 |
 |
Well hello Mike Sorry to have taken so long to respond, but I haven’t been in a corner crying or depressed I have been away having a wonderful short break in the sunshine. I find some of the responses appalling, and for ever on I shall refer to myself as she! But obviously not ‘she who must be obeyed!! Any way long time no see I recall I think the last time we met, it was in a dark dingy room in London a gathering of librarians, at one of the multitude of meetings that deliberated the future of libraries. There had been many many of such meetings, many many reports but this one springs to mind as it was hilariously funny at one key point. This one, and there must have been about 20 or so of us there, and it was very short on space. The Chair was the well know political commentator and journalist Phil Collins, (not the musician, but who I have adored ever since,), and at one point towards the end as it happened, he threw his arms in the air, pushed his chair back and gasped, and said ‘I have lost the will to live, can you people ever make a decision.’ The meeting ended shortly after with of course o decisions being made. Well it seems not, as the debate, reports and everything else still goes on and on and on Likewise with Cilip it seems. I AM AN OLD GUARD Mike, as are you. WE have been around a long long time, and while away, (I came back last night), I have been dwelling on some of the reactions to that statement, and other things that have been said. However I have to say the nice comments have far outweighed the 3 I think not so nice and the defensive ones. In fact I had far more abuse when sending people to prison , as a magistrates. Fortunately not something I had to do too often! cannot understand the offence caused by that phrase. To me Old Guard is not an insult, and I truly believe we need some young blood on and involved in most things these days. It doesn’t take much to be a trustee, and a breath of real fresh air would help. But is it a further sign that our young fresh colleagues who will have new ideas, are either not members, or if they are, feel it is not for them? Of course you Mike have huge experience of public libraries (I recall visiting one or 2 of your new smaller libraries many many years ago, and splendid they were). But to me it is very very sad that the membership has dropped so far, that the profile of the association is so insignificant., that there seems to be less faith, less enthusiasm and less vigour than there was, and this at a time of our greatest need. Now see below I don’t often join in on these exchanges, however as I am perhaps one of these “old guard” CILIP Trustees being mistakingly being referred to or thought of as such I thought I should respond with a few facts!(what is the problem of being old Guard Mike., it brings with it experience and knowledge, wisdom and I would hope an open mind?) Firstly this is my first spell on CILIP Council, and I have now been a Trustee for 30 months, so I hardly think I have been around very long, indeed I still have a lot to learn about CILIP the staff, services and our partners. (30 months is almost 3 years, I would think you have learnt a lot by now, and being a trustee is not too difficult a role, and training and reading about the responsibilities keeps one up to speed) Secondly there is an accusation that too many CILIP Councillors are no longer employed (Not by me!!) (It is a shame there are not more young and employed people on the trustee board or vigorously engaged in the work, but age is of no consequence in my view!). In my case this is certainly true, however I was elected - yes elected on that basis, have said so in my manifesto. I felt privileged to be one of 4 Councillors elected from the 6 (or perhaps 7) that stood that year. I believe I am the only retired person to be elected to Council in recent years.(I really don’t think this is an issue worth worrying about Mike. But one thing that would have been in your favour as having been a librarian with a relatively high profile you would have been known by those who bothered to vote, again a disappointedly percentage. I must admit I didn’t realise you were a trustees)) Interestingly I would not have stood for Council if I were not retired, in the demanding job I was in, managing Libraries, Adult Learning and Community Services I most certainly could not have put the time in I felt such a position required. Having become Hon. Treasurer this year has brought this into even more perspective, as I have already spent 20 days away from home on CILIP business, ignoring time spent reading, mailing and getting frustrated by ill-informed comment.(Is this last matter time consuming, you can do it in the car or bed Mike, and there may well be a reason we are ill. informed?) I would also refute the charge of being out of touch with the profession, I now feel much better informed and have a much wider perspective on the profession as a whole than when I was relatively confined to the narrow world of public libraries.(again I am not aware of making this comment) (I am sure someone out there will dig up something I said along these lines however, i.e. unemployed (or better said as retired), (or out of touch). There are some wonderfully in touch unemployed, retired librarians I could name. So I really don’t know who this old guard at CILIP is, a ghost of the past perhaps?? It is however interesting to reflect that there is indeed an old guard creating a lot of comment who keep saying they want CILIP to change but don’t like any of the change when it is proposed.