NB: THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS TYPED FROM A TRANSCRIPTION UNIT RECORDING AND NOT COPIED FROM AN ORIGINAL SCRIPT: BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF MIS- HEARING AND THE DIFFICULTY, IN SOME CASES OF IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS, THE BBC CANNOT VOUCH FOR ITS ACCURACY. ........................................................................ PANORAMA "TONY in ADLAND" RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC-1 DATE: 26:05:02 ........................................................................ VIVIAN WHITE: Every day in every ad break advertisers bombard us with messages. But now the biggest spender of them all is the New Labour Government buying airtime with our money. Tonight - the millions we pay: the record advertising spend before the general election and how the Blair Government broke the rules that separate public information from party propaganda. A year ago Tony Blair won a second landslide election victory. That year the most communications conscious government we've ever known bought so much advertising time that it became the number one in the industry. KEVIN HURDWELL Media Analyst, Acumen The very striking thing about the advertising activities from the government during 2001 is after a sort of threefold increase in overall expenditure from 1999 we find that in 2001 the government is the biggest single advertiser in the country in a year where most of the top 50 advertisers were indeed cutting expenditure. [Advertisement] Think - slow down. This car was travelling at 35 miles per hour WHITE: There are rules for government advertising. This road safety campaign is well within them, dramatically conveying information. You can spend public money on that. The government's Central Office of Information - the COI - buys the ads and the airtime. [Advertisement] Think - slow down. WHITE: But party politics at the taxpayers' expense isn't allowed, the parties themselves have to pay for their messages. The rules say that government advertising must never even appear to be party political. In opposition Tony Blair found it easy to tell when he thought the Tories had crossed that line. April 1988 TONY BLAIR: The government are not just giving the public the facts, they are promoting a particular Conservative Party view of areas of high political controversy. Now that's not just an abuse of the broadcasting service, it's an abuse of literally hundreds of millions of pounds worth of taxpayers' money. There are millions of pounds of public money being used to fund party propaganda. September 1989 TONY BLAIR: You can see quite clearly that the purpose of this is not to give us, the public, the facts, but is to sell the government's political message and that's quite wrong. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 I think there is a clear line between adverts which tell the public something that they need to know and something they need to do, and an advert that simply says this is a government which has done splendid things for a certain group of people, and I think, if one thinks about it, the dividing line in one's mind is quite clear, and that goes of course to the content of the advert and the style of the advert as well as the timing. VIVIAN WHITE It's not the first time Panorama has taken a close interest in government advertising. Back in 1989 we looked at the Tories. They transformed the way it was done, but we said they'd broken the rules. Kevin Baverstock did research for us then. He was working for the London Media Company, and guess who was cheering him on when we made that Panorama 13 years ago? KEVIN BAVERSTOCK Media Analyst a2a We had quite a lot of dialogue with Tony Blair in his office during the making of your programme where he was expressing a lot of interest. Tony Blair and his office were quite - justifiably in my view - concerned that government expenditure was being used for perhaps the wrong purposes, for party political purposes, and he was keen to know what we were studying for you for those reasons. WHITE: But Blair is the big spender now. He's outspent all his predecessors in the year before the election. Now his critics say he's broken the rules. Sir MICHAEL PARTIRDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 I think it's an improper use of taxpayer's money. It's wrong to do that. ELAINE ABBOT It leaves a nasty taste in the mouth that it's my party that's doing it. WHITE: Official government figures show that in the year from April 2000 to March 2001 the amount spent on advertising went up by 70% compared to the year before, to £192 million making the government the biggest advertiser in the country. [Advertisements] Millions of pounds of your money..... (Targeting fraud) 22 nurses in the NHS...... (NHS) NEVILLE TAYLOR: I was sitting watching television and every now and again