Naomi Phillips, director of policy and advocacy at the British Red Cross, shares her thoughts on influencing for change.
A narrated version of this blog is available at the bottom of the page
How to influence government is fast becoming one of those wicked issues, where the old channels and methods simply aren’t working, and access routes are closing down. We’re a sector under immense pressure, but we need to steer ourselves in the direction of change, learning and adapting to stay ahead of the curve rather than doubling down.
So, what do we know about this government, and what can we learn about ourselves?
Power is centralised to the Cabinet and Number 10, and there are no signs that’s changing. As ever, the special advisers have mixed skills and interests, and civil servants may be less influential than previously. There are also new alliances among the recent in-take of ambitious MPs from the ‘Red Wall’ constituencies and those groupings led by experienced MPs, which demand to be listened to.
What is clear is that we’re dealing with a different way of doing things, and the effective levers for influence are largely untested.
It really cares what the public thinks. And this is particularly true of the public in marginal seats. Ministers talk about ‘exercising the will of the people’ and the PM presumably thinks he’s aligning the agenda with what the public want. And that may be true. Just look at polling on Brexit, immigration and so on, which show popular support for the government’s direction.
And if it thinks it’s in line with public opinion, the government also isn’t afraid to push back – I wonder how many charities have experienced a telling off by a civil servant or minister, for taking a supposedly ‘unhelpful’ approach?
It’s unpredictable. But the government has shown it will take a new direction if it’s clear there’s public support – look at the changes to free school meals, following the Marcus Rashford campaign. It also doesn’t seem too worried about bringing people with them or consulting before big decisions are made – think about the surprise announcement to merge DFID and FCO and to cut the aid budget from 0.7 to 0.5%.
But just as we expect the government to be open to challenge, so should we be.
Looking at ourselves
If this is a government still in the process of forming an identity which can unify all its factions, and working out where to go beyond Brexit and Covid, we should also ask, how do we look to them?
What do they think about the sector? Are we easy to engage with? Do we even speak the same language as the government?
I was talking with a special adviser recently who said that, if they ask a telecoms company for a report, they’ll get them the data on the same day, with how many people have used the service, the outputs, costings etc – and that they just can’t get that clarity or speed of information from the voluntary sector. Now, clearly, we’re working with people not mobile telephones. We tend – rightly in my opinion – to focus on outcomes for people. But we need to get better at data and making the economic, as well as the social argument.
It’s also not just what we say but how we say it.
In this model of government, the inner circle is powerful and well-protected. The PM has demonstrated unfaltering loyalty to his ministers and advisors even in the face of intense public pressure. In this context, strategies to challenge the minister directly have not only been unsuccessful but potentially counter-productive for organisations vocal in this space.
The lesson is an enduring one – play the ball, not the person – focus on the issues and avoid ad hominem attacks.
Our language and approach need to be under constant review, or we risk being overlooked and ignored.
If our ideas are sound, we shouldn’t be afraid to debate and defend them. When those in power are on the offensive, should we not take criticism head-on rather than putting our fingers in our ears? Too much of our discussion is in echo chambers – we need to move beyond that.
If we want to influence, there’s little point in being morally right, if the only people listening are those who agree with us already.
Perhaps most importantly, are we set up as a sector to lead the agenda of rebuilding society, of appealing to that levelling up agenda? Despite the wonderful progress with the vaccine roll-out, things are going to get worse before they get better. Over the coming months, we’ll see the end of furlough, the predicted rise in unemployment, in poverty, in poor health, in inequality. Are we working in the right ways to develop solutions to our time’s big social issues?
This government struggles to join up – and so do we. We’re not homogenous, but to influence we need to start shifting public opinion. Surely it’s better to do that together?
We need to get to a place where we are ready to influence for change, where we are propositional rather than oppositional, solutions-focused and constructive.
I’ve been in this sector for many years, and I think it’s amazing. It is – to coin a phrase – never more needed. But just as we try to analyse the government, we should also use this time to look at ourselves – build on what’s working really well and don’t be afraid to reform.
