Circulated with permission
The Real Big Society
The remarkable public response to the
proposed closure of more than 400 libraries is perhaps a manifestation of the
Big Society in action. Hundreds of thousand people are
protesting and demanding that councils find another way to make the necessary
savings.
In particular, people are concerned about the impact that the
indiscriminate closure of community
libraries will have on the young, the elderly and the vulnerable. These
concerns have been widely supported by the national and local media who are
dismayed at the failure of leadership by Government and the MLA and the
unwillingness of local government to put its own house in order. When a Chief
Librarian and Portfolio Holder stand in front of people in a community hall and
declare that "there are no alternatives to closures", they are increasingly
being told "we don't believe you !"
In Somerset, and in some other authorities,
campaigners have demanded to see the Library Budget Book and are asking hard
questions about how the service is structured, managed and operated to the
benefit of their residents, especially those in small towns and communities.
Why do we need 151 separately managed library authorities, each with
their own chief librarian and support structure ? Why does London have 32
library authorities but just one police authority ? Why do we have today,
despite the developments in technology, more bibliographic departments than
twenty years ago ? Why do "corporate" costs vary so significantly between
authorities and why have these been escalating in recent years
?
Many of these issues have been on the agenda for
several years. For example, the London Libraries Change Programme has been
under way for some four years. The bookshelves of the DCMS and the MLA must be
heaving with reports and consultancy studies, but we have seen little action and
now we face a crisis. We are now told that the Future Libraries Programme
will address some of these issues, but it will only report after many councils
have finalised their proposals.
In many authorities there are real alternatives
to closures, as has been shown by the twenty or more councils that have
confirmed that they will not be closing any libraries. Ironically, they include
the Wirral Council which faced a Public Inquiry last year after deciding to
close 11 libraries. In Somerset, campaigners have discovered that about
half of the library fund is spent on corporate and support services. While
officers claim that they have an "efficient" and "accredited" support service,
it is supporting, amongst other functions, a book fund of just £200k and a total
materials budget of £300k. In another council, officers decided to retain
their warehouse, rather than save some community libraries.
What is astonishing is that the Minister, the MLA
board and the Society of Chief Librarians have been remarkably mute, though the
MLA chief executive did say that "there is no magic wand" to dealing with these
issues. Alas, it is a young mother in Somerset, facing a 20 mile bus trip just
to take her children to the library, who must pay the cost of our failure to
better structure and manage an essential public service.
The key question is whether there are practical
alternatives to many of the closures recommended by officers and endorsed by
their portfolio holders. Is it possible, despite the cuts, to provide an
economically and socially sustainable public library service which meets the
needs of the millions of people in our diverse communities ? The answer
must be yes, but we will have to do things differently, including restructuring
how the service is delivered.
The Minister, the MLA board and the
executive of the SCL should be sending a very powerful message to council
leaders and their chief librarians that there are much better ways to serve the
needs of their residents than to simply close libraries. We need to hear them
clearly and loudly sending that message so that we can hold our elected members
to account.
Desmond
Clarke
From: "Roy Clare"
Hello, Desmond, thank you for noting my
comment about "no magic wand".
Also on the record is my oft-repeated
statement that the public locally
need to fight for the libraries they
deserve; the young mother in Somerset
is a fine example.
Local
authorities are squeezed between the proverbial hard choices; the
nation is
bust, the library service in some places is in need of
modernisation
(including some re-distribution of service points and some
closures); and
yet everyone agrees on the vital importance of reading and
free access to
media and information....new media and digital services are
emerging in a
promising way, but the infrastructure is yet to join up and
the public are
not all ready for full-blown on-line services. Tough options
ensue; of
course it's a blood-stained episode, and has a long way still to
run; many
Councils have no choice other than to maintain pressure on costs.
The MLA
does not have a mandate to lobby publicly, but we are far from
"mute" behind
the scenes. The present government launched the Future
Libraries Programme
within months of taking office; the last government took
two years to
deliver a rather vague and toothless Review. It's not for me to
make
political points, but in purely practical terms I know which approach I
favour. Even if little and unavoidably late, the FLP is provoking the right
kind of aggregation and new-think. The second phase will broaden its reach
during 2011.
My message is consistent: public libraries are for all,
not the few; some
closures are inevitable and local people need to organise
themselves and be
clear what they really want. Decisions remain with
Councils, who must
consult properly and set clear strategies or risk
challenge under the Act;
charging for library services is not on, but arm's
length arrangements may
be legitimate options. Digital dimensions need to be
brought along as
rapidly as possible (Martha Lane Fox's work is relevant and
timely).
The MLA is still on the ball, hard at work, even while pulling
down the
blinds and preparing to sell the furniture. I remain confident that
the
improvement services, expertise and the professional advice we represent
will continue to be available in a new form in due course. More
anon.
Circulate to your list if you wish.
Kind
regards,