This week I listened to a radio programme where the parents of a murdered teenager were talking about restorative justice and what an overwhelmingly positive experience it had been for them. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term it can best be summed up as an approach where the offender is encouraged to take responsibility for the crimes they have committed and accept the impact that their crimes have had. Trying to sum-up this important concept makes me slightly wary because it’s hard to articulate without sounding ‘touchy-feely’, and you can see why some elements of the media have interpreted it as a ‘soft-on-offenders’ approach.

Yet every time I hear about cases where this process was employed, everybody involved has claimed what a powerful tool it can be as part of rehabilitation (which many people involved in criminal justice would agree is somewhat lacking in the UK system). In the case of these parents it involved carefully planned and mediated meetings with one of the gang members who had killed their son. The gang member was serving a prison term but until he agreed to meet the parents he had never accepted responsibility for his actions. He claimed meeting with them was hardest thing he’d ever had to do and he almost refused to take part. The parents, naturally, also needed some persuasion to meet their son’s killer but found it a healing process and deeply beneficial. They received some insight into what happened when the crime took place and in this case said they were even able to forgive him and move on. (For more information on the restorative justice approach and impact see the Restorative Justice Council.)

Some time ago Principle Consulting worked with an organisation called Women’s Breakout who work with women in the criminal justice system or women who are at risk of offending. Although restorative justice was just a very small part of the amazing work they do (and I urge you to check out some of their facts and stats), it really made an impression on me and I often think about them and their work whenever restorative justice makes the news. At the point when we worked with them they were facing huge budget cuts while still being widely lauded for their important work – an all too common experience in the sector these days. Ken Clarke the former Justice Secretary was widely in favour of the restorative justice approach and some of the community alternatives to custody that Women’s Breakout and others advocate, but since the reshuffle last month he has been without a job. We’re yet to hear Chris Grayling’s opinions on the issue but I look forward to finding out.

Lately there has been some interesting debate about charities recruiting celebrities to support their issues and how much it genuinely benefits campaigns.

Marina Hyde in the Guardian wrote this great piece that highlights the downside of chasing the celebrity supporter, and there is very little here I disagree with, but as Marina points out celebrities do bring media attention to an issue that may previously have been ignored. Its a depressing but true fact, as anyone who has tried to get media coverage for their issue can testify: Add a bit of showbiz glamour to your campaign and its more likely to make the news.

However, charities need to think carefully about the merits of using celebrities as spokespeople. It seems relying on celebrity supporters (as the article demonstrates) could actually be a turn-off to the general public. Not to mention the time and resources taken up with trying to liaise with busy celebs or their PRs. I must confess that on occasion my heart has sunk in a meeting with a client when somebody has claimed “we need to get a celebrity on-board”. We always try to explore whether this is the most beneficial use of resources and if so, which celeb would be the best fit for the campaign. Where the celebrity in question has a personal link to the issue or is really an ‘expert’ in a related field (such as an author heading up a literacy and numeracy campaign) it can be incredibly powerful – this is why Jamie Oliver’s campaign on school dinners was so successful.

The Hepatitis C Trust is a long time client of ours at Principle and are particularly deft at the securing the right kind of celebrity support. Sadie Frost has been a long time supporter and champion but also has a personal link to the issue – at a recent Parliamentary event she met an MP who said to her “so you’re the celebrity they’ve bought in then?” but she was quickly able to articulate the main issues of the campaign and the reason for her support (she tragically lost her father to the disease). And this really is the crux of the matter: any campaign spokesperson, whether famous or not, really has to be credible and knowledgeable on the issue. Its not just about taking a pop star out to Africa anymore, the charity-giving public are much more savvy and deserve to be treated as such.

During the course of our work I regularly come into contact with other consultancies who claim to offer similar services to us, but I am constantly surprised at the different approaches that they offer.

Some, I can genuinely say, are excellent and committed professionals (just like Principle!) who have a real grasp of their client’s issues and understand the landscape their clients work in. Others (and I am naming no names) are more interested in name-dropping their ‘contacts’ in Westminster while offering no real comprehension of the charities goals or policy ambitions – I even met someone from a company whose big idea was to target MPs spouses, but could not advise on what business was happening in Parliament. I have no doubt that in some sectors the ‘old boy network’ may be a valid approach, but in charity lobbying I think that strength of your argument and clear reasoning are 100 times more effective. Obviously good contacts are important and we all work hard to build up useful networks, but it’s about knowing what to say to whom and when rather than setting up meetings with no clear goals.

This is why we impress upon our clients the importance of strong policy development work alongside any political lobbying. Principle understands that policy and public affairs are two sides of the same coin. An excellent public affairs strategy is rooted in an organisation’s policy objectives, whilst excellent policy development requires a comprehensive understanding of the political environment. The best strategies combine policy and public affairs assessing the best way to progress an organisation’s policy goals within the prevailing political environment. As well as having all the usual attributes of a public affairs agency, Principle has the added dimension of real understanding of the relevent policy aims. We combine the two to achieve the best possible results for our clients.

