Lessons to be learned: Reviving advocacy organisations after the neo-con men

Abstract

The article assesses the impact of the Howard years on non-government advocacy organisations in Australia. It stresses the importance of advocacy in civil society, and in representative democracy. It outlines how this role was undermined, including with regard to the manipulation of contracting-out arrangements. It argues that to regain their former role advocacy organisations will need to reassess their relationships with government-including their funding relationships-and reassert their role as independent analysts and legitimate critics of government power and policy.

The Role of Non‐profit Organizations in the Mixed Economy of Welfare‐to‐Work in the UK and Australia

“…The attacks came both from key figures within government itself and from close allies such as the conservative think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs. Questions were raised publicly about the capacity of advocacy organizations to be representative of their members and accountable for their funding and donation income (Maddison 2009). Advocates, service providers and activists within these organizations were seen as groups of professional policy actors who were not really interested in the welfare of those they claimed to represent, but as wanting only to feather their own nests and consolidate their power base (D'Cruz and Johns 2004, cited by Maddison 2009: 22).…”

“…There are some grounds for caution. Considering international evidence about the effectiveness of compacts, Edgar (cited by Maddison 2009: 27) concludes that compacts cannot be relied upon to ensure a respectful long‐term relationship; he argues instead for NGOs to direct their energies towards greater public recognition of their important role as advocates in public policy debates. At the level of service delivery, much of the architecture of non‐government funding arrangements remained in place under the Labour Government, especially in the area of welfare to work policy implementation.…”

“…The criticism about churches and charities ‘playing politics’ is not new, but it intensified during the reign of the Howard Government in Australia. Since the early 1970s, the number of advocacy groups seeking to represent low‐income Australians, ethnic groups, Indigenous Australians and women grew significantly in Australia (Maddison 2009). While these groups have always been comprised through an over‐reliance on government funding, they nonetheless enjoyed a quasi‐independent status where their contributions to policy debates were encouraged.…”

“…The removal of the gagging clauses allowed organizations to once again make public comment without first clearing their statements with the relevant minister or department. In announcing the removal of the gag clauses the then Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard (who replaced Rudd as Prime Minister in 2010), acknowledged that NGOs had been living in what she called a 'climate of fear' during the Howard years (Maddison 2009). Gillard went on to argue that the new government did not want to 'stifle debate', it wanted to:…”

“…The former Howard Government referred to the third sector as 'special interest groups' in an attempt to characterize these organizations as peddling their own vested interest and as an attempt to downplay their contribution to mainstream political debate. This rhetoric reflected the Howard Government's acceptance of public choice theory (Maddison 2009).…”