Bruce's point is well made, it seems to me. It's a pity if any list members think it, and the open access debate, inconsequential: surely we cannot take such a narrow view of what it means to be a member of the information profession? There's more to professional life and thought than moaning about pay scales and the perceived failure of others, never oneself, to do anything to improve them  (in passing though, let's remind ourselves of the abolition of the bar on the old local government scales, achieved by joint work by then-LA and then-NALGO)

I've held off intervening in the debate(s) of recent weeks, but for what it's worth, good as it is that this list should be used for vigorous debate, that debate is sterile and pointless unless taken out into CILIP's structures: branches, groups, the AGM. All are democratic, in fact far more democratic than scribbling on a ballot paper once every five years. CILIP is not the old LA; and even that body changed remarkably over the years. I can remember being told that I couldn't bring up issues of library cuts and closures at the LA AGM because political discussions would jeopardise our Royal Charter and displease Buckingham Palace. Can anyone imagine that happening today?

Of course we could do a hundred things better; so could the trade unions that represent library and information workers. But people need to get stuck in and use those organisations to make them reflect what we want.

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Morris
Sent: 11 November 2004 09:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Government rejects calls for push on open-access journals

 

 

 

 

 

....Come on guys, if you can generate half as much enthusiasm for freeing up research information as has been demenstrated slagging off CILIP, we might just make a difference. 

 

Well, that certainly makes me keen to help.

 

Mike Morris, Librarian, ISCA

51 Banbury Rd., Oxford OX2 6PE 01865 274671