Maybotism has infected the DfE’s robotic press officers

Purdah is officially over - not that you’d know that if you’d tried to get anything out of the DfE recently...
21st July 2017, 12:00am
Magazine Article Image

Share

Maybotism has infected the DfE’s robotic press officers

https://www.tes.com/magazine/archived/maybotism-has-infected-dfes-robotic-press-officers

Theresa May’s cloyingly cautious, almost robotic approach to campaigning played a significant role in the government snatching electoral failure (relatively speaking) from the jaws of success. Within Tory circles it seems that lessons have been learned. Cabinet ministers have been let off the leash. So why does the Maybot approach to PR still dominate communications at the Department for Education?

There are times, of course, when caution is necessary. During the period of purdah in the run-up to elections, civil servants are forbidden from making any new policy announcements that could be seen as being advantageous to any party.

In practice, this often tends to be interpreted by overzealous departmental press offices as an excuse for, at best, putting out generic statements; at worst, simply refusing to answer genuine questions.

Since 2015, periods of purdah have been put in place for two general elections, the EU referendum and two sets of local and mayoral elections. The radio silence from government was even more prolonged after this year’s election, in light of protracted Conservative negotiations with the Democratic Unionist Party to form a working House of Commons majority.

Now, of course, there really is no excuse. And some of the bland, utterly useless comments sent to FErret’s colleagues by the DfE in recent weeks have been staggering for the lack of insight they offer. But the best example yet has to be the response to this week’s scoop by Julia Belgutay.

After obtaining the crucial information about the training provider in question and verifying it through official channels, Tes sent over a list of detailed questions to get to the bottom of a quite staggering case.

The response? “We regularly review providers’ eligibility to be on the register and will remove any that no longer meet our criteria.” Right, so what about the specific provider we asked about, and the pertinent facts of the case? Nothing.

Three days later, it was quietly removed from the register. No one at the department thought to tell the publication that had asked about it and - it would seem - brought it to its attention. Talk about ungrateful.

FErret can’t help but fear that the DfE has entered a permanent state of purdah. Here’s hoping that the situation improves soon.

Share your gossip, scandal and intrigue with FErret by emailing ferret@tesglobal.com

You need a Tes subscription to read this article

Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content:

  • Unlimited access to all Tes magazine content
  • Exclusive subscriber-only stories
  • Award-winning email newsletters

Already a subscriber? Log in

You need a subscription to read this article

Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content, including:

  • Unlimited access to all Tes magazine content
  • Exclusive subscriber-only stories
  • Award-winning email newsletters
Recent
Most read
Most shared