exclaiming to my wife "God, look there's another one!". We channel swapped and there was another one. It became a family joke. WHITE: And lots of the ads were on politically hot topics. Nursing shortages and the state of the NHS, benefit fraud, single parents. NEVILLE TAYLOR Director General, COI, 1985-88 There's another one. It was the density, the number primarily but it was also the nature, you know.. what are these messages, what are they essentially messages about government policy which the public has got to know about because there is something happening? Well, the only thing that appeared to be dictating the timescale was the election coming off. WHITE: We've looked at three campaigns in particular. Each cost millions and each ran shortly before the election. Top of the government's political agenda was convincing voters that they've delivered on health. They ran a campaign about nursing recruitment but it was also about boosting the image of the NHS. This ad ran in February and March last year. COI Government advert "A young male, head, leg and pelvic injury.... " 2 Paramedics "You're okay Joe, just going over a few little bumps." 2 Porters "1, 2, 3......" 3 A&E Nurses "This is Joe, he's got a fracture to his right femur" 2 Consultants 1 Radiographer "I think he needs to go up to IT fairly quickly." 3 Theatre Nurses "Get rid of that nasty machine.." 1 Pharmacist, 6 Intensive Care Nurses, 3 Healthcare Assistants, 9 Paediatric Nurses "Good boy." 1 Community Children Nurse "Right, let's see you walk on them crutches for me." 1 Community Physiotherapist "How's he been?" 1 Community Children's Nurse "He's alright. Almost back to normal." Mum 18 months ago Joe was knocked down by a car. 34 people picked him up. Twenty-two nurses were part of the NHS team that saved Joe's life. You could be one of them. For details on joining or returning to nursing and improved pay and conditions call 0845 6060 655. WHTE: The standard source for industry data Nielsen Media Research estimate that buying the time for this campaign alone put the government into the same advertising league as DIY superstores B&Q, they spent £3 million. ALLISON BRIGHT Ward Sister, Ripley Community Hospital. I turn on the television, I like to chill out when I get home from work. [Advertisement} 22 nurses were part of the NHS team that saved Joe's life. You could be one of them. BRIGHT: I just thought it was another government ruse to try and get.. make the NHS look rosy and I thought well at that particular time, you're talking a year ago, it wasn't and it still isn't. I saw it as the glamorous side of nursing, a little boy gets knocked over and all these people look after him. But there's also the other side, there's a little old man who's had a stroke, who's quite disabled by it. And they don't see that, that's the Cinderella side of the care of the elderly. WHITE: Mr Wright's just been admitted into the Community Hospital in Ripley in Derbyshire after his initial treatment in an acute hospital for his stroke. He's 78, typical of Alison Bright's patients. Peter Egan, the care assistant, has been hired in from a nursing agency. It's only the second time he's worked in this hospital. Temps cost more than NHS employees. But they're still short of staff, so Alison has to rely on them to fill in the gaps. BRIGHT: I'm working on a day to day basis with shortage of staff, with lack of funds etc etc. I mean I don't know how much the advert cost but I'm sure it would have provided a lot of staff for me. WHITE: £3 million we think from the best industry estimates. BRIGHT: Good grief! £3 million ? That's unbelievable. Unbelievable. Lord BELL Chairman, Chime Communications It's occupying a lot of air time to communicate the values of the NHS which I'm sure are very fine and which everybody loves, but they're nothing to do with the recruitment, with the purpose of the ad. Ads work if they're single minded - buy this product, get this benefit - that's how advertising works. And secondly it's not the most efficient way of recruiting nurses. You don't see any other recruitment advertising on television. Television is a mass market blunt instrument that costs a great deal of money. It isn't an efficient means of identifying a target audience and getting them to apply for a job that you want them to apply for. WHITE: The government says that the numbers being recruited into training as nurses and returning into the profession have greatly improved. But independent research for the government on the campaign cast doubt on how much that has to do with the ads. The research concluded: "Disappointingly, interest in finding out more about nursing declined" but the campaign may have been just what the doctor ordered for New Labour, a soft sell for the NHS. