Are we outsourcing social policy to Royal Commissions?
For the social purpose sector, available opportunities to influence and guide the process of a royal commission are much narrower than in broader public advocacy. Neil shares his social purpose organisation royal commission checklist.
By Neil Pharaoh
We elect our politicians to lead, but it seems now that some of the big, fundamental social and political issues of our time are increasingly being handballed over the fence into “royal commission land”. Is this the new normal? And how should social purpose organisations who seek policy change handle this structural change to the advocacy landscape?
As the endless “efficiency dividends” (coupled with increased politicisation of the public sector) start to bite into our public service, we are almost seeing the end of Westminster style public servants and their “frank and fearless advice”. With the public service increasingly becoming contract managers, is the rise of the royal commission going to destroy the last of the public policy functions the public service has maintained until now?
Australia has had 137 federal royal commissions since Federation, of which 54 were between 1910 and 1929. While some have marked high tides of justice (the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse 2013-2017), others have been remarkedly narrow in focus (the Royal Commission into the Chamberlain convictions 1986-1987). Far too many have focused on the areas of Northern Territory, Papua New Guinea and Norfolk Island – we have had royal commissions into British New Guinea, NT Railways and Ports, administration of the NT (multiple times), German New Guinea and Norfolk Island (multiple times). And a number have been governments effectively weaponising their forces against the opposition (home insulation, trade union governance and historically, commissions against specific unions).
State governments have continued the trend, so we are now seeing more social and public policy shifting into the realm of royal commissions. The impact of this on the social purpose sector should not be underestimated, as the lobbying, advocacy and networking techniques used in the past to seek legislative or regulatory change will not be as effective in royal commission land.
Royal commissions are highly effective at exposing wrongdoing. The outcomes of the Haynes Royal Commission and its list of recommendations have resulted in substantial policy impact and change. Yet, in Victoria, government adopting all recommendations of such a commission sets up social purpose expectations of funding but limits the ability of the sector to influence outcomes.
The inherent problem of policy-by-royal-commission is that while best practice for policy development includes wide consultation, options assessment, and analysis of cost benefit and unintended consequences, none of these are standard in a royal commission.
For the social purpose sector, available opportunities to influence and guide the process of a royal commission are much narrower than in broader public advocacy. Maximising the opportunity to present, make submissions, and comment on both draft, interim and milestone reports will be critical to shaping policy agendas.
Here is your social purpose organisation Royal Commission checklist:
Play a role in setting the terms of royal commissions. Government always sets the terms in collaboration with the commissioners – is your engagement with relevant MPs and ministers strong enough for you to assist with calibrating terms?
While the commission is underway, do you have media alerts set up? Have you made both written, and potential verbal submissions? Do you have case studies for support, or people who have been impacted and can speak to the issue?
When the draft report is released, how do you respond? Do you have both media and direct channels available?
Are you engaging with the relevant implementation department throughout the commission, to ascertain if they will respond to the recommendations?
Do you use existing relationships, social and traditional media to ensure you are front and centre regarding commentary on the commission? That presence often leads to roles on boards and can facilitate implementation post commission.
Royal commissions may currently seem like a once in a lifetime opportunity for government to outsource policy responsibility – with the added bells and whistles of media coverage and creating the perception of doing something. So the response by the social purpose sector is critical.
I am already seeing departmental and political commentary deferring to royal commissions. “We are only funding recommendations,” they say, or “We don’t have money for anything outside the royal commission”.
Royal commissions tend to go in cycles, so be sure that your advocacy and government engagement strategy incorporates a response to royal commissions – how you advocate for one (if you need it) and how you campaign around one (if underway). Finally, every one of your responses to a commission is critical and should be a board and executive agenda item.
This article first appeared at Pro Bono Australia as part of Tanck's fortnightly column, Happenings on the Hill.
Tanck offers advisory services in government relations, stakeholder strategy, and communications.
We specialise in helping for-purpose organisations to effectively advocate for their causes. Find out how we can help you!
