Critics say published figures do not give the full picture
Hammersmith and Fulham Council spent over three-quarters-of-a-million pounds on publicity last year, a report by the TaxPayers’ Alliance shows.
According to the report, published at the end of last year, the Council spent £836,000 on publicity in 2007-8, up from £669,000 in 2006-7.
Compared to other councils across the country, the figure is below average. “The average local authority spends almost £1 million (£971,985) on publicity. There are six local authorities spending more than £5 million on publicity,” the report says.
However, opposition councillors argue that the figures for H&F do not give the full picture and say the Council has “concealed large aspects of its PR budget by allocating it differently”.
“The figures do not include costs of employment advertising, statutory notices, other council 'advertising' which are funded out of separate budgets. Money for these goes to support the council newspaper and are on top of the sums quoted,” said Cllr Mike Cartwright.
The Taxpayers’ Alliance Policy Analyst, Maria Fort, says the figures used in the TA report are taken straight from the Council’s accounts, but adds: “We are aware that Hammersmith & Fulham generates revenue from selling advertising space in its own publications and this revenue is used to offset the costs incurred by the council on publicity. This revenue may alter the cash flow statement in the accounts, but with regard to publicity, this transaction is not made clear in the publicity accounts and as such is not reflected in our research,” she said.
Local authorities are legally obliged to keep a separate account of their publicity spend, but, as the TA report explains, this can be interpreted in different ways: “Publicity spending is defined as ‘any communication, in whatever form, addressed to the public at large or to a section of the public’. This definition under the 1986 Act unfortunately allows local authorities a degree of definitional flexibility. Councils should be subject to much stricter and more open reporting requirements,” the report says.
A council spokesman said H&F was spending much less on publicity than other London boroughs and that the Council’s accounting methods were the same as they had been under the previous (Labour) administration: "A recent report from the Taxpayers' Alliance proves we have one of the smallest communications budgets in London. We are proud to have a lean, value for money communications team. The accounting methods we use to monitor the press office budget have not changed. The only thing that has changed is that we are spending less than we did in the past. By bringing the production of H&F News in-house we saved more than £300,000. By market testing the print of the numerous leaflets and brochures that we produce, we saved another £300,000.
“It is not just about saving money, it is also about being smarter in the way we communicate, ensuring that our residents are aware of the services they are getting for their money. Surveys prove that residents feel better informed and the latest poll showed an all time high of 64 per cent of residents happy with council services - up 9% in one year," the spokesman said.
In neighbouring boroughs, Kensington and Chelsea spent £1.2million on publicity last year, while Ealing spent more than £3million. Both have higher populations than H&F, with K&C ranking as the 129th-largest borough in the country, Ealing the 59th and H&F the 136th.
However, while more than 200 councils had decreased their publicity spend, H&F was one of many which had seen an increase: “The 225 councils who have increased spending should hang their heads in shame. In the middle of a recession, councils need to cut back on propaganda and spin doctors and deliver savings to taxpayers,” said Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance.
Yasmine Estaphanos
11 January 2009