Government Advertising: National Press (Hansard, 3 March 2004)

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, the cost-effectiveness of full-page national press advertisements is measured by cost per response—that is, the cost of the advertising space divided by the number of responses that can be attributed to the particular advertisement.
Decisions on the size of advertisement to be used are made in consultation between the government department concerned, the Central Office of Information and the specialist advertising and media planning agencies appointed to the campaign. Key factors considered include the nature of the message and the audience being targeted by the advertising.

§ Lord Higgins
My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for that reply. The Government's pensions credit is so complicated that barely half the people entitled to it are actually claiming it. So I can certainly agree that there is a strong case for advertising the Government's pensions credit. But the full-page advertisements that are being used are both wasteful and misleading. The whole of the top page contains absolutely no information whatever. The bottom half of the page says that a certain group of pensioners will get extra cash, when in fact they will simply be allowed to keep a little more of their own money. Can the Minister tell us the cost of this campaign, and whether the content has been approved by the Advertising Standards Authority?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I am not aware whether the content has been approved by the Advertising Standards Authority. I should have thought it was more appropriate for it to receive responses from the public over criticisms of advertisements placed.
I think that the noble Lord misses the point. That campaign has been extremely effective; it is a very eye-catching advertisement. It is likely that 75 per cent of pensioners every month who get an award will benefit in the sum of at least £43.50—that is the average award—on top of their basic state pension. That is a very large sum of money in my view. Two-thirds of those receiving the benefit will be the poorest women in our society. Its aim is to reach some 3 million households in all, and some 2.5 million are already in receipt of it.
I think this is an excellent campaign and I am surprised that the noble Lord seeks, perhaps by undermining the effect of the advertising campaign, to deprive millions of pensioner families of money to which they are rightly entitled. As to the cost of the campaign, at £12 million I think it is extremely good value.

§ Lord McNally
My Lords, does the Minister recall that when Mr Alastair Campbell had overall control of government advertising, the "Panorama" programme accused the Government of jiggery-pokery in terms of government advertising prior to the last general election? When Mr Alastair Campbell left his job, it was split, very correctly: Mr David Hill took over his position immediately, and we were promised a senior 657 and independent civil servant who would keep an eye on government advertising to prevent any more jiggery-pokery. When will we get this civil servant?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I think that the noble Lord has asked a question along those lines in the not-too-distant past. I explained to him on that occasion that the recruitment of the Permanent Secretary, not for advertising but for communications across government, was in process.

§ Baroness Knight of Collingtree
My Lords, who paid for the full-page advertisements for changing the system of getting numbers from the GPO? Was it the GPO or was it the Government? Two rather ridiculous young men came galloping through the pages of our national papers frequently.

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I do not know for sure, but I suspect it was the commercial organisation that was changing the numbers.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, what is the Government's total expenditure on advertising and how does that sum compare with the amounts spent before they came to office?

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, prices in real terms, adjusted for inflation, from 1986–87 to 2002–03, are available. The spend in 2002–03 in real terms was £160 million, which is somewhat short of the £190 million recorded for 1986–87. For 1996–97, the sum was some £81,700,000.

§ Lord Higgins
My Lords, I have stressed constantly in debates that I am strongly in favour of people taking up the Government's pensions credit, but wasting paper in this way is not an ideal way to do it.

§ Lord Bassam of Brighton
My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord is in favour of take-up campaigns for benefits. I am hoping that he will add his enthusiastic voice to that end. I am sure that the company which has advised the Government on providing advertising support for that campaign will be more than happy to advise the noble Lord further, should he so wish, of the success of that campaign.