"Events, dear boy, events!” – This phrase, attributed to Harold Macmillan, pretty well sums up the life of a communications director in a large Whitehall department.
Over 13 years, serving seven secretaries of state and seven permanent secretaries in the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and HM Revenue & Customs, I had my fair share of “events”. Protests over benefit changes; the merger of the Department of Social Security with Employment; the escalation of the Afghanistan conflict; withdrawal from Iraq; the capture of sailors and marines by the Iranians; the loss of the child benefit database; constant reorganisations to do more with less; a ministerial resignation; and a general or two going off-piste – all had a profound impact on my ability to maintain a strategic focus.
It is easy to get knocked off course and lurch from one crisis to another. Whitehall communications directors face a constant struggle to keep a long-term view while dealing swiftly and effectively with the unforeseen events which pop up – usually late on a Friday afternoon.
Seven things every government press officer knows are true
What's it really like for civil servants when departments are broken up?
How Sir George Martin caused me to lose my minister – by a former private secretary (and Beatles fanatic)
This same struggle is replicated in many parts of the civil service as we try to keep a balance between the immediate concerns of ministers and special advisers with the longer term public good. Since we deal directly with the media, communications directorates are in the firing line during short-term crises. Yet to be successful we have to do much more than simply spin a good line.
When the Westminster Village was convulsing over the latest media storm I always tried to remember that the majority of citizens had quite different concerns. The things that occupy the minds of Today programme presenters, Daily Mail journalists, most special advisers and many ministers tend to revolve around who’s up or down in the political world.
For the rest of the country, politics is about the delivery of services which will either improve or hurt their daily lives and their future prosperity. This gulf between the concerns of SW1 and everyone else is very difficult to bridge. It is perhaps the failure of successive governments to do so which has fuelled such scepticism and disillusionment among the electorate.
"To be successful, government communications needs to say things which match the reality of people’s experiences. When rhetoric outstrips reality, people become disillusioned and accuse government of 'spin'"
I call this the rhetoric-reality gap. To be successful, government communications needs to say things which match the reality of people’s experiences. When rhetoric outstrips reality, people become disillusioned and accuse government of “spin”.
I recall during my time at DWP showing a minister data which compared positive and negative news stories with what the pollsters and focus groups were telling us. The big negative national stories – those ones the minister was most concerned about – bore no correlation to what people actually thought about government policies.
Regional media were more aligned to public concerns yet, above all, the public judged us by their actual experiences. If we were delivering what they wanted, in a way they appreciated, most people were positive. If we did not then they viewed us negatively. No amount of gushing positive news stories were going to change their minds if we continued to deliver substandard services.
Although this particular minister was very thoughtful and reasonable, he was not inclined to adopt a strategy which would shift from a national media focus to the regional media and more direct communications with the public. “The point is, Simon, I will be judged by my colleagues on how well I do on the Today programme,” he told me.
This frank admission helped me to understand the many dynamics at play in the political world in which a communications director must operate. A good performance on a prestigious national programme can enhance a minister’s career. A disastrous performance can destroy it regardless of how well the minister or the department is delivering government policies.
"Failure to deal effectively with the daily media circus will undermine efforts to deliver a long-term communications strategy"
Failure to deal effectively with the daily media circus will undermine efforts to deliver a long-term communications strategy. Very early on I realised that to do both I needed an excellent head of news and a sharp press office to deal with the day-to-day. This was often my first recruitment priority and I was blessed with some excellent people over the years. I also made sure that some of the brightest senior communicators were one step removed from the media circus.
Their job was to work closely with colleagues to integrate communications into policy development and delivery. Their focus was on the public rather than the media. I too tried to keep slightly removed from the day-to-day battle, stepping in when necessary but striving to keep an overview rather than being drawn into the detail. In this respect I tended to work very closely with the permanent secretary who naturally had a greater interest in longer term issues as long as ministers and Number 10 were kept happy.
It did not always work, but we did have some great successes such as the introduction of Pension Credit. In this case, I was able to integrate senior communicators into the project team and they ensured that communications issues were built into all stages, from development through to delivery. This three-way collaboration between policy, delivery and communications ensured success. Failure to do so in other cases usually resulted in something going wrong.
Invariably, it is the crises which are etched most deeply on my memory. When I moved to HMRC I showed up on my first Monday morning with a cheery “hello”. My head of news looked up from her computer appearing rather pale and wan as if she had been in the office all weekend. She had been. Her response to my greeting was simply: “We have a problem!”
The department had lost the data of 25m people in receipt of child benefit. I had been tempted to join the department because of the respect I had for the permanent secretary who had been my first civil service boss several years earlier. Over the next two days I had to handle his resignation and deal with the fall-out for many months after that.
"Trying to pump out good news stories without fixing the underlying problems would only make matters worse"
At a later emergency board meeting, I was asked for my advice on how to repair HMRC’s reputation. My response was simple – fix the problems, improve the service and then gradually we will be able to rebuild and focus attention on the good things we are doing. Trying to pump out good news stories without fixing the underlying problems would only make matters worse.
One of my great career challenges was trying to get ministers and senior officials to understand that communications is not a sticking plaster which can fix deeper underlying problems. Poor communications will make a problem worse or even create a problem where none exists. Good communications can limit damage and draw attention to the positive things which are being done. A well-focused, sustained communications strategy can even change behaviours and attitudes over time. We managed this at DWP with attitudes to benefit fraud; Transport has done the same on road safety and many other departments have had similar successes.
The trick for a would-be communications director is to satisfy the Westminster Village’s voracious appetite, in order to create the space to implement effective public communications. Is it difficult? Yes. Is it frustrating? Certainly. Is it fun? Mostly. Is it worth it? Absolutely!