This article is written by Sean Moore, founder and principal of Advocacy School, an Ottawa -based social enterprise providing training and coaching in public-policy advocacy

There’s an old joke among lobbyists: “What’s the difference between lobbying and influence-peddling? Two years less a day.”

The implication of this gag, for anyone confused by it, is that lobbying is legal in North America, while 'influence-peddling' is a criminal offence — in some places earning "two years less a day" behind bars.

But aside from the occasional lame joke like this, lobbying in modern democracies is no laughing matter. Rather, in many countries, it’s a fixture of the political and policy process, and often a controversial one at that.

They can serve as a useful source of new information, analysis and insight into previously undetected, unintended consequences of certain policy options. But some critics argue that it can give special interests undue access to influencing policies that affect all of us.

My own experience lends perspective, in that I’ve worked as a public policy and advocacy consultant and coach in Canada, the US and abroad for more than 40 years.

Dealing effectively with lobbyists (also known as government relations, public policy, public affairs staff or consultants) can be a productive two-way street for public servants.

Jokes aside

Several years ago, I was asked by the Canadian government to deliver a half-day workshop on lobbying practices and regulation for officials visiting Ottawa from abroad. The group comprised a delegation from the People’s Republic of China, specifically the country’s National Corruption Prevention Bureau.

They had come to find out more about how authorities in Canada, the US and Europe deal with illegal attempts to influence decisions of governments. After all, making any serious attempt to subvert the Chinese state within mainland China could easily land you in trouble, as we have seen most recently in the case of the Alibaba millionaire Jack Ma’s disappearance.

Their main question was quite straightforward. How can a government — any government — tolerate people being paid to undertake the task of influencing a public policy decision?

In any serious discussion of lobbying, it needs to be said early on that public policy advocacy, a legitimate and organised attempt to influence a decision made by a government, is a perfectly acceptable activity, so long as the players involved act in accordance with the laws and norms of the society in which they are operating

I knew I had to proceed carefully, and keep the lobbying jokes to myself.

The older members of the delegation neither spoke nor understood English, and relied on their interpreter. The younger ones seemed fluent in English but still needed lots of careful explanation, especially of the dual phenomenon of lobbying and political donations — even where such payments are legal in some Western countries.

Listening to myself talk, I began to find my own explanations of the dynamics and rules of organised policy advocacy a little strange: how transparency and disclosure were central, and how information provided by lobbyists can be helpful in the policy-development process.
Fortunately, at the time Canada had recently banned corporate political donations and imposed strict limits on what individuals could contribute, so that helped clarify the political-finance rules environment, at least for this country.

However, even though I had previously lived and worked as a consultant in the US, I didn’t even try to describe for the Chinese how it all works there. I left that to my American brethren to explain in Washington the next day.

In any serious discussion of lobbying, it needs to be said early on that public policy advocacy — a legitimate and organised attempt to influence a decision a government makes — is a perfectly acceptable activity, so long as the players involved act in accordance with the laws and norms of the society in which they are operating.

Your duty to ask

In many countries, this involves some manner of lobbyists registration and disclosure. Thus, a perfectly fair first question for public servants to pose to those contacting them from outside the government about public business, is: “are you duly registered to lobby and on whose behalf?”

Resistance to answering that question is a red flag not to be ignored, though merely asking questions about existing policy is seldom considered ‘registerable lobbying’.

This discussion is not about the intricacies of lobbyists registration and its numerous variations globally. Rather, the point is this: there are good reasons and often strict legal requirements for such activity to be transparent. Public servants and lobbyists need to be familiar with the rules. However, even in the absence of such registration and disclosure regimes, a public servant or political assistant should make a point of understanding what and whose interests are being advanced.

Not everyone who contacts the government about a public policy matter sees themselves as lobbyists per se. Indeed, many often abhor the label, tainted as it is, by frequent media and critics’ suggestions of undue influence, or graft. Rather, they view themselves as policy specialists, lawyers, management consultants or public-interest advocates. And so they may be. Oftentimes, they are citizens acting on their own behalf or voluntarily (i.e. unpaid), on behalf of their community, or a group with which they are aligned.

But if someone is paying them to communicate with the government, they are, by law, in most jurisdictions, deemed lobbyists.

Be Churchillian about it; tell them to keep it concise, say two pages max

Of course, not all countries register lobbyists or have related public disclosure regimes. But, for those that do, public servants are obliged — if not by law, then by best practice — to ascertain the status, role and purpose of those who communicate with them on matters of public policy. Most jurisdictions that have lobbyists registration systems, also have easily accessible online registries. For those without such registration and disclosure systems, it’s still a good idea for public officials to ask some questions right at the outset — ideally, getting the answers in writing.

One of the key tools in policy-development and policy advocacy is the briefing note.

You’ll be doing yourself, the advocates, and whatever issue or cause is at issue, a great favour by pressing for a focused, structured and tightly written summary of what they want to discuss, in advance or immediately following contact.

Get it in writing

Be Churchillian about it; tell them to keep it concise, say two pages max. The well-prepared public servant would have a briefing note template handy to send these interlocutors — if they need it — featuring various useful sub-headings.

If a lobbyist has a longer exposition and analysis to offer, insist on a two-page executive summary or cover note, to accompany it. This will greatly assist your own work; after all, you’re probably going to have to write a briefing note yourself to colleagues or upper echelons.

In this way, dealing with lobbyists can be less a burden and more of a benefit in fulfilling your obligations as a responsible and savvy public official.

As for the departing Chinese delegation, the older ones still seemed to have difficulty getting their minds wrapped around the idea of legal lobbying. Some of the younger ones, with a glint of entrepreneurship in their eyes, left looking forward to learning more about the business end. — Sean Moore

We want to hear what you think about this article. Pitch an article to us or send your comments to hello@apolitical.co

Make sure to share your own thoughts with the author by leaving a comment below