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary DSS, 1988-95 I think it's only got really the nurse recruiting tacked on the end. Most of it you could mistake for a party political about.. you know.. we've now got a good NHS and this is what the government is doing for you. WHITE: And what do you think of that? PARTRIDGE: That I think is something that ought to be paid for by the party rather than by the taxpayer. WHITE: Tony Blair once sharply attacked nursing recruitment advertising on TV for being too political. It started under the Tories and this was one of three campaigns Tony Blair criticised in a public letter of complaint to the government in 1988. Tony Blair complained about politicians who mask party propaganda as factual information. Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 What he said in 1988 doesn't cease to be true when he becomes Prime Minister. I think that it shows that he's aware of the risks when somebody else is doing it. I hope he's equally aware of the risks when his own people are involved. WHITE: At the Peartree Inn in Ripley cash transfusion for the NHS are a regular event. SPEAKER: The biggest thanks is for the people that contribute to Ripley Hospital every Tuesday they're here because we need to support our local hospital as I'm sure everybody else in country does in their own way. Thank you. ALLISON BRIGHT: Ward Sister, Ripley Community Hospital I think that it's good that the community can support us but I feel sorry that they have to provide us with basic equipment. That should be provided by the NHS at the end of the day, but it isn't so... WHITE: How did you vote in 97 and why? BRIGHT: I voted Labour because I wanted a change. I wanted a change in the NHS. I wanted things to get better. You know.. I was ever hopeful. WHITE: How did you vote in 2001, Sister? BRIGHT: I didn't vote in 2001. WHITE: Why? BRIGHT: As I say, I was beginning to get disillusioned then and I still am now. WHITE: But it wasn't just what the government said in the Nursing Campaign, it was when they said it. BRIGHT: I just felt it was timed nicely before the elections. They'd had five years in power, they wanted to portray what they'd done was good and that everything was running very smoothly thank you so vote for us again. ANDREW MARR: Almost everybody one speaks to thinks that he will go for May 3rd. WHITE: Tony hadn't announced the general election date but it wasn't exactly a secret, with ministers regularly parading themselves for Labour Party photo opportunities in front of the invited press. Blair was universally expected to make it all official in April, and then no government ad campaigns would be allowed at all. At the very last minute another drama which wasn't in the script, the foot and mouth crisis, forced him to delay, but under the rules, the government was meant to be specially careful about its advertising because of the election coming up. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 From the beginning of January one would be very concerned that any advertising expenditure was absolutely proper to be paid for by the taxpayer and not by the party. WHITE: But Panorama can reveal that £97 million of taxpayers money, according to the COI's own figures was spent between January and March, nearly as much as they spent the whole of the year before. The government normally spends heavily towards the end of the year but this time 50.4%, over half of the annual spend, went into the last three months. KEVIN HURDWELL Media Analyst, Acumen That is very unusual. I mean you would not normally spend 50% of your advertising budget in the last quarter of your financial year, that doesn't make commercial sense whatsoever. KEVIN BAVERSTOCK Media Analyst, a2a There are advertisers who are very seasonal, I mean cream eggs for instance may want to advertise pre- Easter, perhaps they spend 50% of their money, but it is quite unusual. Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 The natural suspicion is that the picking is related in some way to the fact that a general election was known to be coming or was thought to be coming at the beginning of May 2001. NEVILLE TAYLOR Director General, COI, 1985-88 Why suddenly would there be a burst in advertising for any other reason? WHITE: 2001 was a record, Spring was a record, March was sensational. Here are the figures: January £29 million, February £19 million and March, the month before the expected election campaign, £49 million of public money, an all time record for a single month. The government says buying ads in Spring is cheap - but March isn't. BAVERSTOCK: It looks like a massive surge. HURDWELL: No, no, to spend a quarter of your budget in the last month of your financial year either suggests bad financial management or a significant plan to spend the money in that month. NEVILLE TAYLOR Director General, COI, 1985-88 To concentrate expenditure and impact and message all in a very tight timescale in a run up to an election has to smell, it has to indicate