UPDATE (and apology): Parking, PR, and should the council answer questions?

UPDATE:

Polly Rance, Hackney's head of media and external relations, has provided a response to some of the questions posed in the piece below.

Here's what she said: 'Just to let you know that I have not resigned from my role at Hackney and have every intention of returning to work on 3rd May 2011. The conjecture in your e-mail and your article is entirely incorrect, and whilst my employer was quite right not to share HR details with you as a journalist I am more than happy to put the record straight in a personal capacity. By the way, my piece in PRWeek to which you have made several references is not about Hackney Council but making a more general point about the industry. I would no doubt write it differently in the context of the current cuts situation, but my overall point stands, that backroom services such as comms have to strive doubly hard to prove their worth in hard financial times. Please amend your blog so that it no longer implies that I have left my job.'

So apologies to Polly and thanks for the reply.

Original article:

Should Hackney council have answered any questions when its head of parking services was caught out in an alleged case of favouritism? Apparently not, according to its head of PR.

Head of hackney parking, Seamus Adams, had his car returned by his staff after it was towed away and his fine reduced. I think it was a Hackney Gazette story (although it's not on the paper's website yet so here it is from the Daily Mail).

The council leapt to the defence of this officer. (Adams appears to have been happy to collect cash from other people and not return it unless ordered to do so by a court (Check out this freedom of information request worth a story in its own right!) which didn't seem to be what happened to him.)

Meanwhile Hackney's "interim assistant chief executive, communications and consultation", Carl Welham, had recently told Blood and Property that: "The council does not answer questions relating to individual members of staff."

Blood and Property had asked if Polly Rance, head of Hackney's PR and Communications had left her job.

Carl Welham wouldn't answer and added: "I hope in future that you will confine your questions to matters of council business."

This wall of privacy (Not there for Michael Sobell and Seamus Adams) was in place even though Polly Rance had aired her views in public. There is no suggestion that she has done anything wrong, just that she is probably an important figure in Hackney's policy making.

See Carl Wellham here on YouTube saying that councils face major cuts and work has to be done to "make sure communications is not a casualty of that by proving we are an essential part of the business and not a nice to have add on."

Which sounded remarkably similar to Polly in a PR Week piece where she made a case for maintaining the size of the communications department:"In a recession the need for clear, accessible comms is greater than ever, as residents seek advice on debt, jobs and housing."

Is it none of our business whether these public calls for more PR have been taken on board or been ditched? No suggestion that anyone has done anything wrong, just a question about council business.

(OTHER STORY THIS WEEK: INSULT OR INJURY TO HACKNEY?)

Is anyone policing Hackney's PR department?

Over the last 12 months it looks like only one senior Hackney Council officer has publicly argued against cuts in their department.

Polly Rance, head of the borough's media and communications department said her department should not be cut during the recession. But would she allow the heads of other council departments to defend themselves from job cuts in a public arena?

In her latest piece in PR Week she defends Hackney Today, part of her communications empire: Councils would welcome resolution on publications debate (April 21 2010)

In an earlier piece (October 9 2009) she made a case for maintaining the size of the communications department:"In a recession the need for clear, accessible comms is greater than ever, as residents seek advice on debt, jobs and housing."

Compare Rance's recession plan with that of another Hackney Council officer who has been in the press - Gifty Edila, head of the borough's legal department. When she was interviewed by The Lawyer in November 2009, she said: “We’re in a recession and that’s impacting on the public sector, but we have to make sure we streamline resources while recruiting really talented people to fill the large number of vacancies we carry.”

Phrases like "streamline" and "large number of vacancies" are not used by Rance.

Is the communications department on a level playing field with other council departments?

Another council officer who has been interviewed or written for the press in the last year is Risthardh Hare, group head in the borough's social services, he reviewed the film Precious for the Guardian.

There may be more - I haven't seen them.

Will Jules Pipe ever answer these questions?

It started off so well but after months of waiting and several broken deadlines, Jules Pipe has yet to answer a set of questions sent by Blood and Property back in January.

A GOOD START:
15 October 2009:
Blood and Property asked Jules Pipe: "Do you believe in Ghosts?"

16 October 2009:
Jules Pipe replies: "I am happy to confirm that I have never felt the need to attribute any event to ‘supernatural’ causes...." (Do Hackney Politicians believe in Ghosts?)

A BAD END:
11 December 2010:
Blood and Property asks for an interview with Jules Pipe.

22 December 2009:
Polly Rance, head of Hackney's media and external communications, wrote: "Thanks for your request for an interview with Mayor Pipe. I am sorry but things have been very busy in the run up to Christmas and we have not been able to fit this in before the holiday season. Jules might be able to manage something in the new year. Perhaps you could send over the list of topics you would want to talk to him about and we can try to find some space in the diary?"

19 January 2010:
Blood and Property sends a list of questions to Hackney's press office having been told this is the correct way to approach the Mayor.

27 January 2010:
Hackney Press Officer: "Sorry for delay in getting back to you. I'll chase this up."

12 February 2010:
Diane Abbott answers a similar set of questions. (Diane Abbott answers Blood and Property Questions).
I resend questions to Hackney Press Office. A press officer replies: "This is fine. As I said, questions are quite wide ranging so may take us a little while to get back to you. Let me know if you need any of this urgently."

19 February 2010:
A Hackney Press Officer calls to say that efforts are being made to get a set of answers by Monday 22 February.

