Agenda item

[To consider the Council’s approach to communications]. 

The Director of Vibrant City introduced a presentation on the Council’s approach to Communications.  The Head of Communications presented the slides.  A copy of the presentation is attached to the signed minutes.

A Panel Member commented that they felt the Council needed to do more to promote partners such as The Grand and the events taking place at the Civic Halls.  Thousands of people subscribed to the Wolverhampton Today Facebook page.  They also felt promoting voluntary sector events was important.  

The Head of Communications commented that the Council did promote the work of the Halls.  He cited other examples of promotion such as the Arts Festival and Food Market.  He agreed that where appropriate the Council should work to promote the voluntary sector more. 

The Vice-Chair did not like the use of the word influence as part of the Communications Team’s role.  He felt to inform was more the purpose rather than influencing.  He did feel that sometimes the full story was not relayed such as what the Opposition had stated at Full Council on important topics.  He sought clarity on the Communications Budget.  He asked for a Departmental Chart for the 12 people in the Communications Team including the role each person had allocated.  He asked whether the Council needed a Head of Communications and a Director of Communications.  

The Vice-Chair felt the Council promoted partners too much and did not see it as the Council’s role to promote others.  He stressed the need for the Communications Team to promote the work of the Scrutiny function in accordance with the Statutory Scrutiny Guidance.  Meetings were not being advertised and therefore residents did not know of the work taking place. 

The Director of Vibrant City stated the word influence was taken from CIPR (Charted Institute of Public Relations) definition, it could be quite easily changed to change behaviour which was a fundamental part of communications.  He was keen to promote the City.  The overall budget of £2.4 million for the Directorate included Communications, Arts and Culture and City Events.  The Communications Team in terms of numbers was very comparable with other Local Authorities in the area, such as Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Solihull.  He stressed the importance of Communications Teams in the public sector, and this was highlighted during the Covid pandemic, where it had been essential.  He was happy to look into what more the Council could do to promote the Scrutiny function. 

A Panel Member asked whether residents would feel £600,000 was good value for the service they received from the Communications Team, particularly those who did not use digital media.  He asked about the brands the Council used and any costs for trademark and copyright.  He asked about the relationships the Council had with media outlets such as the Express and Star and how they managed the relationships. 

The Director of Vibrant City commented that the Council did not incur massive costs on trademark or branding.  The relationship with the Express and Star was a professional relationship. They worked closely with the journalists and sometimes robust conversations were had when there was disagreement.  They worked hard each day to promote the work of the Council. 

A Panel Member asked about the colour scheme that had been used for the Voter ID campaign.  She stated that purple background was not very good for people with a visual impairment.  The Director responded that the Council had chosen the national artwork from the Government which had been provided and this was due to the short timescales.

A Panel Member asked if Councillors social media was monitored by Council Officers.  In response it was confirmed by the Head of Communications that Councillors social media was not monitored by the Communications Team. 

A Panel Member asked how often the Council complained to the Express and Star about articles. She believed that the Council challenged the Express and Star frequently, citing almost every day.  The Head of Communications responded that when information was unfair or not accurate, then it would be challenged, but this was not on a frequent basis.  The Council tried to encourage a balanced story. 

The Panel Member felt the Council had a very close relationship with the BBC, with members of the Communication Team being on first name terms and frequent interaction.  The Head of Communications commented that the relationship was professional, they did aspire to TV coverage as it was great for promoting the City at a regional level.  They had a positive relationship with the BBC.  

The Vice-Chair asked for the cost of a “wrap around piece” in the Express and Star Newspaper.  The Chair asked for it to be for the last two occasions, including the date and the nature of the piece.

The Chair gave praise to the Communication Team in their efforts to ensure the Council was seen in a positive way and that the relationship was defended.  He liked the work the team were doing on digital communications.  He praised the work completed on the Voter ID campaign, as only 55 people had been unable to vote in the May 2023 Local Government elections in Wolverhampton.  Members of the Council on their own social media had also stressed the need for Voter ID using the material provided by the Communications Team.  He gave praise to the Better Health Rewards scheme promotion which had a substantial impact on people’s lives in the City.  The figures for digital campaigns were impressive but he added they could be bettered.  He did align himself with the Vice-Chair on the point of promoting Scrutiny more and how residents could understand more about the function.   He knew digital communications worked.  Working in partnership he saw as an important role for the Communications Team. 

The Chair asked what was the weakest area of the organisation and what was it that stopped them being able to deliver everything they wanted.  The Director of Vibrant City responded the growth in digital communications had been exponential in the last decade.  Opportunities were probably being missed on other channels such as TikTok, What’s App and Snap Chat.  Social media was a 24/7 domain.  They did not have the resources to be able to utilise all social media effectively. 

The Vice-Chair asked how often over the last five years has the Council sought external advice on communication matters and the cost involved.  The Director of Vibrant City promised to check and provide a written response to Board Members. 

The Chair asked if an Annual Report on the work of the Communications Team could come before the Board in the future.  This report could incorporate some of the answers to points that had been raised during the meeting and any data could be compared in future years with the previous Annual Report.

A Panel Member asked for raw data of communication campaigns showing how successful they had been.  He asked for this to be last year’s and to clearly show the outputs.  They also asked whether the Council paid for any advertising and its’s nature, including any on Facebook.  The Director responded that they did spend some money on advertising such as statutory notices and campaigns such as fostering.  He was happy to bring some more information to the Board on outputs for campaigns in the future.