another motive for doing it. WHITE: The government declined to give us an interview for this programme but we know that Tony Blair objects to money being misspent on government advertising. September 1989 BLAIR: You can see quite clearly that the purpose of this is not to give us, the public, the facts, but is to sell the government's political message and that's quite wrong. WHITE: The Nursing Campaign mixed recruitment with public relations. Some campaigns went further, concentrating more on impressing the general public than the people the ads seemed to be about. This campaign was on benefit fraud. COI Government advert MAN1: Did you get hold of Terry? MAN2: Yeah, yeah, he'll be down soon. MAN1: How is he? MAN2: Oh he's alright, you know.. still signing on though. MAN1: Is he still? MAN2: Yeah. MAN1: It must be getting to him. TERRY: Right, can I have my money? BOSS: Same time tomorrow? TERRY: No problem. See you chief. WHITE: This ad was run in March last year as well. MAN1: Hey Terry! TERRY: Hello lads. MAN1: What you having? TERRY: Oh cheers mate, I'll have a pint. I'd get 'em in but I'm a bit skint, you know. MAN2: Hey, hey, we'll see you alright. Targeting Fraud People who commit benefit fraud are getting away with millions of pounds of your money. We aim to put a stop to it. WHITE: The best industry estimates are that the government spent over £3 million running this ad on TV in March. The government's top spend of the month. This campaign alone cost taxpayers nearly as much as McDonalds spent to advertise their hamburgers. TERRY: I'm a bit skint, you know.. MAN2: Hey, hey, we'll see you alright. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 I think that this one also is improper. At the end the bit I object to is to say "We are going to do something about it." Targeting Fraud We aim to put a stop to it. PARTRIDGE: You could easily run.. see that ad running in a party election campaign and you wouldn't raise and eyebrow, you'd think that was a party political broadcast saying 'this government is cracking down on fraud'. Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 It doesn't seem to me to be the sort of campaign that needs to peak two months before an election. WHITE: An independent report had recommended trying out advertising to help reduce benefit fraud. So in the year before the election the campaign was tested in the north west, and one of the places where the ads were first seen was Preston. Elaine Abbot saw them. She knows a thing or two about advertising. She works for the Lancashire Evening Post. ELAINE ABBOT I've sold advertising for 17 years. I know it's expensive and I know in some instances it works, in a lot of instances it works, but I don't think the Benefit Fraud Campaign was value for money. Terry: Right, can I have my money? ABBOT: Very few people condone fraud of any kind, but the people who are committing benefit fraud know it's wrong, know they're doing wrong, and they're not going to stop just because they see an advert telling them that they shouldn't be doing it. WHITE: Elaine Abbot is also a Labour councillor who was re-elected for her ward in Preston this May. ELAINE ABBOT Labour Councillor, Preston I don't think it was a serious attempt to target benefit fraud, it was to let people know that they were considering benefit fraud as a serious issue. People who probably had given the government grief about benefit fraud, the people who would not normally be Labour supporters but the government was hoping to court. WHITE: Elaine saw the intention as political. We've seen the research for the government on the campaign. It was definitely meant to reach and to change the attitudes of opinion formers and members of the general public who weren't on benefit as well as claimants themselves. ABBOT: Good evening. Thanks for coming to the door. I'm Elaine Abbot, I'm one of your Labour councillors. Would you normally support Labour? RESIDENT: Yes I do, yes. ABBOT: That's brilliant. Thank you very much indeed. Bye bye. WHITE: The Benefit Fraud Campaign went national in the press and on TV in March 2001 just before the election. So everyone could see it. But extra care was taken to make sure that the message got to a prosperous middle class audience. In the press up market titles like the Daily Telegraph were used much more than mass circulation newspapers. KEVIN BAVERSTOCK Media Analyst, a2a The red top papers such as The Sun, the Mirror and The Star were not used, or used to very small level, and papers like The Telegraph, The Times and The Independent were used very heavily, in fact about 90% of the expenditure went that way. KEVIN HURDWELL Media Analyst, Acumen Yes, 90% of activity was committed in newspapers which you wouldn't claim were avid reads by the claimant community. WHITE: It just strikes you as odd does it? HURDWELL: It doesn't make sense. BAVERSTOCK: It doesn't make