22 February 2010:
No news.

23 February 2010:
A press officer replies to an email saying that the matter was being looked into.

24 February 2010:
Any news? A Hackney Press Officer says the answers are "nearly there".

2 March 2010:
Replying to an email, a Hackney Press Officer says: "have already chased this matter this morning for you. Almost there…" We later spoke on the phone. The answers would be ready by Friday 5 March.

5 March 2010:
I asked if there was any news: not ready.

8 March 2010:
I asked if there was any news: not ready.

9 March 2010:
I asked if there was any news: no reply.

10 March 2010
I asked if there was any news. A Hackney Press Officer said: "Sorry about this… still waiting."


Sadly the questions are hardly worth the build up. The ones about the Labour Party's relationship with the Orthodox Jewish Community were added at the beginning of February which could explain some of the delay. Hopefully the answers are coming but I can't say much more than that.

QUESTIONS FOR MAYOR PIPE:

1. Do you think that main opposition in Hackney is really the Conservative Party or the Orthodox Jewish councillors who make up its majority?

2. You had a run-in with Councillor Steinberger last year over his actions as head of scrutiny, do you believe that he put the planning needs of his community above the financial needs of the rest of the borough? (23,000 Hackney tenants used as a bargaining chip, Mayor Claims)

3. How do you react to claims by some members of the OJ community that the Labour Party in Hackney is anti semitic?

4. Do you think it is odd that Orthodox Jewish councillors so rarely stand against each other - would it matter if there was some kind of agreement within the community not to do this?

5. Do you think it matters that Hackney's legal department was 25% understaffed during major development period - olympics, bishopsgate goods yard, dalston development.

6. The BNP wants to stand in the Hackney Mayoral elections this year: http://bloodandproperty.blogspot.com/2010/01/bnp-to-stand-in-hackney-mayoral.html
how do you think this will affect the elections in the borough?

7. How much has the borough changed in the last 10 years - demographically (there's some research claiming that Hackney North has the highest density of people with degrees in the country) Do you think this will change the make up of the voting patterns in the borough?

8. To what extent do you think that changes in the borough are related to property prices and new people moving here - how easily do you think that this process could be reversed (i.e. do you think that many hackney residents see their homes as investments or just as homes?)

9. Do you think that Hackney has suffered the worst effects of the financial crisis? Why is Hackney's employment situation improving more slowly than other boroughs?

10. What would happen to Hackney if the conservatives win the next election? How much less money would the borough recieve?

11. Do you think it is healthy that so many of the boroughs schools are now academies - and does it matter that these schools are not subject to the freedom of information act? - References here: Hackney academies: too good to be true?

12. Although crime in Hackney has fallen, other boroughs complain that Hackney has more policemen. On top of that, Hackney seems to be able to rely on outside agencies like Operation Trident. Do you know how much support Hackney's police get in fighting crime and whether this might no longer be available either if the conservatives win or if the government has to cut police budgets?

13. How important do you think religion and an understanding of religion might be in Hackney. Do you think that it will become more or less of an important factor in Hackney politics in the future? (There seems to be a lot of political activity in fundamental churches) and the orthodox jewish community is said to be growing fast and has specific requirements.

Hackney Labour Councillors - Budget defence by blogging

Hackney Central's Labour councillors appear keen to crush their opposition as early as possible.

According to the Hackney Central Labour blog, the Greens offer "reckless proposals" in their alternative budget that will hit the poorest hardest.

The blog criticises the Conservative Party saying: "They have shown how unprepared they are and how little effort they have made in offering the people of Hackney an alternative. Right before our elections in May - the Tories have failed before the firing gun has even been set off."

The Lib Dems got off lightly with HCL briefly saying that their policies would be annoying and unhelpful if they were ever put into practice.

Hackney Central Labour sounded unworried. This may have more to do with a historically loyal electorate than any policies. The 2006 election results (with a 32% turnout) and the 2002 election results (31% turnout) in the ward both saw Labour win comfortably.

Over at We Love Stoke Newington the mood wasn't quite so aggressive - the only criticism from its Labour Councillor authors was for an unnamed free local paper - (might that be the Hackney Heckler?)

We Love Stoke Newington said: "There have been some misleading reports in a local free newspaper about budget cuts - we'd like to reassure you that this is not the case - these are different economic times, but due to managing the Council's finances well, we're able to freeze council tax and continue to invest in key services."

(Could this article in PR Week, by Hackney's head of Communications, Polly Rance, also be described as misleading too? "Talk of spending cuts in an election climate often sends a chill through communications departments. Comms teams know full well that their budgets are a prime target for cuts in manifesto pledges. Now is the time, more than ever, for us to prove our value, not just to our organisations, but to the residents we serve.")

Labour Councillors in Stoke Newington Central face a more real threat than their colleagues over at Hackney Central.

The 2006 local elections results for Stoke Newington Central show that Labour Councillors faced a threat from the Green Party - two Green candiates won more than 700 votes each while the poorest performing Labour councillor won around 900 votes.

The results for the 2009 by-election in Stoke Newington Central - to replace Labour Councillor Jamie Carswell - saw Labour with 48% of the vote compared to the Green's 32%.

The results for the 2002 elections in Stoke Newington Central showed a more comfortable lead for Labour suggesting that support for the Green Party in the ward has gained momentum since 2002.