Except that there has been no 'debate' as to what the real issue is. Until
there is some proper research into what services are actually required by
the public - and agreement that they will be provided - then random
'reports' such this one will generate more heat than light. Of course, had
the press release actually been headed 'Bookseller says libraries should buy
more books', then it might have got the press attention it actually merited.
John Briggs
Andrew Sandeman wrote:
>
> you are right about Hampshire but this sort of response (in general, I
> really don't want to personalise this) - makes me despair, because it
> discourages debate on the real issue.
>
> Even at 55% (LISU), staffing costs are damagingly high and the effects
> (yes,
> there are other factors as well) include
> LISU 2003 p.4 "Only 9.6% of total libraries expenditure was on books in
> 2001-02."
>
> We SHOULD be concerned that
> a) most of our (Paying) customers still want a good range of books etc.as
> their top priority
> b) we are NOT spending 90% of our budget on what they want.
>
> There are some good things happening out there, but they need to deepen
> and
> spread very
>
> rapidly if libraries are to recover their relevance to most of the general
> public.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Briggs" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: 28 April 2004 16:52
> Subject: Re: Press Release from the Laser Foundation - 'Who's in Charge?'
>
>> The figures quoted by the report are that Hampshire spends approximately
>> half of its 'funds' on "staff", which is in line with the UK as a whole
> (see
>> Appendix 2).
>>
>> Andrew Sandeman wrote:
>>> A pity that a report which makes some important points - controversial
>>> maybe, but the basic thrust is well supported by evidence - should be
> met
>>> with this sort of 'debate'.
>>>
>>> Hopefully, perhaps elsewhere, we can have a more considered discussion
>>> about
>>> how to achieve the STEP CHANGE in effectiveness which is so clearly
>>> needed.
>>>
>>> For example, it looks as if many authorities spend (roughly) two thirds
> of
>>> their budget on staffing,
>>> whereas I understand that the BBC spend approx.20%.
>>>
>>
|