Privatisation – Pro

• Private companies are seen by many as being intrinsically more efficient than the public sector.  This view is something that, of course, companies are keen to support. LSSI is reported as offering to run libraries at 35% less cost while still making a profit.  It is claimed that such an improvement will come by outsourcing back-room tasks such as acquisitions to other private companies and by offering economies of scale.

• There’s also a cost to the privatisation process itself.  Croydon is putting aside £250,000 for the cost of  transferring its libraries to the private sector.

• LSSI are also positive about putting in services which will generate income such as cafes, bookstores and IT, although of course many council-run library services already charge for these.

“We are very much aware of the depth of feeling for libraries and share that. We love libraries and that is why we are in this business. Libraries are what we do. Our business depends on getting our service right in every branch, every day.” Stuart Fitzgerald, Vice President LSSI (UK)

• Although it has denigrated some of the working practises (“slacks and trainers”) of librarians and reduces employment costs (pensions, salary, etc)  by around 15% compared to US state libraries, LSSI does continue to employ 100 qualified librarians in USA.  Riverside County (USA) expanded opening hours and bookfund/usage while cutting costs. LSSI also report that library usage increases when they take over a contract as they give the public what they want. LSSI CEO Frank Pezzanite was quoted September 2010 in the New York Times, talked about “a lot of libraries” as saying “their policies are all about job security… You can go to a library for 35 years and never have to do anything and then have your retirement…You come to us, you’re going to have to work.”.  It is worth noting, at his point, that Mr Pezzanite went on a 112 round-the-world cruise at the start of 2012.

• Private library companies will need to ensure that they continue to provide an effective service or they will lose the contract at the end of their fixed term, normally  three or five years.  Also, being there are at least two companies competing in the UK, there is competition even if the authorising council remains wedded to the concept of private enterprise running the service.  LSSI say their standards need to be high as USA councils give them annual contracts, meaning if they fail to succeed, they lose business.

• Private companies providing public services is common in the UK and libraries should be no different.  It is argued that, wherever competition from private companies has been introduced,  this has driven up the quality of the service overall.

• Expectations are very high of the improvement to be gained by privatisation.  In the case of Wokingham, the council expects the move to make a saving of £170,000 per year as well as ensuring no libraries close, that services and usage will be boosted and, presumably, there will be a worthwhile profit for the company involved.

• In hard times, it has been argued that privatisation is better than closing libraries and councils no longer protect jobs either.  This is a similar argument to that advocating volunteer-run libraries.