Strategic planning, policy prioritization and membership consultations

1. Anders Ulstein Presentation at OSI/EPHA conf Riga 3-5 April 2003 Strategic planning, policy prioritization and membership consultations How and why did we start working on a European level? ActisNorwegian Policy Network on Alcohol and Drugs (Umbrella for 26 NGOs)

2. Our situation at around 1990: “Something must change” • EU-membership was on the national agenda • A need to connect closer to the European alcohol policy agenda • A perception of being in a weaker position nationally • A lack of a long term viable strategy

3. Analysis of the situation • Key elements of “our” policy were about to be “decided in Brussels”. • Europeanization (Internal market) and general internationalisation had us sidetracked strategically and left us with fewer policy responses to new challenges … • The government increasingly “the gatekeeper” to Europe… • ... all adding to an existing long term trend of decline in membership, popular support and political influence in particular for volunteer organisations like us on the national level.

4. Window of opportunity • In 1995, the government offered financial support for NGOs to ‘get involved in Europe’. A sudden interest in ‘everything EU’. • A new strategic avenue slowly emerged in our organisation: A strategy to regain influence and momentum through working at the European level.

5. Leadership and consultation • The initiative constituted a breach with some of ‘our’ tradition and conviction, and required vision, leadership and decisive action from the leadership. • Chairman and key members were in favour, and fast tracked the involvement at EU-level • Planning and support at board level. • Membership consultations annually at AGMs – but little opposition (because of the separate funding). • ‘A knowledge based advocacy and strategy’ already in place. • We had already a thorough discussion on pursuing a knowledge based advocacy and strategy, generating professionalism and pragmatism. (As opposed to a normative/moral/personal dominated approach)

6. What we did? • We co-founded a European policy network, EUROCARE, in 1990. • Established a contact with a consultant in Brussels that reported to the board on relevant issues from 1993-95. • Established an office in Brussels with funding from Foreign Office in 1995; employed a permanent representative. • [Became a member of EPHA in 1994. • Brussels office: Regular reports to the board • Brussels office: Newsletters to members • Brussels office: Website to a wider national audience (Individual members, media, politicians, professionals, wider NGO community). • Regular study trips to Brussels for members (‘visualizing EU politics’). • Visibility at relevant Norwegian events (conferences etc).

7. New strategy Policies: • We will now stay fully informed – ‘EU is domestic’ • prepare national responses accordingly and • contribute to European level advocacy through EU-level NGO • The EU-project became an offensive strategy, not only defensive. Organisation: • “Europeanization” of our work shall invigorate our organisation and activities.

8. Results • Our members are overwhelmingly supportive • Prevention initiatives are imported, and exported (best practice) • We have regained some legitimacy and influence nationally (We are the only Norwegian social NGO office in Bxl). • The European dimension is now prominent in our national advocacy and in our internal discussions. • Some of our “European arguments” are echoed in parliament and government, • Some success in breaking up the black/white picture many have of the EU, a perception that only our ‘adversaries’ profit from. • The will and ability to defend national policies, and/or to a larger extent explore other constructive policy options for the government and parliament has strengthened. • A Nordic Network (Nordan) has been set up in 2001, modelled on Eurocare and EPHA. • ACTIS enlarged its platform and broadened its policy scope in 2003. More PH related. Influenced by EPHA/Eurocare experience.

9. Practical priority for getting involved • One dedicated person • And one high speed Internet connection – most info is ‘out there’. • Identify main policy areas/processes • And where they are dealt with - then take one at the time • Enter one primary relevant European network • Increase information input from all possible sources • Output at home, nationally • get visible very soon – first to own members • email lists, newsletters, web site, show up at meetings … • Involve your members in networking • Experience the joy of acknowledging fellow advocates in Europe • National advocacy strategy • Keep ‘Europe’ as top priority at top level in your organisation! • Be “the national specialist”; information and network is the currency • Think ‘European’ when working nationally • The power of knowledge about ‘everything EU’ – use it. • European strategy • When national strategy implemented, what to do with Europe? • Presence in Brussels important to shape EU policy process.

10. Challenges for us – where are we today – after a decade ‘in Europe’ ? • How to utilize effectively all our information and competence • Bring ‘Brussels’ closer to ‘home’ - the org. and policy wise. • Rapid response to events both ways nationally – EU-level. • Handling the information flow with limited resources • The paradoxes of success - visibility creates further demand • Strategic and tactical differences between NGOs – requires a lot of sensitivity and understanding. • Members of E parliament are very important contacts - as a non-member of the EU this avenue is blocked. • The ‘mental map’ of our members and our partners at national level is still a challenge; Social policy is national, a priori.