Dear ELG members

At the last CILIP Council meeting there was vigorous debate about the 
proposal to create a set of new special interest groups which would draw 
together clusters of existing SIGs into larger, mainly sector-focused, 
groups.  The alternative proposal was that the present status quo should be 
retained.

1.  The key feeling emerging from Council was that there had been 
insufficient opportunity to consult CILIP members on the 
proposals.  Consultation on the value, nature and responsibilities of SIGs 
had been put to members at the outset but no further feedback on the 
picture emerging or the proposals to be offered had subsequently been 
supplied to members.  The briefing meeting in the autumn, to which SIG 
Chairs and Secretaries had been invited, had informed  representatives of 
the working party activity to date but had not put forward any specific 
proposals which could be circulated to members for comment, prior to the 
proposal document tabled for decision at the December Council meeting.

2.  SIG representatives attending Council and Councillors from SIGs were 
divided on whether a new larger-group structure or the status quo would be 
preferable.  It was recognised that financially CILIP is struggling to 
sustain the present capitation level - but this has to be seen in the 
context of a much bigger problem of balancing the books overall, and SIGs 
are not the only area which needs to be reconsidered with a view to 
reducing costs.  On this basis, a status quo situation is untenable.
Some felt that a new clustering would provide opportunities to take a new 
approach to issues, particularly where these concern cross-sectoral 
matters.  ELG in particular benefits from being able to look at serving 
education across a range of users and sector areas and has more in common 
here with eg. Information Literacy, and some clustering around this might 
be best for us. However, if a sectoral approach were to be adopted it is 
possible that ELG would be better served by linking up with SLG than in 
being part of a higher education focus.  There was some unhappiness 
generally with the groupings as presented in the Working Party's preferred 
proposal.
Equally, many groups noted that they exist because there is a membership 
demand for their specific focus and services, which argues in favour of 
maintaining a status quo - or of opting for a 'market forces' approach 
where individual SIGs would swim or sink on the strength of their 
membership take-up, sale of attendance at events and courses etc (and which 
would seem to presume reduced or no capitation directly from CILIP Centre 
into groups).  It was not clear if such a 'market forces' model would also 
assume that CILIP membership fees would no longer include the 'free' SIGs 
but would assume an add-on fee for each SIG chosen.

In general, there was dissatisfaction that no alternative options had been 
invited to be put forward.

3.  The nature of overlaps and combinations of interest led to a discussion 
also on the relationship between CILIP Panels and SIGs.  It was evident 
that some Councillors and members of the Review Working Party saw the role 
of Panels as largely redundant in a new 'clustered' approach to special 
interest delivery.  However, the Youth and Schools Panel (of which ELG is a 
member along with YLG and SLG) performs a much wider role than simply 
enabling CILIP SIGs to look together at issues of mutual interest.  YASP 
draws in representation from a wide range of non-CILIP bodies and agencies, 
enabling debate on major issues of common interest and sharing of views 
which can inform policy decisions within CILIP and elsewhere.  Your ELG, 
SLG and YLG representatives were all strongly of the opinion that the SIG 
review should not be a short-cut to disbanding the YASPanel or that lumping 
together these groups with shared interests be a sufficient alternative to 
wider CILIP engagement with DfES, MLA, Ofsted, National Association of Head 
Teachers, School Library Association etc.

4. There was some discussion of why the review did not also consider a 
review of Branch roles and membership demand in relation to special 
interest preferences.  Members at present are automatically subscribed to a 
branch and it was not clear how far individual members would prefer SIG 
membership over branch membership if offered a straight choice.  The role 
of branches has been changing as the new Framework of Qualifications is 
being rolled out.

In general, councillors and SIG representatives were in favour of the 
proposals relating to the formation, responsibilities and accountability of 
SIGs, with many feeling that their SIG was already delivering to these.


Overall, there was considerable dissatisfaction and Council voted not to 
make a decision based on the proposals as set out to Council.  Instead it 
was agreed that the overall feedback and the proposed options should be 
reported to members via Update or Gazette, and members be invited to input 
to consultation on the way forward.

I therefore urge all ELG members to look out for this next round of 
consultation and to feed back your views and desires into it.  Be aware 
that the proposals may be presented to you as straight either/or 
options.  If you have views which are different from the ways the proposals 
are offered - for instance on appropriate clustering of existing special 
interests, or on the feasibility of sustainability of current SIGs, please 
make sure you make your comments known.  Whatever your views, any revised 
structure is not likely to come into force before 2007.  This is your 
chance to indicate to your professional body what you want of it.

Please note, your views as indicated in the original consultation have not 
been collated centrally in a form which makes it possible for individual 
SIGs to know what their members felt.  This may be the case again following 
the next consultation.  If you would like ELG to know what you feel, please 
do send me a copy of your views, to

	[log in to unmask]

I hope this helps to update you all on where the review is at.  I attach 
some of the proposal documentation as presented to Council on 8 December 2005.

Lucy

(Chair and ELG Councillor) 


L Gildersleeves
Lecturer
School of Library, Archive & Information Studies
University College London
Gower Street
LONDON WC1E 6BT

office tel:  0207 679 7204
direct line: 0207 679 2630
e-mail:	     [log in to unmask]