THE leader of Warrington Borough Council has defended the spending of nearly £180,000 on the production and distribution of 11 issues of a magazine over the last three and-a-half years.
Coun Ian Marks (right) says communication is well recognised as a key driver of public satisfaction with a council – and that 
since the authority magazine “The Wire” was launched in May 2006 there has been a marked increase in public satisfaction with it.
The council leader was responding to a question from Labour’s Coun Linda Dirir (below, left) who asked: “In this time of recession and severe budgetary restraint on the council’s finances, would the leader inform the council of the cost (out-sourced production and delivery) of all glossy magazines/leaflets delivered to all households in Warrington – the cost for this year and total costs since May 2006 and projected costs for next year?”
Coun Marks said “The Wire” was written and designed in-house and distributed via Royal Mail three times a year.
The council had managed to secure agreements with the printer and Royal Mail to maintain costs at 2006 levels. The cost per edition for production and delivery was £16,275, giving an annual cost of £48,825 which would also be the projected cost for next year.
However it had recently been decided to make The Wire a partnership magazine so this would result in the cost being split among a range of partner organisations.
Cost of producing and distributing 11 editions since 2006 was £179,025.
The council had also produced an A-Z of council services this year, which cost £6,995 to print and £2,961 to 
distribute to 87,000 households. This was not published every year so there would be no cost next year.
The only other designed leaflet distributed to all households was a recycling leaflet to provide information on the blue bin scheme. This had cost £1,995, funded from a ringfenced grant budget for recycling publicity.
Coun Marks said it had been shown that if two councils performed at the same level, the one with the better, more regular communications would be the one with the higher resident satisfaction, as people felt informed and aware of what was happening
Council chief defends £180,000 glossy
66 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
6 Comments
You just have to love that last paragraph. When times are good, maybe, but when times are not good and you have a council reeling in debt, I would imagine the residents would prefer to keep their services rather than read that they have lost them in some “glossy”.
I would also suggest that this is the tip of the iceberg as regards printing costs.
How many people actually read the stuff that the council print?
Keeping valued services is far more important than telling us how many flags they have won and how many boxes they have ticked.
What can the ‘Glossys’ do that the Warrington-Worldwide and the Warrington Guardian can’t do? All we need is news in short parargraphs instead of waffle and colourful pictures with text?
Having read the spending plans for 2010/11//12/13 an the possible closures
of libraries, swimming activities, to reducing health care provision and increasing the council tax the list goes on. How can the council justify not reducing the churning of ‘glossy-wire magazine’ and other information produced from the council’s own communciations/pr department, it must cost the council and we, the tax payer to keep a top heavy department in place to recycle other employees and departments information.
Well you can take me OFF the mailing list thanks, I DONT want it, there are MORE than enough OTHER professonal magazines around in Warrington that you could "COMMUNICATE" your news through ( if any one really wants to know). It's just a way of meeting a Perfomance Indicator and my wages and Council Tax are being WASTED so see sense and STOP IT NOW.
Work in partnership with whats already out there, use your SENSE for once!!!!!!!!!
Ditto…someonewhoworks4WBC…At this time of cut backs and possible reduction or loss of services and jobs within the council, according to the document ‘Council spending plans for 2010 to 13’ this must be reason enough to save money and get a local publisher to provide the news that the council gives out and halt production of the glossy wire news magazine, what’s wrong with the Warrington Guardian or Warrington Worldwide providing the information or just publish it on the Council website? As for the A-Z guide (or may be A-B) being produced, at least next year’s edition will have less letters and less services and save the WBC some money because of the cutbacks.
The on cost of providing the council wire news is very expensive, especially when the communication/pr section are involved, how can the council afford or justify such a non revenue earning, excessively staffed, high salaried section that recycle other departments and sections information, at the expense of other worthwhile sections within the Council that benefit the community are at risk of being lost, reduced and staff being made redundant.
The document is scary reading, there are other ways the council can obtain money from the public,
1. make the first car driver to top at traffic lights when they turn red to pay £1
2. charge 50p for pedestrians for walking on the cracks of pavements
3. excessive of breathing in and out 50p
Coun Marks said it had been shown that if two councils performed at the same level, the one with the better, more regular communications would be the one with the higher resident satisfaction, as people felt informed and aware of what was happening.
WHAT A LOAD OF PATHETIC TWADDLE!
Instead of trying to manipulate statistics for ‘higher resident satisfaction’ with political ‘spin’ why can’t they just actually DO something ! Is’nt the emphasis supposed to be on reducing garbage not producing it!
“as people felt informed and aware of what was happening”
has got to be the silly statement of the century! What people seem most aware of in Warrington is that deals are done behind closed doors and ‘public consultation’ is just another waste of paper!