Campaigning should not be the first thing to cut!

In campaigning small investments can lead to large consequences. A minor amendment to an education act over 15 years ago, together with securing a commitment from Government to establish a funding stream called the Schools Access Initiative - to make schools more accessible for disabled children - led to large scale change. The campaign to achieve the campaign aim cost less than £50,000, including staff time. Yet over those 15 years the fund has given out over a billion pounds of funding to make schools more accessible. Such leveraging power of campaigning can sometimes far outweigh the impact of service provision and is often its handmaiden.

How strange then that in times of crisis for public services and huge changes to legislation, news begins to seep out of cuts to campaigns teams across the sector. First hit seem to be those umbrella organisations that rely in part on central government grants for the work they do, but following close on their heels are other organisations beginning to shed staff or curtail activities. It is of course understandable that organisations have to retrench in times of financial scarcity but is cutting campaign capacity inevitable or the right strategic choice?

Many of the funding steams that charities, voluntary sector organisations and their clients depend on are changing or disappearing. Coupled with this there are massive upheavals to large sections of the legislative framework on which many social entitlements rest, and which their beneficiaries are dependent on. Government and local authority decisions on future funding streams and service programmes will depend on statutory obligations and in part on where they see the pressure for services and what is most politically sensitive to cut. Those organisations and causes with the least influence and voice will be the most vulnerable over the coming years.

Therefore decisions to cut campaigning capacity at this time may turn out to be very short sighted - organisations may find downstream that the needs of their beneficiary groups are no longer front of mind when the tough decisions have to be made about future funding for the services they provide. If legislative entitlements have been weakened, grants and funding may be even less forthcoming and service opportunities restricted or funding disappear completely. For some sectors this is, of course, simply part of the changing landscape of service provision, and it is sometimes healthy for organisations and services to develop and change.

However, in a period of financial crisis where bone and not just fat is going to be cut away, the removal of a strong voice and profile for many social causes is in danger of leaving those communities without a voice - and the organisations who seek to represent them and provide services to them without the capacity to support them. Some may see something healthy about a radical challenge to voluntary organisations dependence on central and local funding from Government, but for big society solutions to work you need more focus on what social need exists, not less. The campaigner’s role therefore remains central either way.

Interestingly, if in future organisations are less able to access state funding or use insider routes to profile their issues with decision-makers, then the incentives to stay so close to insider routes in their campaigning strategies will also diminish. Whether this will herald a sharper publicly focused campaigning style on behalf of organisations that retain campaigning capacity will be interesting. What is certain is that for those that survive the restructuring of campaigning in the new environment they will need their campaigning skills more than ever.

Brian Lamb’s new book 'The Good Guide to Campaigning and Influencing' was published by NCVO on 25th January.