In her infamous financial statement in July, Rachel Reeves expressed shock at discovering a “£22 billion black hole” in the public finances for this year. The Financial Times asked, via a Freedom of Information request, for a breakdown of how this tally was arrived at. The Treasury were unable to tell them. Since the last Government was blamed, presumably the £9.4 billion for public sector pay – above inflation increases with no productivity improvements – was not one of the items. But it will hardly have helped. The Chancellor did set out some savings, however. There was means-testing of the Winter Fuel Payment, of course, as well as some other items in the economy drive.
One announcement that I welcomed was that the Government would “stop all non-essential spending” on communications. The Taxpayers Alliance has found that spending by the NHS alone on communications comes to £57 million a year. Total public sector spending on communications was reported as being £0.75 billion last year, having been rising fast. A Treasury briefing note, published on July 29th the same day as the Chancellor’s statement, said that “immediate action on spending pressures” would include savings of £50 million in Government Departments on communications. Rather a modest target perhaps – with the implication that it is “essential” for over 90 per cent of communications spending to continue. Still, perhaps the focus was on PR that Government Departments had direct control over – rather than covering the spin doctors working for the NHS, the local authorities, and all the Quangos.
So how is it going? According to the response I have had from Freedom of Information requests to Government Departments there seems to be no savings at all so far. We are already halfway through the financial year – yet the tone of the replies hardly conveys a sense of urgency.
- The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, with 218 communications officers, states that there “are no current plans to change the size of Defra’s Communications.”
- The Department for Work and Pensions, with 135 press officers, says “information is not held” on any reductions.
- The Department for Transport has 90 press officers. The response does say the total “is currently under review.”
- The Department for Culture Media and Sport, with 45 press officers, has “no information” about any cutbacks.
- The Department of Health has 80 press officers and says that “no decisions have been taken about reductions for the current financial year or 2025-26.”
- The Cabinet Office, with 34 communications staff, should be leading the review but has no plans to set an example declaring: “There are no current plans to change the size of the Cabinet Office Communications.”
- The Business Department has 117 press officers. No news of any reduction in the spin machine.
- The Department of Justice has 108 press officers with “no plans to change.”
- The Department of Education has 84 communications staff, and promises “we continuously review all teams.”
- The Ministry of Defence responded that it doesn’t know how many communications staff it has and it would cost too much to find out. Ditto the Foreign Office.
- The Northern Ireland Office has nine communications officers: “Given the essential nature of the work, the Northern Ireland Office has no current plans to make reductions.”
- The Department for Energy Security & Net Zero has 76 communications officers and says there are “no planned reductions.”
The Treasury has not replied with regards to its own spin machine.
Incidentally, I have no personal animus against all these communications staff. But the numbers are absurdly high. I wonder if there are more press officers in Whitehall than journalists on national newspapers. Doubtless the press officers are a fundamentally bright, good humoured, public spirited bunch who felt it would be an exciting career choice. Surely the reality must be a great disappointment. They must be bored witless. Would not redundancy be a liberating opportunity for them to find more worthwhile endeavours?
Some may argue that with state spending of £1,200 billion a year it is rather a footling matter if a billion or so goes on comms, or a billion on equalities and diversity and so on. That strikes me as the wrong attitude to take. With a billion here and a billion there you are soon talking about real money. In Argentina, state spending as a share of GDP has fallen from 44 per cent last year to 32 per cent year due to reforms introduced by Javier Milei. Taking a chainsaw to the bureaucracy, subsidies, and corrupt vested interests has proved rather popular. I suspect he writes his own tweets.
Politicians often talk about “tough choices” on public spending. But there are plenty that are rather less tough than forcing pensioners to shiver this winter.
The Chancellor’s pledge to “stop all non-essential spending” on communications sounds as if it was, rather ironically, just a bit of spin.
