The document outlines an advocacy workshop on lobbying and engagement with policy makers. It provides an agenda for the workshop that includes discussing principles of ethical lobbying, experiences with lobbying, strategies and skills, and identifying potential policy makers to lobby. Resources on responsible and ethical lobbying are also listed, including guidelines from Transparency International. Case studies on lobbying efforts in Guyana around LGBT rights and road safety legislation are presented for discussion.

1. Lobbying & engagement of policy makers
March, 2017
Prepared by Vidyaratha Kissoon
Email vidyak1@gmail.com
Mobile 686-0835
Shared under Creative Commons Share and Share alike
License

2. Outline of the session
● Recap of Advocacy, focus on Lobbying
● Principles of Ethical lobbying
● Experiences with lobbying
● Strategies, skills – discussion of case studies
● Who do we have to lobby? How do we reach them?
● Next steps
● Evaluation of the workshop

3. Resources
● RESPONSIBLE LOBBYING :A Short Guide to
Ethical Lobbying and Public Policy Engagement
for Professionals, Executives and Activists
produced by Transparency International and
available from
https://www.transparency.cz/wp-content/upload
s/Responsible-Lobbying-A-Short-Guide-to-Ethic
al-Lobbying-and-Public-Policy-Engagement-for-
Professionals-Executives-and-Activists.pdf
● Advocacy Plan of the National Co-ordinating
Coalition available from
http://nccgy.org/advocacy

4. Constitution of Guyana
● Article 13 : Constitution of Guyana
● “The principal objective of the political system of
the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy
by providing increasing opportunities for the
participation of citizens, and their organisations in
the management and decision-making processes
of the State, with particular emphasis on those
areas of decision-making that directly affect their
well-being. “
●

5. Advocacy Definition
● Advocacy originates from advocarte, ‘call to
one’s aid’ or to speak out on behalf of
someone, as a legal counselor Conceptually,
advocacy fits into a range of activities that
include organizing, lobbying and campaigning.
● (NCC Advocacy Plan )

6. Other activities...
Activism: Mobilising activity of supporters in order to generate publicity and/or lobby policy and decision makers
Alliance or Coalition Building: Generating, mobilising and coordinating support from other groups & organisations for a
particular solution to a problem or issue.
Awareness Raising: Increasing the knowledge of the public (or sections of the public) concerning the existence of a
particular problem or issue.
Campaigning: Generating and mobilising support from the public (or segments of the public) for a particular solution to a
problem or issue. A Campaign is a project or organised course of action designed to achieve a specific response from a
particular audience.
Communications: The science and practice of transmitting information.
Lobbying: Direct approaches, usually through face-to-face meetings, to decision makers or individuals with high
influence in order to persuade them to take a particular course of action.
Policy Work: Investigating issues and problems, gathering evidence and identifying recommended solutions or courses
of action.
Public Education: Increasing the understanding of the public (or sections of the public) concerning the nature and/or
causes of a particular problem or issue. The goal of public education is often to encourage a change in behaviour of the
public.

7. Lobbying
● Lobbying derives from the Latin word loggia, a room
where one would meet directly with decision makers
to engage in (often private) quality discussions and
debate. Compared to organizing, lobbying takes a
more targeted approach and reaches out to fewer
people. On the other end of the spectrum, the Latin
origin for campaigning is campus, the wider battlefield.
● An advocacy campaign publicly promotes an agenda,
involving platforms where a wide audience can hear
the advocate’s message. (NCC Advocacy Plan )

8. Transparency International (TI) defines lobbying
as ‘Any direct or indirect communication with
public officials, political decision-makers or
representatives for the purposes of influencing
public decision-making, and carried out by or
on behalf of any organised group’

9. TT Guardian 5 March, 2017

10. TT cont'd
● “Under the agreement between the Government and the
lobbyist group, The Group DC is expected to promote
investments from the US into T&T, to further the
macroeconomic objectives of the Government of T&T,
and to improve the bilateral relations between T&T and
the US, and identifying key individuals to improve these
relations. The group is also contracted to assist in
initiating and sustaining relationships between the
Government and US Members of Congress. The
agreement will continue for a period of two years at a
rate of US $1.2 million annually.”

12. Case Study : Guyana Evangelical
Fellowship/Georgetown Ministers Fellowship
lobbying to prevent the inclusion of sexual
orientation as one of the grounds for
non-discrimination
(see attached at end of slides )

13. Case Study : Mothers In Black
(attached)

14. Lobbying Activities
● Participating in consultations, task forces,
groups
● Engaging public officials
● Writing submissions on policies and laws
● Conducting research on policies and laws
● Campaigning to engage policy makers and law
makers

15. Lobbying goes wrong when
● Bribing or blackmailing public officials
– Holidays, gifts, donations to political parties
● Misleading the public about issues related to policies or laws
– Hiding research (Exxon Mobil /Climate Science )
– Using 'fake' advocates, studies
● Offering future work
● Secretly funding campaigns / Hidden influence
● Contradictory public and private approaches to policies and
laws

16. Lobbyists..
● Can be professional, paid a lot of money
● Can work voluntarily
● Can work part – time

17. Lobbying requires
● Effective communication
● Knowing all the 'players'
● Analysing priorities, politics, context
● Telling the story
● Building support
● Finding the windows of opportunity
● What else?

