Asking questions and writing letters

Asking questions and writing letters - these are two accepted tools of the apostolate. But there is an interesting art to them both.

One can ask a question for three reasons: to elicit information (in which case you will often ask a question that does not reveal to your interlocutor the information you are really seeking, but the answer to which will reveal it); to make a point to your interlocutor and to others in the audience (in which case the question will clearly indicate where you stand on the issue at stake, and invite agreement or disagreement in response); or to attempt to influence the actions of your interlocutor and audience, especially if he or she happens to be a politician (in which case the question will probably probe the reasons or evidence supporting a point of view).

It all depends what you are trying to achieve. The second type of question almost certainly will not influence the actions or views of the person of whom it is asked; but, in a political environment, it can make the person who asks it look good, strong and effective. Though, in practice, the questioner has in all probability achieved very little. The third type of question is much more likely to influence someone, particularly if it is well argued. The effectiveness of questioning does depend on something unstated, though, and that is whether or not any degree of trust is built between the questioner and the questioned. Trust is not the same as agreement. But if you do not have a basic level of trust in the person asking you the question, you are not going to give a proper answer - you do not know what the questioner will do with your answer so you will make sure that you do not give them anything that they can do anything with. The third type of question, I would suggest is the one that implies most trust and will therefore bring out the most useful answer.

Letter writing is the same. You can write to score a point (and so, in political terms, gain status yourself, perhaps an "open letter") or you can write with the purpose of influencing. But the successful influencing - which does not always mean agreement - depends on a basic level of trust from the person you are writing to. If your correspondent does not trust what you will do with their reply, and thinks that you might release it to the press or publish it on your blog, you should not expect to receive anything more than "thank you for your letter, which is receiving attention" in response. And that is down to you as the writer of the letter, and not to any disregard on the part of the person to whom you have written. On the other hand, if your correspondent trusts you to treat their reply with discretion and fairness (in any public use of it), then you are much more likely to be able to engage in a proper dialogue and so influence. But you should not write the one type of letter and expect to achieve the outcome appropriate to the other type of letter.

I do have experience of both questions and letters! Something like two years ago now, I was a resident member of the Board of an Arms Length Management Organisation in my local authority. This is a company, wholly owned by the local authority, with responsibility for managing the local authority's housing stock. If I say that, as I left the Board, the officer responsible for developing the Organisation's work on equalities and diversity commented favourably on the way I asked questions at meetings ("not putting people down" was part of the way she expressed it) you can perhaps work out what was happening there.

I have had exchanges of letters with the General Secretary of my trade union on two matters over the years. The General Secretary's responses have been honest - we do not agree over the issues concerned - but they would not have been so without the element of trust that existed between us in the correspondence. When we see each other at meetings, I think we both know where each of us stands on the issues concerned but there is no personal antagonism. The potential for influence is there, whereas it would not be if I had just written to score a point.

Now, where is my pen ...