Charities walk a constant tightrope trying to make their policy goals relevant to a particular political environment whilst staying true to their core values, and we are constantly on-hand to clients to offer advice on how to do this. It may sound obvious but it’s amazing how many seem to overlook this.

For the last couple of weeks I have been working with some film-makers to design a campaign to accompany a feature film (drama, not documentary). The idea being that when the film gets a cinematic release next year, the campaign will be launched alongside it and cinema audiences will be motivated to add their support.

This got me thinking about the use of film in campaigning, and particularly drama. I’ve worked on many campaigns that have involved the use of documentary footage, which can be a powerful testimony, but doesn’t do that much to bring new campaigners to the issue (surely if you’re prepared to seek out a documentary on an issue you must be pretty interested in the first place?). And let’s be honest, there are some fascinating documentaries out there but many more are preachy or resort to scaremongering. Some are just too highbrow or plain boring, and very few are any good for appealing to the masses. Drama, on the other hand, could potentially reach a whole new audience. Good drama can be thought-provoking and conscience-pricking, and open people’s eyes to a problem they never knew existed.

I don’t know why more campaigns don’t make use of film and drama but I’ve been racking my brain to think of a recent example, to no avail. In 1966 the BBC broadcast Ken Loach’s Cathy Come Home which was watched by over 12 million people. This was, coincidently, the same year at the charity Shelter was founded. Shelter have since said that “the film alerted the public, the media, and the government to the scale of the housing crisis, and Shelter gained many new supporters”. This is surely a ringing endorsement of the power of good drama, so why are there so used few today in campaigning?

I recently spoke at the first ever UK Feminista Summer School in London. UK Feminista is a feminist campaigning organisation which aims to act as a link between ordinary women who are interested in feminist campaigning and the many different excellent campaigns and organisations already out there.
 
I was asked to give a presentation on how campaigners can influence politicians, but with only twenty minutes to make my case I had to be very specific! I talked primarily about working with MPs and how to identify those that may be broadly supportive of your issues. I have offered to run a broader and in-depth workshop-style session, which is something Principle has done for clients in the past. 
 
If the attendance at the Summer School is anything to go by, then UK Feminista is doing very well at reaching out to new activists. The event was fully booked and got some terrific media coverage: both Kira Cochrane and Bidisha wrote about it in The Guardian and the Today Programme featured the event on its programme the day before. The vast majority of people there were enthusiastic but inexperienced campaigners – I found this really exciting and a great privilege to speak to so many eager activists.  Kat Banyard and the rest of UK Feminsta had done a brilliant job in appealing to this group, and it made me think that a lot of campaigns could learn from this model:  not only reaching out to grass-roots supporters but also continuing to support them in their campaigning actions. 
 
(Find out more about our charity training sessions.)

Last month we were thrilled to win the prestigious Communiqué ‘Best Health Policy Campaign’ award for the work we do with the brilliant patient group, The Hepatitis C Trust.
 
The Hepatitis C Trust is an inspirational organisation that puts patients at the heart of everything they do (it is led and almost entirely staffed by patients) – and they do a lot!  Public, professional and political awareness of hepatitis C is low and it is a health issue that disproportionately affects vulnerable members of society (for example, homeless people and injecting drug users) so making sure they have a strong voice in political and policy making circles is crucial.
 
We have worked closely with the team at the Trust to analyse the problems in services for hepatitis C patients and produce a robust evidence base and cross-party political support for reform.  Our call for action was for a national liver strategy driven by a ‘National Liver Tsar’ to solve many of the problems experienced by patients (such as low diagnosis rates, poor public awareness, low treatment rates, a postcode lottery of care and undefined patient pathway).
 
Working closely with the members of the All-Party Parliamentary Hepatology Group (APPHG) and other liver related charities, we built a cross-party political alliance to support this aim and raised the issue in Parliament through a variety of constructive questions, debates, motions and meetings.  Developing an evidence base for reform was crucial, so we audited Primary Care Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities on their hepatitis C services which revealed the previous Department of Health Action Plan for hepatitis C was not working and change was urgently needed.
 
Needless to say, we were delighted when the Minister for Health responded to the campaign and announced the development of a National Liver Strategy in October 2009 and appointed a National Clinical Director for Liver Disease (in February 2010) to drive forward the work. 
 
There’s still lots to do!  The Trust is now working with the Department of Health to make sure that the strategy will make the necessary changes to patients’ health and wellbeing… and then will be working with local health services and local authorities to make sure the changes are implemented on the ground and that patients feel the difference. 
 
The judges said:
“Quite simply this campaign helped transform the policy landscape for Hepatitis C”
 ”This stood out in an extremely high standard category. An outstanding piece of work – very defined, robust and measurable. Their success ensured they over-achieved against very tough objectives”

After several years with our previous website, we felt it was time for a change.

Our new site is designed to provide more information about our charity advocacy services, as well as offer more useful resources for our colleagues and clients.

We’ll be blogging here whenever we’ve got some great news, tips or reports to share.

In the meantime, take a look around and let us know what you think!