18. Ethical lobbying is
● Legitimate
● Transparent
● Consistent
● Accountable
● Open to opportunity
● Anything else ?
● (from TI Responsible Guide )

19. Legitimacy
● Lobbying positions should act in the public
interest – not pursue activities which could be
harmful or destructive
● Should reflect analysis of pros/cons or
benefits/risk of the proposed policy
● How can we ensure that our policy goals are
legitimate?

20. Transparency
● Publish all submissions, policy positions
● Identify funders, beneficiaries
– Can 'bad' money do good?
● How will you ensure transparency in your policy work?

21. Consistency/ Practise what you
preach
● Lobbying position should be consistent with
your ethics and values
● What happens when your 'friends' who are
supporting one of your positions, believes
differently on another position?
● How will you ensure consistency in your
lobbying campaigns?

22. Accountability
● Explain to all stakeholders why you are taking
the positions
● Account for any contradictions or perceptions in
conflicts of interest
● How will you ensure accountability in your
lobbying activities?

23. Opportunity
● Build collaboration with other groups (outside
NCC) on issues of common interest
● Advocacy around Article 13 to ensure
participation
● What opportunities exist for your working
group?

24. Some lobbying skills..
● Analytical Skills
● Research
● Knowledge management
● Effective Communication skills
● Preparation
● Speaking clearly
● Writing clearly
● Listening well
● Summarising and being specific
● Being persistent
● Following up
● Excellent interpersonal skills
● Building relationships
● Strategic and tactical planning skills

25. Case Study : Georgetown Ministers’ Fellowship (GMF) and the Guyana Evangelical Fellowship
(GEF)
Guyanese urged to denounce Constitutional Amendment on `sexual orientation’ … hints of
‘Evangelical [sic] obediance’
By Shirley Thomas Guyana Chronicle July 17, 2003
THE Georgetown Ministers’ Fellowship (GMF) and the Guyana Evangelical Fellowship (GEF) have
mobilised a ‘Call to Action’, urging all Guyanese to categorical say a “No!” to the proposed amendment
to have ‘sexual orientation’ deemed a fundamental right in the Constitution of Guyana.
The Ministers are contending that, if allowed to go through, the Constitutional Amendment which
promises to pave the way for what has been termed ‘sexual orientation’, would open the flood gates to
a host of ills.
Such a precursor would “open the door to homosexuality, bestiality, child sexual abuse, and every
form of sexual perversion being enshrined in the highest law of this land,” Bishop Juan Edghill, a
representative of the GMF/GEF explained.
He cautioned that : “If the Legislation is passed, Guyana will be faced, for the first time - with what is
called ‘Evangelical Obediance’.”
The Ministers made these remarks at the launching of a 25-page document which clearly spells out
“Why we must say NO to Sexual Orientation.”
The document, launched during a press conference in the conference room of the National Library,
deals extensively with the attendant ills of what is now being proffered as ‘sexual orientation’.
These include unnatural behaviours, sexual abuse, family breakdown and the alternative lifestyle’,
now coming under the guise of ‘sexual orientation’.
Bishop Edghill outlined that, since ‘sexual orientation’ has been removed from the Fundamental Rights
Bill, and the Sexual Orientation Bill, every parliamentarian will now have to decide, by a separate vote,
if sexual orientation should be included in the Constitution.
Considering the serious social consequences and the attendant scope of social dislocation,
GMF/GEM was adamant that what stands at the centre of the militancy is not only a ‘better deal’ for
homosexuals, rather it is the ‘Goals of the Gay Lobby’ and gay militancy specifically, that are being
advocated.
Noting that behaviours which were previously known as ‘sodomy’ have come to be called ‘gay’; what
was recognized as ‘sexual perversion’ now called ‘sexual preference’, and ‘sexual defiance’ - sexual
orientation or alternative lifestyles, the Ministers are determined that the Bill should not be allowed to
go through.
And citing some of the atrocious goals of the Gay Lobby which will almost immediately come to the
fore in the event such a bill is passed, GMF/GEF pointed to demands being made :
** for the repeal of all sodomy laws
** for the legalisation of all forms of sexual perversion including paedophilia (child sexual abuse)
** to change the age of consent to allow sex with minors
1

