- There was strong consensus that we need a refreshed, clear, concise and compelling set of arguments to convince senior decision-makers to protect and prioritise PSEAH budgets. It should:
- make use of available data and evidence and be clear that SEAH remains widespread and under reported, and that risks are rising.
- be clear that failing to act on SEAH increases risks and harm, but also highlight the positive impact of PSEAH efforts on organisational reputation, effectiveness and culture. We should show what is being prioritised and streamlined due to the cuts and changes in the ODA landscape, to demonstrate that the PSEAH community is being strategic and efficient in the face of a new reality.
- Highlight the cost and impact of not doing PSEAH. Doing less should not be an option, or only one that is chosen in full knowledge of the negative impact it will have on individuals, communities, organisations, brands and the wider reputation of aid. Messaging should recognise the importance of WROs/WLOs to PSEAH efforts and the need to ensure they continue to receive support.
- The script should be adaptable for different audiences and make use of multiple entry points and arguments. The moral case is compelling, but compliance and risk may have more weight for many decision-makers, particularly when difficult prioritisations are being made. The integrity, accountability, human rights, and security benefits of PSEAH work should feature too.
- A set of core messages can be found in Annex A.