are likely to ask is ‘what have you got that’s new?’. If you’re trying to get a hook for a media story, it’s hard to beat the power of new evidence or data, especially if it’s combined with people’s stories and case studies.

Tip 10: Use the emotive language sparingly

When you are presenting a case for change, there is definitely a role for emotion. Afterall, you’re trying to fix a problem that matters to you and your stakeholders. However, in contextualising your evidence and data, use the emotive language quite sparingly. Not everything is an ‘outrage’ or a ‘crisis’. How you frame your evidence and data is just as important as the evidence and data itself. Afterall, you’re trying to win people over to your way of thinking.

What is your experience of using evidence to support your influencing work? What evidence do you think it the most persuasive? Let me know in the comments below.

Drowning in paper? How do you decide which consultations are worth bothering with? And how do you make a submission that will be listened to?

Responding to consultations is bread and butter for anyone involved in influencing policy. In this post, I’ll take a look at how to make sure that your voice is heard

Responding to government consultations is bread and butter for people working in policy roles. If you’re not careful, it could be all too easy to do nothing but, surrounded by piles of paper and post-it notes.

So how do you decide which consultations to respond to, and which you can ignore? And what are the best ways to go about putting a submission together?

In this post, I’ll be looking at how to approach government consultation processes, and some of the tips and tricks to make your voice heard.

What is a consultation?

This might sound like a fairly easy question to answer. But the reality is that there are lots of different types of consultations that government (and their associated arm’s length bodies) might issue from time to time. Being able to spot the difference will help you decide which ones to prioritise, and which you can safely ignore.

In 2018, the UK Government Cabinet Office published an updated set of principles to support the civil service on how to run consultation processes (which are substantially watered down from previous versions). It provides useful insight in to how such processes are planned and organised from the government’s perspective. In reality, I’m not convinced that the principles are always used by officials when planning such processes.

A duty to consult

There are some consultations that the government has a legal duty to issue – these are normally fairly technical consultations where there is a responsibility to regularly consult with stakeholders. One example of such a consultation is the annual consultation that is issued on the detail of the NHS Standard Contract which is used for any providers delivering NHS funded care. If you have technical expertise, or something specific that you want to see changed, it can be relatively easy to have some influence on these, as officials are specifically looking for input on the detail.

A fait-accompli?

There are then some consultations which are simply tick-box exercises which allow the government to say that they canvassed views. A tell-tale sign of one of these is a consultation which is issued to gather views on a subject that the government has already been quite vocal about the approach that it is planning to take (the consultation on proposals to make COVID vaccination a condition of deployment in health and care services in England is a good example of one of these, even though that was eventually reversed). Another tell-tale sign of one of these types of consultation is that they often have very short windows for responses (best practice is to allow respondents 12 weeks to submit responses, but in reality it is often much less. For tick box consultations it can sometimes be as short as a couple of weeks).

Seeking expert input

The third type of consultation is one where the government is genuinely interested in gathering input and expertise to help them take some policy decisions. Consultations about developing or updating guidance (where expert professional input will be essential) is an example of this kind of consultation.

This isn’t to say that this is the only type of consultation that you should bother with. Deciding which consultation process to engage with will depend a lot on how relevant the consultation might be to your priorities or interests. Sometimes, even if there is little prospect that your comments might change the government’s mind, it can be important that you are seen to respond and make your voice heard. It can help build your profile and your reputation as an important stakeholder.

The growth of consultation surveys

In recent years, there has been a noticeable growth is consultation surveys, where government issues a consultation with an associated survey to gather responses. This is, of course, designed to make it easier for the poor officials who have to collate responses and pull together summaries of the key themes. Much easier to do that by counting up the number of yes/no answers to a very specific question than to have to read lots of narrative explanation.

Consultation surveys definitely have a place. They’re particularly helpful where some of the decisions that government has to make are quite binary in nature – for example, should we do X or Y. They are less helpful when trying to deal with some complex issues which don’t lend themselves to distilling down to a narrow binary reply. However, in recent years they appear to be increasingly popular with government as a way, presumably, of reducing the administrative burden of analysing submissions. It also helps the government to guide respondents to the answers that it wants to see. This brings me on nicely to the next question.

Should you just answer the consultation questions?

In my opinion, the short answer to this is no.

Sometimes, the questions that are not asked can be more important than those that are. Structuring your response around the consultation questions will obviously make it easier for officials to collate your responses. However, there are sometimes important issues that the government has not yet considered, and that do not fit within the framework of the consultation questions being asked. On those occasions it is perfectly acceptable (and arguably important) to step outside of the question framework and to offer a narrative response. Consultations often have an email address, or mailing address, where narrative responses can be sent, even if the consultation is being run as a survey.

What makes a good response?

A good consultation response is clear, concise, and evidence-based. Although it can be tempting to write War and Peace on a topic that you are very knowledgeable or passionate about, like any communication, it’s important that you get your message across succinctly and clearly.

When it comes to evidence, quantitative and qualitative evidence are both equally important. As I said in a previous post, evidence is king when it comes to making a persuasive argument. That evidence might be evidence about cost and benefit, but could equally be case studies, examples and the voices of people who might be affected.

Maximising your impact

Responding to the formal consultation process can be an effective way to make your voice heard. To maximise your impact, there are a few other things that you can do.

As I have said in previous posts, influencing policy is all about relationships. One of the best ways you can maximise your impact in a consultation process is to get in touch directly with the officials leading the process. They will be keen to learn as much as they can to inform their advice to ministers. It’s quite common for there to be workshops run in parallel to the written consultation process, which can be a good way to find the right people to talk to.

It can also be useful to get in touch with other organisations who might be responding to the consultation too, to see whether there are any common or shared messages that you can both reinforce or help to amplify. The more responses that make a point, the more likely that point is to be heard.

Sometimes, there might be opportunities to use your response as a hook for some media work. This will work best where the issue at hand is particularly newsworthy or interesting, and where you have a strong and clear line. It can help to reinforce your wider campaign messages. Talk to your communications and media colleagues who will be best placed to advise.

Never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to

Responding to consultations is one of the most commonly used tools in the influencing toolbox. If the government is genuinely in listening mode, it can be a really effective way of getting your voice heard, and positioning yourself as a key stakeholder with something constructive and valuable to add.

Pay particular attention to what questions are being asked. As the old legal adage goes, never ask a question that you don’t already know the answer to. Sometimes this also applies to consultation processes – think carefully about the questions that you’re not being asked as much as those that you are.

What is your experience of responding to consultations? How do you pick which ones to prioritise? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

Coming up next time: I’ll be exploring working with other organisations to achieve policy influence. Do coalitions work, or do they just water down your objectives?