sense. WHITE: The campaign had shifted. It was now much more about reaching and changing the attitudes not of claimants but of this middle class audience, so they would know that the government, like them, was concerned about benefit fraud. These ads didn't give the free phone number to shop benefit cheats. BAVERSTOCK: It would indicate that you are most definitely targeting the middle classes and the opinion formers. WHITE: The March TV campaign told the same story. The ads were shown right across commercial TV but our media analysts were struck by how heavily Channel 4 was selected, a station with a particularly up market audience. BAVERSTOCK: You're hitting the middle classes and opinion formers very heavily with the weight of advertising that was used on Channel 4. HURDWELL: I think it's overkill. I think the campaign in March of 2001 is overkill. WHITE: Meaning? HURDWELL: Meaning more advertising airtime was bought than necessary on a normal campaign basis. [Advertisement] BOSS: Same time tomorrow? TERRY: Not a problem. See you chief. WHITE: And the campaign had two unexpected side effects. The government's own research report says that benefit claimants in the north west who'd seen the ads more than anyone else became increasingly unwilling to shop someone that they knew was on the fiddle. Their attitude has hardened. And there was also, as they put it here in the report "a negative impact". Guess what? People perceived the benefit fraud as easier to commit. Unfortunate that, in a campaign about beating benefit fraud. Targeting Fraud We aim to put a stop to it WHITE: The government says their campaign was the beginning of a long haul aimed at gradually changing attitudes towards benefit fraud while tightening up the system itself. The government says the number of people trying to commit benefit fraud has fallen by 18%, and they claim that's partly as a result of the ads. ELAINE ABBOT Labour Councillor, Preston I think as an advertising campaign it was a very pretty campaign - I think it was a waste of money. It leaves a nasty taste in the mouth that it's my party that's doing it. WHITE: Doing what? ABBOT: Using money to buy votes. WHITE: In his public letter Tony Blair attacked three campaigns run by a Tory government as ".. the flagrant abuse of public money for party purposes." Panorama March 1988 One of their ads was about changes the Conservatives were making in social security support for families. Panorama filmed the ad being made. Tony Blair complained that this was a party promotion for the Tories. Civil Servant Sir Michael Partridge says it wasn't but he remembers Blair's complaint landing on his desk. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 Well obviously he knows the rules because he wouldn't have raised it if he hadn't, so I think he must equally ask himself whether he's abiding by them. WHITE: If some of Blair's ads were about impressing the public in general, some went further and didn't tell the apparent target audience things that they needed to know. COI Government advert 2001 MOTHER: I never thought I'd be able to get into work until I heard about the changes to 'new deal for lone parents'. It really worked for me. The adviser took me through all the choices now available. I learnt new skills and I even got help towards the cost of registered child care for my kids. WHITE: This ad ran in February and March. MOTHER: Now I'm working part time and it's a lot of fun. I'm glad I took a look at the choices I could make. New deal for lone parents 0800 868 868 Find out what your choices are. For more information call 0800 868 868 WHITE: The best industry estimate shows that £2 million went on buying the space for this ad, most of that in March, nearly as much as Toyota that month on advertising a new car. SUE CURTIS A lot of my friends obviously know my situation. My work colleagues know my situation and they were really pleased for me. They'd seen the ad and they though well that's fine, Sue'll be fine now, she's taken care of. At last they're doing something for single parents. And I had to sort of let them down gently by saying well it doesn't work for me. I've got a mortgage, I've got this, that and the other, I've got certain things that mean that it doesn't work for me. And they were just flabbergasted and I felt as if I'd kind of let them down. 0800 868 868 Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 I was just sitting there and I saw this advert come up and I thought that's a bit odd because we're getting very near an election, and certainly if I had still been the Permanent Secretary I would have had doubts about whether it was a proper form of words to be paid for by the taxpayer. It seemed to me to be crossing the line. MOTHER: It really worked for me..... PARTRIDGE: I would have required it to be more factual about the actual change of policy that was happening rather