Simon Rosenberg Deputy CEO Developing Throughcare : A better way of doing policy?

Three ways to “do” policy The Consultation Approach The Advocacy Approach The Partnership Approach – Throughcare as case study

1. Policy by Consultation  Govt identifies a policy issue  Govt develops a draft policy or consultation paper, and seeks reaction through forums or submissions  Community sector organises its response  Govt accepts, adapts or ignores sector input  Govt provides feedback on the outcomes – sometimes!

2. Policy by Advocacy  Community sector identifies unmet needs, gaps in services  Sector does research and consults internally on the issues and solutions  Policy Paper/Submission developed to present to Govt.  Govt accepts, adapts or ignores sector views

3. Policy by Partnership  Community sector (or Govt) identifies unmet needs, gaps in services  Sector approaches Govt (or vice versa) to work jointly on issues and solutions  Policy Paper/Submission(s) developed – may be joint or separate, but with common elements  Govt and sector reps maintain their accountabilities, but work together as far as possible  Ideally, a final policy position emerges that has govt and sector ownership.

Community Integration Governance Group (CIGG)  Cross-sectoral community agencies’ forum set up late 2009  Focus on Throughcare, ie continuity of services and support for offenders pre and post release from AMC, Bimberi, and broader justice system.  Problem identified: new facilities with rehab and human rights focus, but no systemic planning or coordination of throughcare services to help prevent reoffending.  Whole of Govt, whole of community (WoG/WoC) problem  Developed initial policy position for Throughcare  CIGG explicitly aimed to work with govt

CIGG achievements  Participation from all relevant sectors  Comprehensive submission to AMC review  Engagement with ACTCS and CMD initially, then all key govt agencies  Input to paper for Policy Forum (Dep CEOs)  Policy Forum agreement to development of Throughcare Policy collaboratively between ACT Govt and CIGG.

What made it work?  Trust and openness  Role clarity  Accountability  ‘Selling’ the value of the sector's input  Patience  The ‘Partnership’ was genuine

What are the risks? Confidentiality Co-option Role confusion Delay

What are the benefits? An alternative way of doing policy – community sector has earlier input, and outcomes more likely to be jointly owned Particularly useful for ‘wicked problems’ – often need WoG/WoC joined-up approach* Implementation issues get better consideration at policy development phase Greater understanding of each other’s constraints Enhanced trust and respect for further work A practical expression of the Social Compact!

Conclusion Community sector should explore opportunities for policy development through partnership with govt Sector needs to more actively share and learn from experiences of what has worked and what has not Partnership approach most useful for WoG/WoC* Value connecting/networking skills. ph * For more info see APSC, “Tackling Wicked Problems: A Public Policy Perspective”, 2007