In this blog, Chair of The Advocacy Initiative, Kieran Murphy reflects on the need and importance of trust in his work as a social justice advocate.

He examines the issues raised in a new study ‘In Other Words’ on the perceptions of policy makers to social justice advocacy due to be launched by The Advocacy Initiative on Friday, June 14 th for the C&V sector and his work.

"Thinking back on my own experience of doing social justice advocacy I notice that I prepare for meetings with policy makers in a particular way. I make sure that the points I want to make are clear, well-structured and that there is appropriate evidence to support my points. If attending with a delegation from the Saint Vincent de Paul or other community and voluntary organisations we work out the order in which we will present, who will lead the delegation, and how to deal with variations in our policy positions and preferences.

The one thing I never consider is ‘Do I trust the policy makers I am meeting, or do they trust my organisation and me?’

In terms of the statement ‘ where there is trust, truth can be spoken to power ’ I want to concentrate on ‘truth’. I also want to concentrate on ‘speaking to power’ and look at what I want from the policy makers, be that to agree with me, take on board my views, or do something. I rarely, if ever, think about the levels of trust between us.

Where there is trust, truth can be spoken to power ’ assumes that the power is that of policy makers and structures and institutions of which we are not a part. However, an important dimension is that each of us has power: the power to decide to listen, to be open to the views of a speaker, to decide to change the way we think and feel and then perhaps to act differently. What this illustrates for me is that trust is an important and powerful dynamic.

Trust is something that has taken a battering in Ireland over the last decade or more. Late last year there was a very funny Martyn Turner cartoon in one of the papers. It showed four figures and each of them saying in turn ‘Trust me I am a politician’, ‘Trust me I am a banker’, ‘Trust me I am a lawyer’, ‘Trust me I am priest’. I know there are lots of trustworthy politician, bankers, lawyers and priests, but I got the joke. The point was that the four figures represented the national institutions in which people have lost trust.

The cartoon could have had a lot more characters. A recent public opinion poll conducted last November for a consortium of Irish Charities asked people which of the following national institutions do you trust? And the following had low levels of trust: banks, the government, the church, the media, insurance companies, city and county councils, the EU, and Trade Unions. The three institutions which scored highest were The Gardai, charities and schools. 74% of respondents to the poll said they trusted charities either ‘somewhat’ or a ‘great deal’. That is very impressive.

When we begin to look at trust and advocacy work the picture becomes more complex.

The following reflections draw on my involvement in The Advocacy Initiative and some of their recent research. I am going to examine three questions:

1. To what extent do policy makers trust C&V organisations and their leaders?

2. Are there good levels of trust from the public for social justice advocacy?

3. Do colleagues from within different C&V organisations trust each other?

In a study to be launched on Friday, June 14 th , 33 people involved in the policy making process were interviewed to get a better understanding of their perceptions of social justice advocacy and what it is like to be on the receiving end of our work in the area. They included:

- elected representatives,

- key public and civil servants,

- state/semi state agencies and organisations,

- experts/advisors/academics/researchers for political parties.

A lack of trust came up in a number of significant and different ways.

- The issue of the legitimacy of some C&V organisations and people doing the advocacy work came up. In the minds of policy makers they had questions such as: ‘What is the mandate of these groups to advocate on particular issues’, ‘Where do they get their mandate from’, and ‘Are they genuinely connected to the ‘ground’ to the ‘real voices’ of the people whom they claim to represent. Not only did policy makers have these questions in their mind, but also they were answering to themselves in the negative: I don’t think they have a mandate.

- Policy makers spoke of seeing self-interest. That some organisations were more interested in sustaining their organisations and/or their jobs, rather than the interests of the groups/individuals they set out to represent.

- There was also a perception of an absence of an honest critique and self-reflection within the sector. Particularly, in relation to organisations not being able to recognise the tension that exists between being both a service provider, which is funded by the state, and being an advocate for the people who receive the service.

These are challenging views. Whether or not you agree with these perceptions is not really the point. The issue is that if policy makers are thinking, as you are speaking your truth to them, that ‘ I don’t think you have a legitimacy, I think you are more interested in the preservation of your job and organisation and you are not open to self-reflection ’ then at some level they don’t trust you and they are not as receptive as they might be to the truth you are trying to speak.

In regards to the general public they are very positive about the potential role of charities in policy formation. An opinion poll which I mentioned earlier, asked people if they agreed with the following statement: ‘I believe that greater involvement of charities and community groups in national policy making would ensure that vulnerable people are better provided for in the current crises’. 15% strongly agreed, 42% agreed.

Two further questions were asked: How influential do you think charities and non-profit groups are in persuading government to change the law or policy? & How influential do you think charities and non-profits groups should be in persuading government to change the law or policy? The results were 15% and 46%.

What this illustrates is that the public see a gap between how influential charities are and how influential they would like them to be. The public’s view of charities was in stark contrast to other sectors where the public thought that trade unions, business, farmers and religious bodies were more influential that they would like them to be.

Now onto the issue of trust between advocates working in different organisations within the C&V sector. One of the things we are experiencing difficulty with within The Advocacy Initiative is finding ways of having dialogues about sensitive issues. While we are really good at advocating: making a point, debating an issue, trying to convince another about our view of the world, we are less skilled at ‘enquiry’ – where the emphasis is on asking the other person how they see the world, understanding what is important to them and genuinely seeing their perspective. Some of the issues we are finding challenging to explore are:

- How do we deal with competition between organisations for resources, access to policy makers and public profile?

- There are a variety of different frameworks and approaches to the work: human rights, equality, and community development to name just three. How do we deal with the tensions between these approaches so that the tension is creative rather than destructive?

- We are not all great at the advocacy work we do, so how do we have a conversation about perceived bad practice?

There is an appetite to explore these issues and we are making progress, but key to any success will be higher levels of trust between advocates.

So does trust matter? I believe it does. And it has something to do with maximising the potential of social justice advocacy. I am coming back again to my own experience and I notice that a lack of trust impacts me in two ways:

1 It saps my energy and wastes my time. If I am working with people where I experience low levels of trust then I am more cautious, less likely to take a risk, less imaginative, spend more time defending my perspective and at times even become aggressive if I feel threatened, ridiculed or undermined.

2 More importantly, a lack of trust in other people and organisations appears to simplify the complexity of the world. Because if I don’t trust someone, I’m unlikely to engage with them, and will tend to dismiss their perspective. So, an appearance of a lack of trust can have the effect of simplifying complexity and diminishing a diversity of perspectives.

In conclusion trust is a key and powerful resource in social justice advocacy work; trust between social justice advocates and between social justice advocates and policy makers. My own experience and the work of The Advocacy Initiative point to the fact that there is further work to be done to build trust and by building it we will maximise the potential of social justice advocacy."

You can book a place to attend the launch at: http://bit.ly/ZdOtxr.

0 Comments
Back to top