than a general puff for the benefits of government policy. WHITE: Sue Curtis, from Stockport, is a single parent with two school age children. SUE: I tend to be pro Labour because they were the originators of the welfare state and I always thought they'd be more generous than Conservatives. WHITE: Sue already works part-time as a trainee lab technician in the NHS for an extra £20 a week on top of her benefit. She would have been delighted if a 'deal deal personal adviser' could have changed her life which was just what her friends who had also seen the ad thought had now happened. SUE: It really annoyed me when people were saying "Well you'll be fine now. Isn't it good news. Why aren't you shouting it from the roof tops". I just felt as if it wasn't living up to the dream that they'd been sold. WHTIE: As for Sue herself, she completely missed the key change in government policy that affected most lone parents. That meeting with the personal adviser about getting a job was going to be compulsory or benefit could be cut, starting the following month. It wasn't mentioned. There was just the small print 'from April 30th conditions apply'. PARTRIDGE: I think an advert that's paid for by the taxpayer should be much more factual and not trying to gloss it up as some great new boom in benefit. In fact it's about cracking down on lone parents. WHITE: You mean that's the real change in policy. PARTRIDGE: Yes. WHITE: And what happens to the real change in policy? How much is that advertised on the screen? PARTRIDGE: Not much at all. That is really like an insurance company advert which says buy one of our policies and there are certain conditions that apply to it. WHITE: After the children finish their homework Sue Curtis does hers. She wants exactly what the ad claimed to be offering - new skills and a good job. Lone parents were all told in an individual letter that the meeting with the personal adviser was compulsory or their benefits could be cut. The TV ads, which everyone else saw, left this information out. [Advert] The adviser took me through all the choices now available. SUE: Well I think it's basically dishonest. I think if they knew they were going to make it compulsory they should have said that. It depends what you're advertising for. If you're advertising for information, you need to give that information. You don't need to give an impression because then this is what happened to me. I came away with an impression and found that the truth didn't add up to that and that must have happened to a lot of single parents. They really enjoy bowling. I've never been so they're going to have to teach me. It's not an activity we can usually afford. WHITE: The new policy of making the meeting with personal advisers compulsory was extended to more lone parents last month. There was no TV advertising to back that up. SUE: I must admit it knocked my confidence in Tony Blair, it knocked my confidence in New Labour. I don't think they're as new as said they were. WHITE: So what did you do at the election? SUE: I didn't vote. I just.. I didn't think anybody had my best interests at heart anymore. WHITE: The Blair government chose not to give us an interview about its record spend before the election in 2001 but Mr Blair's critics say there are questions he must answer. Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 I don't think advertising campaigns happen accidentally. You have to put time ahead and all that, and so that there must have been some purpose. KEVIN BAVERSTOCK Media Analyst, a2a With campaigns of this weight it would be quite unusual for them not to be pre- planned at least 8 weeks in advance. KEVIN HURDWELL Media Analyst, Acumen Yes, the level of money and the level of intensity would suggest to me that these campaigns have not happened by accident, they have been planned. WHITE: There is a central system for monitoring government advertising. There's a minister in the Cabinet Office at the heart of the government machine and senior civil servants who are meant to enforce the rules. But no one inside the system did stop millions being spent, and on campaigns that appeared to be political. BRIAN NICHOLSON Chairman, COI Advisory Committee 1993-98 I thought, when I heard about this, that the people that I'd worked with over the years would have been really quite concerned about this because it did seem to be a very strange and odd matter. WHITE: We've been briefed by officials that ultimate responsibility rests with the Prime Minister. The former Head of the Home Civil Service now wants to know who sanctioned the pre- election surge in spending. NICHOLSON: I should like to know why it peaked on particular campaigns, whether the decision was to peak it at those times came in a series of different places or were in some way coordinated. [Advertisement] MOTHER: I'm glad I took a look at the choices I could make. Find out what your choices are. For more information....... WHITE: And the government knew the risks. Before these ads were shown in January 2001 'Campaign' the trade magazine for the ad industry carried a government warning. The Cabinet Office minister in charge of COI Communications wanted ministers to delay non-urgent ad campaigns until after the election, expected in May. WHITE: It was one of the least effective warnings in political history. 