26. ** for public funds to cover sex-change operations
** for the deliberate inclusion of lesbians, homosexual men, bisexuals and transgenders in education
and childcare, and ** the trend toward the removal of God … from public life.
Bishop Edghill recalled that in 2001 the combined religious community, following a meeting,
approached President Jagdeo, asking him not to sign the Homosexual Bill. He said the President,
accordingly, did not sign the Bill, but sent it back to Parliament for further discussions and notations.
But, coming out of the Communique signed between President Jagdeo and the Leader of Opposition,
Mr Robert Corbin, there was need for the passage to the Fundamental Rights Bill within a certain time
frame. Edghill said, under his leadership, the Ministers of Religion convened consultations at the
highest levels, of which the Guyana Evangelical Fellowship and the Georgetown Ministers Fellowship
including Hindus, Muslims, Bahais Roman Catholics and Anglicans formed part. They have since
written all the Parliamentarians, clearly stating their position, which is, that they are totally against the
sexual orientation bill.
He said the Ministers have issued a statement, “in which we have clearly and categorically, that we
cannot and will not support any legislation that lists Sexual Orientation as a Fundamental Right.”
Meanwhile, Pastor Roger Williams, alluding to the goals and manoeuvre of the Gay Lobby, referred to
it as nothing but deception, and semantic terrorism, asserted, “We are not interested in semantic
terrorism, legal chaos and alternative lifestyle.” He said, that what is now being witnessed is an
attempt to allowed a minority group of people to change the value system of society. He said that,
while society respects the right of such persons to work, medical care and the like, “We cannot allow
people, based on their perversion, to change the value system.”
Further, the Ministers argued in this regard that, views held, can ot be transformed into rights
enshrined. Elinor Jordan noted that, while the Church at large, does not like the ‘behaviour’ of the
homosexuals, it is not to say that they do not like the people exhibiting those behaviours. She added
that the Church is willing to help them out of such behaviours, but they should seek that help, and
show that they want to change.
And Reverend Raphael Massiah, of the First Assembly of God Church, and of GMF/GEF noted that
there is no credible scientific evidence to support that there are homosexual genes, but that there is
evidence to support that homosexuality is behavioural.
1) What was the goal of the advocacy of the GEF and the GMF ?
2) How did GEF and GMF gain support for their cause?
3) Who did they lobby?
4) What was the impact of the lobbying?
2

27. Case Study : Mothers In Black
Mothers in Black is a group in Guyana which was formed by mothers and other relatives of
persons who were killed in road accidents. The group started their public protests in July 2000
as a way to bring attention to the increasing levels of road deaths. The flyer they shared
stated :
“WE ARE MOTHERS WHO HAVE LOST LOVED ONES- Slaughtered on our roads.
WE ARE MOTHERS WHO CONDEMN SPEEDING -We demand the use of radar traps.
WE ARE MOTHERS AGAINST DRINKING AND DRIVING- Amend the laws to deal with breath
analyser testing.
WE ARE MOTHERS DEMANDING THE USE OF SAFETY-BELTS AND HELMETS - We have lost too
many loved ones
WE ARE MOTHERS DEMANDING IMMEDIATE REVISION OF THESE AND OTHER TRAFFIC
LAWS, AND DRASTIC ACTION TAKEN TO ENFORCE THEM.-
Support our signature campaign.
WE ARE MOTHERS, GRANDPARENTS, AUNTS, SISTERS, FRIENDS AND MEN WHO CARE! DO
YOU?- Join us every Friday. Same Time. Same Place. 12 midday-1pm.
GEORGETOWN - Opposite Parliament Buildings; LINDEN - GNCB. Next to Mini Bus Car Park;
BERBICE - End of Stelling Road, New Amsterdam." “
The group and their supporters hosted a weekly picket in different venues while also
engaging in a collection of signatures for a petition to change the traffic laws. They faced
several kinds of opposition ranging from comments from senior officials like the then Minister
of Home Affairs1
“that the changes were impossible because laws about speeding, seatbelts and
drunk driving would inconvenience too many drivers” to outright abuse from some drivers who passed
the pickets. Other activities included a Drive with Care procession in which cars drove at the speed
limit on the public roads with many incidents of accidents caused by persons driving over the speed
limit)
In May 2002, the National Assembly voted the amendments into the legislation to ensure that
vehicles had seat belts and that they were being used. In August 2008, the National Assembly
further passed laws to deal with the use of cell phones while driving and to increase the
penalties for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Mothers in Black through the media and other events continue to lobby for better conditions
for road safety.
Questions for discussion:
1) What was the goal of the advocacy of Mothers in Black ?
2) How did Mothers in Black gain support for their cause? Who do you think they had to
lobby?
3) How long did it take before the change in laws? What does this tell you about the time
taken for some changes to occur?
4) What other lobbying and advocacy efforts are you aware of in Guyana?
1 http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2008/08/11/this-law-is-a-tribute-to-the-perseverance-of-the-mothers-in-bl
ack/
1