Crisis PR analysis of Purcell's departure from Glasgow City Council

As a result, the initial announcement that Purcell had resigned ‘due to stress’ and the private team hired by Purcell caused more intrigue and set the press hounds off the leash to get to the bottom of ‘what really happened’.

Despite cries of ‘I’ll be back’ Purcell’s political career seemed to come to an end when it was then reported by the newspapers that he was in a rehabilitation centre.

Rumours are still circulating as to the reason for Purcell's decision to step down - although a claim of drug use has been denied by the rehabilitation centre following reports of a 'chemical dependency'.

Irvine has since lodged a complaint with the Sunday Herald, which ran a piece criticising his handling of the situation.

“When somebody’s caught, literally with their pants down or with their hand in the till, then you have a story which is legitimate, but I’ve rarely seen an operation in which the method of news management it has generated as much speculation as the actual departure,” says Martin Paterson, crisis PR consultant and former deputy director General of the Food and Drink Federation (UK) who believes that the problem was not in the main down to Media House’s involvement, but that three communications teams.

The 'teams' referred to by Paterson were Media House, The Labour Party, of which Purcell was a councillor and Glasgow City Council, which he says were acting against each other to get their own messages heard.

“From the beginning, there was confusion,” explains Paterson.

“The public was never quite sure what the actual position was and the whole operation was characterised in terms of crisis management by one failing, which was a lack of unity among the various teams. That was the problem running the whole way through the story, from start to finish. There were three teams trying to manage that story to greater or lesser degrees…one of the first rules of crisis management is to get everybody together and get everybody to agree ‘the line’. Failure to do that was a recipe for disaster."

Billy Partridge, associate director of Grayling Scotland, can see why it was so difficult for the communications team to work together, with The Labour Party and Glasgow City Council aiming to save face, while Media House was looking to protect the personal interests of their client.

“Representing an individual is fundamentally different to representing an organisation,” begins Partridge. “There are more personal sensitivities and emotional issues to consider. In assessing the management of this issue it is essential to understand that it was led by a team representing an individual.”

Partridge adds that the protection of Purcell’s privacy was the key aim through out the crisis:“There are potentially legal sensitivities to this case which may have affected the ability and willingness to fully engage with the media. These are significant unknowns. In all communications strategies the first and most important step is to identify how a modern, fragmented media environment can support or threaten the messages you want to deliver. You can no longer pigeonhole media channels. It is critical that the political implications are weighed against the needs and expectations of the mainstream consumer media.”

Despite this, Paterson believes that the lack of unity meant that the situation became more of “a melodrama”.

“There was far too much drama. If you have a managed departure from a high profile public position then you need to have a minimum of drama. You need to make it as boring and as unexciting and have as little incident as possible.”

While the wolves have been put at bay for the time being, it is unlikely that the end has been heard of Mr Purcell’s tale if and when he ever does return to Scotland once recuperated.