(The old guard, (people like me), been around the block lots of times, are interested in the future of Cilip, and feel we must comment when we think the direction of travel is not wise! The trustees are not the font of all knowledge, and sometimes the story as it is told, doesn’t quite live up to the actual proposals. In this case I do think The Board should consider other, maybe better, options, as follows:- You must be aware Mike that there is considerable concern about especially the proposal to electing only two members to Council every year and that one third of Council will be appointed. Anyone who thinks carefully about this must conclude that this proposal weakens accountability of the Council to the membership - and risks Council being dominated by a cabal. Yes, experience and some stability is necessary, but attracting new blood and especially ensuring accountability is paramount. Incidentally, most boards and trusts require their members to stand for re-election every three years. Why don't you amend the proposal to elect say, three or four members of council every year, giving a total of nine or twelve elected members and cut the number of people that can be co-opted to just two. Ever since the Cadbury and other reports, transparency and accountability is rightly seen as being at the heart of good governance. You should amend the proposals to achieve just that. Cilip could later discuss how to improve communication and especially, the effectiveness of CILIP's advocacy. As I am taking the time and effort to write, I will also comment on the factual position regarding the Governance review and perhaps this will also enable those who are making ill informed comment to acknowledge the real position. • The proposals were thoroughly researched by a Working Group lead by the then President, Phil Bradley, and including external experts such as the Head of Governance at The British Library • The research looked widely at best modern governance practice amongst membership bodies especially those who are also charities like CILIP. • They have been subject to long and detailed debate at Council for over a year, starting in July 2013. Even before that Council received regular updates on progress from the working group over a period of a year, and the research had started before I joined Council. • Following the initial decision to go forward at Council the proposals have been subject to extensive consultation with members, not only in written form via UPDATE etc., but also through visits to member interest groups etc. More than 25 of these visits took place and in ALL but 2 cases the member groups were very supportive of the overall direction.The detailed feedback from all of the consultations has been published and was used by Council to fine-tune the proposals, which will be going forward to the AGM. Council on the 8th July agreed these proposals with 11 votes for an 1 against. • The decision to propose changes to the governance structure is driven by the need to ensure CILIP is governed and managed by Trustees who have the experience and skill to take responsibility for a £4.7m business, and who can deal effectively with crisis as and when they occur rather than set unbalanced deficit budgets and put off essential action. as as unfortunately happened in the past. In my real experience, having established 2 Charities (which are still operating), been on the Boards of 3 others and been an FE College Governor, leaving it entirely to chance that candidates come forward with the essential skills and experience needed to run a charity is foolhardy! I totally agree with this last point, but elections to a board of trustees by election should not be by chance. When recruiting trustees applicants prior to any vote should receive a prospectus about the role and the skills required ,indicating any specific skills that are required, e.g. type of library etc., so that there is a balance, age is not a factor, but time commitment, previous experience or knowledge etc. would be expected., working or having worked in the profession would be required. In addition a board of trustees would also have as non-voting advisory members with some specific expertise, such as employment law (if not on the staff), pensions and financials etc. Equal opportunity law etc. would also be of use, depending on type and size of board.. I think Cilip is in crisis now! The membership is so low, the participation is limited, the advocacy is poor, and the disillusionment is high. Never refuse to see others point of view and to at least be open enough to discuss it. Better to have those outside the tent doing the proverbial being inside the tent surely. And finally the comments re Tom were totally uncalled for and I would have expected one of the Board or the CEO to have said so! Would you expect people to flock to your organisation if people are allowed to be so utterly rude and not be admonished and an apology given by the Chair of the Board of the CEO? Frances Hendrix ‘Old Guard’ and ‘she’!! Mike Hosking CILIP Hon Treasurer.