'Don't spend too much, will you' and ministers went on to spend £49 million in March, the all time record sum. In February this year Tony Blair brought government advertising formally under tighter political control. The target was the COI which buys the ads for ministers. Carol Fisher, the Chief Executive of COI Communications now reports to Alistair Campbell who's come from the Labour Party - or as the government puts it, she's taken on an additional role "reporting to the Prime Minister's Director of Strategy and Communications." What's wrong with Carol Fisher, who runs the COI, having an additional reporting role - as it puts it - to Alistair Campbell? Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 Because that will lead to the suspicion, which may be quite unjust, that political considerations are entering closely into what she's accounting for. BRIAN NICHOLSON Chairman, COI Advisory Committee 1993-98 Responsibilities have moved away from the people who previously had had it to spokesmen operating out of Downing Street, and I think that was a.. from the moment I heard of that appointment I really did worry that things that people had stood for and achieved over so many years that word 'integrity' was very difficult to actually apply in the new set up. WHITE: The anniversary of Tony Blair's re-election is in a fortnight. The year before the election his government broke all previous records for advertising. And the following year, the year after the election the official figures won't be published until the summer. But Panorama has learned that in 2002 there's been a significant drop compared to 2001. And the latest Nielsen Media Research estimates show that the amounts spent this March, just on buying the advertising space, is 28% down on that record spend in the March before the election, and this year they didn't load as much of the annual spend into that one month. Sir MICHAEL PARTRIDGE Permanent Secretary, DSS, 1988-95 Well I think there are dangers that the system is slipping towards a more politically oriented presentation of government advertising and that I think is alright provided it's not paid for by the taxpayer. Lord ARMSTRONG Head, Home Civil Service, 1981-87 I'm unhappy because there are very strict rules about election expenses and this could be a way in which the governing.. the party in government could be spending more on purposes related to the campaign than the law allows. If I were the opposition I think I would be asking a good many questions about it. [Advertisement] MAN1: It must be getting to him. TERRY: Right, can I have my money? ELAINE ABBOT Labour Councillor, Preston I don't see why I should go out to work, pay taxes, for any political party to try and gain votes. It's not what I go to work for, not what I pay my taxes for. [Advertisement] TERRY: I'd get 'em in but I'm a bit skint, you know.. WHITE: The benefit fraud ads were shown again after the election in the autumn but opinion formers weren't specially targeted. The nursing campaign with it's positive images of the NHS came back this spring, but ¾ of a million less were spent on it. And the lone parents campaign, the one the Department's former top civil servant says shouldn't have been allowed, was never shown again after the election. Tony Blair preached about the rules, now he stands accused of breaking them. That's Tony in Adland. September 1989 BLAIR: You can see quite clearly that the purpose of this is not to give us, the public, the facts, but it's to sell the government's political message and that's quite wrong. [Advertisement] People are getting away with millions of pounds of your money. We aim to put a stop to it. _________ www.bbc.co.uk/panorama CREDITS Reporter Vivian White Film Camera Ian Kennedy Alex Hansen Mike Spooner Sound Recordists Tony Pasfield Mike Turner VT Editor Boyd Nagle Dubbing Mixer Damian Reynolds Web Producer Bessie Wedgwood Production Co-ordinator Karen Sadler Research Amanda Vaughan-Barratt Graphic Design Kaye Huddy Julie Tritton Film Research Kate Redman Production Manager Martha Estcourt Unit Manager Laura Govett Film Editor Bob Hayward Assistant Producers Jonathan Brunert Khevyn Limbajee Eleanor Plowden Producer Mike Rudin Deputy Editors Karen O'Connor Andrew Bell Editor Mike Robinson 15 ________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________ Transcribed by 1-Stop Express Services, London W2 1JG Tel: 020 77953 E-mail 1-stop@msn.com