Rotherham PR consultant paid £850 per day, twice a week. Worth it?

[geared]

and maybe if they gave up those responsible for the crimes committed, instead of stubbornly protecting them the people might have some respect again???

[Zamo]

There aren't vast swaths of people leaving Rotherham, we know our council is useless and we have learned to accept that they will never provide the service for which we pay. The best way to improve their image is to do what they are paid to do.

 

I never said there were large swathes of people leaving but people do leave and who will be wanting to move into the area to replace them? It will eventually deflate house prices and drags the area down as it becomes increasingly less desirable... and it wasn't that desirable to start with.

 

The council isn't useless but has had serious leadership problems like many other places. I've done some work there and I know the vast majority of staff are good at their jobs and hard working. We should not be writing them off as a rotten lot. With the right leadership they can get back on track but it is up to the people of Rotherham to ensure they get the right leadership - they voted in people who created the political correct culture that dis-empowered ordinary staff and allowed what happened to happen. If they continue to blame 'the council' for what happened then we will see the best staff leaving the sinking ship and all you will get in to replace them are the people nobody else wants... then you really will have a rotten council.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Look North reported this evening that Rotherham council is spending £850 per day to a PR consultant for two days each week (£9,613 spent so far, since November). Can that be justified? If so, how? Is it worthwhile?

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/election-politics/politics-and-election-news/exclusive-scandal-hit-rotherham-council-hires-850-a-day-pr-man-to-improve-image-1-7217774

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-32381838

 

 

In my opinion, this stunt will backfire.

Why? What sort of professional outside contractor will do work for much under £100 per hour?

[loraward]

I never said there were large swathes of people leaving but people do leave and who will be wanting to move into the area to replace them? It will eventually deflate house prices and drags the area down as it becomes increasingly less desirable... and it wasn't that desirable to start with.

 

The council isn't useless but has had serious leadership problems like many other places. I've done some work there and I know the vast majority of staff are good at their jobs and hard working. We should not be writing them off as a rotten lot. With the right leadership they can get back on track but it is up to the people of Rotherham to ensure they get the right leadership - they voted in people who created the political correct culture that dis-empowered ordinary staff and allowed what happened to happen. If they continue to blame 'the council' for what happened then we will see the best staff leaving the sinking ship and all you will get in to replace them are the people nobody else wants... then you really will have a rotten council.

 

My experience of them leads me to conclude that they are a useless organisation, but I accept that like most useless organisations it is very likley down to very corrupt and incompetent leadership.

[Native lad]

Why? What sort of professional outside contractor will do work for much under £100 per hour?

 

 

Most contractors, or risk losing the work by being undercut by a competitor. If around £100 per hour sounds reasonable for a bit of spin, perhaps it is not so unreasonable to suggest that the minimum wage should be raised to at least £25 per hour? After all, most people on such low earnings are doing far more than just being eloquent.

 

Local Authorities (LAs) are easily taken advantage of because those responsible for commissioning work usually lack any private sector business experience in the specific area of expertise for which they are commissioning work and consequently draught inadequate terms and conditions. Every contractor sees LAs as a cash cow and knows they can get away with charging more, so they do.

 

---------- Post added 22-04-2015 at 12:06 ----------

 

"£850 a day? That's quite cheap, especially considering the task at hand."

..."It can be justified, quite easily, on the basis that the town's image laid (probably still lies) in tatters after last year, but must be repaired soonest if R'ham is to preserve, and attract further, job-creating investments..."

 

Personally, I believe businesses will see beyond any spin and are more likely to base investment decisions on matters of substance, such as the availability of skilled labour with appropriate skills and qualifications, the proximity of suppliers and the standard of transport network infrastructure. Where businesses would find it necessary to attract outsiders to the area, in cases where there is a skills/qualifications/experience deficit amongst local job applicants, they would have the same difficulties in attracting applicants regardless of how much money the local authority has spent on PR.

 

Ask yourself, would you want to put down roots in an area where political correctness has reached such extremes in every aspect of local culture and governance that the worst of crimes are ignored and covered up? Would you want your daughter or sister to be raised in that environment - an environment where those with more traditional local values are persecuted?

 

I think Loraward is right in saying that the best way to improve image is for the authorities to do what they are paid to do (that includes the police and both local and national government).

Edited April 22, 2015 by Native lad

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Certainly Rotherham's existing councillors failed miserably- for years- to protect children. Hence:

a. all suspended;

b. no Council elections there this year;

c. UKIP may take the seat at Westminster, in the General Election; and

d. a 'full-council' election next year.

[Native lad]

Certainly Rotherham's existing councillors failed miserably- for years- to protect children. Hence:

a. all suspended;

b. no Council elections there this year;

c. UKIP may take the seat at Westminster, in the General Election; and

d. a 'full-council' election next year.

 

What's more alarming is that the police and managers of front line staff in a range of local authority departments failed to fulfil their duties. What is even more alarming is that it would appear that they have not been held accountable for their acts and omissions. If the staff for whom they are responsible had been so incompetent and negligent, they would have, no doubt, been fired or "downsized" - or whatever other politically correct term you could imagine for it - long ago.

[ubermaus]

Look North reported this evening that Rotherham council is spending £850 per day to a PR consultant for two days each week (£9,613 spent so far, since November). Can that be justified? If so, how? Is it worthwhile?

 

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/election-politics/politics-and-election-news/exclusive-scandal-hit-rotherham-council-hires-850-a-day-pr-man-to-improve-image-1-7217774

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-32381838

 

 

In my opinion, this stunt will backfire.

 

The amount is ok if the PR is effective. I guess rotherham council need good PR, Its Justified.

[Flanker7]

As the amount is not divisable by 850 I guess there is an expenses 'arrangement' too

Is there an example of their work?

Which agency?

Which of the very expensive Commisioners signed off on this?

[Zamo]

What's more alarming is that the police and managers of front line staff in a range of local authority departments failed to fulfil their duties. What is even more alarming is that it would appear that they have not been held accountable for their acts and omissions. If the staff for whom they are responsible had been so incompetent and negligent, they would have, no doubt, been fired or "downsized" - or whatever other politically correct term you could imagine for it - long ago.

 

The leadership issues were/are not unique to Rotherham. If we go on a witch hunt then we will have nobody with the knowledge and experience to run all these departments and things will get even worse.

 

Think what happened in Iraq after the war. We went after the bad guys and removed everyone from positions of power that worked under Saddam. The country fell apart because those put in place weren't up to the job and the chaos remains today.

 

It might make us feel better to see punishments dished out but it will result in a decline in service provision and the last thing we need to do is make things worse for vulnerable children and families who depend on social services.

 

We need to learn the lesson but move on.