I have had more confidential postings which may interest you all., and I do hope this interests the new Trustees, who (and I know officially you don't start your duties until 08, but that 'Old Council' is on 12/12., that all of you take heed of what your voters and non voters are saying below and in previous emails).(and new Trustees please read the other postings!) It is in all our interest that we have a relevant and active team at the top of Cilip, whether the CEO, The President and the Trustees, who are working to ensuring the future is bright and that we increase membership and have a satisfied membership. Last week I attended the National magistrates Association AGM and Council Meeting. The Council meeting was open to any member who wished to stay. The AGM and event was one of the best I have ever attended, in every respect. Exceedingly well organised, ran to time BUT most of all the role of the Trustees. ALL Working groups did presentations by 2 members. This described, with Power Point, the remit of the group, the main work being done and the challenge for the next year. There were 2 debates led by 2 magistrates, and then open questions and discussion., the debates were on matters of concern to the magistrates courts, were well put and the level of discussion and debate was excellent. There were several guest speakers, The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice, and there was a final debate on a project on going in the magistrates court with Legal Advisors Justices Clerk, The police and judiciary on the panel. Questions form the floor from all magistrates were brilliantly organised with Mics on numbered stands in the aisles where people queued to put their question This was a great way of meeting the trustees and hearing about their work and having the chance to ask question in a very fair way. I commend it to Cilip and the new Trustees! Now for the additional postings:- 1. Dear Frances - thank you for your email re the low turn out. I have to confess I did not vote - more from being scatterbrained than actual dissatisfaction though I put it off ...and put it off...because I realised I knew none of the names (Shame you say - but I am actively involved in YLG London and National and I mentor) - and almost all seemed to be attached to academic institutions. I may be totally wrong in this - I apologise if so BUT as a Children's Librarian (lowest of the low in LG) working in Public Libraries I find it increasingly difficult to see where CILIP fits since as someone else has pointed out for a Local Authority , why bother with professional librarians? I do support CILIP, and I try to interest my colleagues but I am more engaged with my Group than the umbrella body which does often seem divorced from the reality of the work place. 2.Fully admit there's folk on the new Council I don't know from Adam either yet. There's certainly biogs of everyone and photo's scheduled for January on website. Hopefully a lot more besides! You know CILIP, there's folk who want all internal discussions 'indoors' and controlled (arguing public profile and membership confidence) and get nervous about external ones. But there's also folk who like a good discussion whether they agree or not. 3.I would have voted if CILIP hadn't disenfranchised me by despite changing my address with them and receiving gazettes and updates for the last 5 months they couldn't manage to send the ballot papers to the right address (they were forwarded on by the new residents and arrived on Monday missing the deadline)... unsurprisingly in todays post I got the membership renewal form... so when they want my money they know where I am! 4.I thought I was the only person that happened to! But no, I have someone to share my pain. Funny, I also moved 5 months ago and have been receiving Gazettes and Updates and requests for cash with no problem... curiouser and curiouser. I haven't missed voting for anything in 10 years of membership, but I have now. So I can be counted in that number of people that "didn't bother" to vote that has so saddened and worried people. The voting papers may have been in easy packs full of excellent details but if they're not posted to the voter's address it's a tad difficult for said voter to well, y'know, vote. 5.In response to others' comments about lack of commitment towards CILIP, I would like to add another brief observation - no doubt amongst the many already received! A close colleague of mine from a neighbouring authority, having observed for herself the de-professionalisation of professional posts, commented that she felt her CILIP qualification "was a worthless piece of paper". Personally, I think this is a terrible indictment for a professional body. How often do you hear of Chartered Accountants, teachers or similar registered professionals down-grading and devaluing their professions? Since qualifying more than 30 years ago , I have always regarded myself as every bit as professional as a doctor, solicitor or any other named profession, despite the low-pay, low-value image of our profession. It annoys me intensely to see our profession further down-graded and devalued. If the trustees are to achieve a turn-around in popular support, I suspect that the issue of recognition, value and high-profile representation of its professional people needs swift addressing. I suspect the working of CILIP at the trustee level is regarded as largely irrelevant to many, (myself included, I might add) hence the patent disinterest. 6.Just a comment from someone who took the trouble to vote in this election. I thought when wading through all the names and election addresses that twelve was a little too many to be electing. Would it not have been far better to have SIX? Reading the election addresses and CVs became a bit repetive and bland after the third or fourth one - no offence meant for individuals involved. I also recognised only two of the fourteen names on the candidate list. This from someone who tries to attend at least 2 CILIP events every year. Might this explain the low turn-out? This generally appears to be the norm anyway, especially when postal voting is concerned. Maybe someone needs to look again at the way things by time of next election of Trustees 7. I would say that the public library service needs well trained and- if you like- professional staff, but the problem is that the training they get and the pride in the profession -- is based on the wrong training and the wrong skills,, That's the problem and one wishes that CILIP would acknowledge and address it, simply because they are the best placed people to do so. We don't need cataloguing skills in every council - but we do need information skills, people skills and basic management skills, to a level which just simply isn't there. 8. The same thing happened to me: I gave CILIP my change of address in June and have received all post from them as usual except my ballot papers, which they sent to my old address. I would have voted but only got hold of the papers the day after the deadline! Now then Cilip and Trustees, I can hear the groans, oh her gain, and on the lists, Oh Goodness why doesn't she go away! BUT I do urge you to take note. There are admin type things that would be easy to correct, but there are more fundamental things that Cilip has to address if we are to make the major change that is required. It is clear many people feel not enough is being done to support, build up and place the profession in the world today., there are those who feel their qualification and profession is no longer of value (these seem to come mainly from public libraries), and these comments come from those who are involved and care about their profession. Leadership and action is needed and needed soon. Talk to us, be open about things, show us you are there because you believe and can do and will do, not just because you want to be a trustee. Now is the time, new broom, new powers etc. Lets hear it form you Trustees, get on with it. Lets turn this all around, PLEASE!! -----Original Message----- From: Library and Information Professionals [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Diane Dewar Sent: 06 December 2007 10:34 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: FW: CILIP announces new Board of Trustees > > CILIP: the Chartered Institute of Library and Information > Professionals > 7 Ridgmount St, London WC1E 7AE. > > Tel: 020 7255 0500 > Textphone: 020 7255 0505 > Fax: 020 7255 0501 > Mailto:[log in to unmask] > > News from CILIP > 6 December 2007 > > CILIP announces new Board of Trustees > > CILIP Members have elected the twelve Trustees to serve on its reformed Council, which takes effect from 1 January 2008. > > They are: Chris Armstrong, Judy Broady-Preston, Paul Clarke, Veronica Fraser, Isabel Hood, Ayub Khan, Dion Lindsay, Nigel Macartney, Liz Maclachlan, Caroline Moss-Gibbons, Diana Nutting, and Bruce Royan. > > Bob McKee, Chief Executive of CILIP, said "CIILP has been working hard on Governance issues over the last two years. The twelve Trustees were elected from a strong list of candidates. They will drive CILIP forward over the coming years". > > > Contact: Daniel Sabel, Governance Manager Tel:020 7255 0656 > > > Notes for Editors > > CILIP: the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals is the leading professional body for librarians, information specialists and knowledge managers. It forms a community of around 36,000 people engaged in library and information work, of whom around 21,000 are CILIP members and around 15,000 are regular customers of CILIP Enterprises. > > > > > > > > > >