What is Lobbying?
Lobbying is simply the act of people and groups attempting to communicate their views to the government on issues important to their interests. Many people think lobbying is a bad thing; others view it as a necessity of public policy formulation and implementation. This book asserts that lobbying is just one part of a continuum of advocacy that constitutes government relations advocacy. "Lobbying,” as defined and tracked by the various lobbyist registries across Canada, is just the high profile intensive endpoint of well established policy making processes.
Direct lobbying to influence government decision making at the very end of the policy process tends to be costly in time and resources for anyone trying to get their message into the government at the 11th hour. However, successful organizations adopt a long term systemic view of government relations advocacy and use direct lobbying as just one aspect of their overreaching advocacy relationship with the government and related interests. The dual benefit of understanding and working with the system in this way is that it's cheaper and ultimately probably more effective in influencing public policy decision making.
Critical to this approach is knowledge of how the system works and intelligence gathering within the system. Generally speaking, organizations that interact with government systems tend to take one of two approaches: either they hire specialized consultants who are thought to possess in-depth understanding of the political and governmental spheres to assist them in formulating policies, or they decide to handle the task themselves. In effect, time is the real commodity in government relations. Organizations can build up their own knowledge, experience, and relationships over an extended period of time or simply pay someone who already has such capacities to make up the shortfall when it is needed. This book is for the former, but hopefully it will be valuable to all.
Organizations that possess current knowledge about the people and institutions within the system can act as their own best advocates. Contrary to popular belief, this form of government relations does not involve "friends and insiders." There is a clear pattern of success and failure in government relations. Groups that are better prepared and engage early fare much better when making requests to the government. Those who come late to the policy discussions or who are just reacting to government proposals tend to have an uphill battle to make any significant progress.
The best advocates come prepared for a serious policy discussion. They understand the government's objectives. They have data, bring solutions, have an understanding of what is possible, who can do what, and know precisely what they want from the government. They also ensure policymakers know the implications of the laws they are making. This level of readiness never guarantees success, but it gives these organizations the best chance to represent their members' interests.
It would be naive to argue, of course, that political insiders don’t have special access to their friends in power. This happens and will always be the case when organizations are willing to hire firms based on their consultant’s experience as former elected members, party workers, or even retired senior public servants. These people do have specialised knowledge and perceptions that can help an organization move its agenda forward.
Often, insiders are in a position to quickly arrange meetings with staff or cabinet ministers to help raise their client’s issues. This does help, but ultimately, there is no escaping the demands of the policymaking system itself. Even a premier or prime minister is going to be hindered from helping a political friend if it goes against the requirements of the broader public policy system. It's just as likely that a politician will ask their friends to “take one for the team” in order to help the greater political cause or stifle perceptions of favouritism that might occur if the decision was to help that friend.
Rather than access or influence being the core of government relations, time is the true commodity for success in affecting government decisions. Direct lobbying simply attempts to compress everything into a short, critical time frame, usually at the end of the policy development process, often after key decisions are made. Whereas complex government relations advocacy seeks to extend the time frame of weeks, months, or years to influence the context and upstream direction. Therefore, dealing effectively with the government is much more than just direct lobbying. Lobbying is late in the process, short-term, and often highly political. Advocacy is long term, nonpartisan, runs through the entire process, and can ultimately include direct lobbying, but it takes a systemic view of the policy system.
