| Refusing to comment, owing to the election 11:59 - Jun 29 with 1520 views | Zx1988 |
Is this a legitimate reason to avoid giving comment in response to bad PR, or is this just the seasonal version of 'cannot comment upon an ongoing investigation'? |  |
| |  |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 14:24 - Jun 29 with 1386 views | xrayspecs |
It is standard practice for public sector organisations. Once parliament breaks up for election campaigning, public sector organisations are effectively subject to a communications ban. They are no longer able to make public announcements, including on topics that would be considered to be their day job, nor respond to questions from journalists. All external communications goes on hold until after the election.
It is intended to ensure that the public sector does not get drawn into the politics of the election, including accusations from political parties about their motives for any communication. [Post edited 29 Jun 2024 14:25]
| | | |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:10 - Jun 29 with 1206 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 14:24 - Jun 29 by xrayspecs |
It is standard practice for public sector organisations. Once parliament breaks up for election campaigning, public sector organisations are effectively subject to a communications ban. They are no longer able to make public announcements, including on topics that would be considered to be their day job, nor respond to questions from journalists. All external communications goes on hold until after the election.
It is intended to ensure that the public sector does not get drawn into the politics of the election, including accusations from political parties about their motives for any communication. [Post edited 29 Jun 2024 14:25]
|
This isn't true – public sector organisations can still do day-to-day communications. They just have to be careful not to do any publicity that could be deemed political, such as new projects a politician could boast their party is delivering. |  | | |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:20 - Jun 29 with 1166 views | Zx1988 |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:10 - Jun 29 by Clapham_Junction |
This isn't true – public sector organisations can still do day-to-day communications. They just have to be careful not to do any publicity that could be deemed political, such as new projects a politician could boast their party is delivering. |
That was my understanding. I can't see that purdah prevents the prison service from responding to the unsavoury scenes/allegations from Wandsworth. | |
| |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 20:11 - Jun 30 with 949 views | factual_blue |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:20 - Jun 29 by Zx1988 |
That was my understanding. I can't see that purdah prevents the prison service from responding to the unsavoury scenes/allegations from Wandsworth. |
I'd say it's borderline as prison issues are always a political hot potato, and what the Civil Service must not do under any circumstances is add fuel to the election debate. And the CS will err on the side of caution - that's what they're meant to do. |  |
| |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 20:48 - Jun 30 with 900 views | xrayspecs |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:10 - Jun 29 by Clapham_Junction |
This isn't true – public sector organisations can still do day-to-day communications. They just have to be careful not to do any publicity that could be deemed political, such as new projects a politician could boast their party is delivering. |
I stand corrected, it is not an absolute ban, but from experience, most comms, including a lot of what you call day to day, gets put on hold. The provision of public services is inextricably linked to the current government, so organisations needs to be mindful. | | | |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 20:56 - Jun 30 with 876 views | xrayspecs |
| Refusing to comment, owing to the election on 21:20 - Jun 29 by Zx1988 |
That was my understanding. I can't see that purdah prevents the prison service from responding to the unsavoury scenes/allegations from Wandsworth. |
The allegations are serious and relate to the provision of prison services, for which the current government are accountable, so I can understand why they fall under the purdah. [Post edited 30 Jun 2024 21:38]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
