This is a copy of my weekly blog which I write for work and is published on the council's intranet.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the Head of Communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

Last week we were setting up the sandbags ahead of what – in military terms – you might call a ‘defensive manoeuvre’ ahead of another not-so-flattering report about children’s services.

The good news is the ‘explosion’ that was the report I’ve just mentioned was well contained down to the hard work of one of my brilliant press operatives Emma.

Yes, there was coverage in the local media and the difficult questions we anticipated were asked; but we managed to keep it out of the nationals despite the fact the story was picked up by the Press Association.

Now then, there’s nothing to say the Sundays aren’t – right now – preparing a two page splash; and some other media organisation might be pulling together a Freedom of Information request, so the threat is still there.  But, for the time being we’ve kept a lid on things.

The reason?  Easy.  It’s because for this latest children’s services report we were open, honest, acknowledged that things haven’t been right, admitted that we’ve still got some work to do to make sure all the issues we’re facing are tackled, reassure the people of Leeds we’re taking this seriously and by saying ‘yes’ to every single request for an interview or statement.

In the past the council has probably been really defensive on issues so sensitive as this – but that’s not the way I intend to manage them.

My approach is to stand in front – not behind – the sandbags and take the media flak as it hits you.  In this case the flak was the difficult questions we were being asked.  Rosemary Archer did a great job of answering all of them and none were avoided.  As we were so honest and open I don’t believe there remain any unanswered questions and that’s a great position to be in.

So, a week on and the sandbags have been put into storage again.  However, we’re now getting ready to deploy the heavy artillery and big guns!

As I’m sure you are aware, some members of Unison and the GMB within the council’s street scene team have voted in favour of industrial action in a dispute, which they say, is over plans to cut wages.  We’re not too sure yet whether the action will involve a walkout or perhaps a work to rule.

Here’s why we need the heavy artillery: we’re going to have to fight two ‘battles’ with this one.  There’s the whole complicated issue of why the strike is happening and then there’s the issue of the disruption any strike is likely to cause.  This means two press officers, two directors and two politicians to handle the reaction to just one strike.  Our press ‘machine’ will have to be cranked up to the max!

On a much lighter note; I was able to enjoy some time last week doing what I consider to be the best bit of the job –meeting some of the great people doing great work for the people of our great city.

I was invited to attend an awards ceremony for adult social care staff.  Some were there to collect long service awards and others were being presented with accolades for the hard work they’ve been doing.

There were so many good news stories, I could fuel several months worth press releases.  The highlight was when I got ‘interview’ Stuart Simmons in front of the audience.  He’s the manager of Osmondthorpe Resource Centre and has won so many awards himself he’s running out of space on the mantelpiece.

My interview was fairly light hearted.  I established that Stuart’s wife is the main reason he gets out of bed to come to work in the morning; that his caring work started way back in the 1970s in Ghana; love brought him to Leeds; he likes Marmite (yuck!) and that even if he won a £1 million on the Lotto today, he’d still be at his desk the next morning.

I wonder how many other Heads of Communications got the chance to find that out about a colleague last week?

Finally, I asked for your feedback on the suggestion that we should ‘date stamp’ our publications so that readers know if a document is valid.

Here are two of the responses – from Harvey in ICT:

Would it be easier to have a version number (so long-standing doc[ument]s don't look like they've not changed in a decade) and allow a search on the intranet [or] Internet for version numbers, to help identify the latest copy and what the previous copies were?  One for Sharepoint when it comes along.

And Sarah in the Renaissance unit:

This really is a pet hate of mine! From personal experience, if I come across a document I want to know when it was published. Now if that was a while ago I might see if an up to date version existed. If it was more recent, I would feel confident using it to refer to. As it stands, a lot of our documents don't include a printed date so I have to ring around to try and ascertain how old it is.  And on a second print run you could have a similar reference that's found in books - first printed x date, reprinted x date. Putting a printed date on a document gives it a sense of context. Surely its better to know, than not know - then you can use your own judgement on it.  I'm not sure you need to include a valid until date - a lot of our plans and strategies are out of date for a while until they are replaced - but until a new one exists the assumption surely is that the old one is still the official version. A valid until date is probably more hassle than it’s worth.

Thanks to all of you for your comments.  I’ll discuss this with senior communications colleagues across the council as well.