Editorial

The decision by Lincolnshire Council to see if it can seek compensation from library campaigners for the failed legal action against them is one of the two key news items to me today.  The large amounts of money involved mean that, if the council does so decide, it would seriously dent the finances of those who sought legal action.  The results of this will inevitably mean that only clear-cut cases of council wrongdoing will only ever make it to court.  Few would be willing to risk their assets for an iffy legal argument to save their local library. That will make councils more gung ho in reducing library services and also, perhaps, more lax in adhering to their legal responsibilities.  Now the judicial review is out of the way, one can expect the DCMS to deliver its own verdict on if the council has met it’s statutory duty.  It will doubtless decide that it has done so,  What the thing is to look out for is if Mr Vaizey considers the reduced (core) council-run library service sufficient on its own to meet the definition of “comprehensive and efficient”. He has done so in every case so far so the legal status of volunteer libraries has never been brought into question.

The other thing that I noticed was the decision by Dudley to pass its libraries to an employee-led mutual, similar in style to Suffolk and York. Those two examples are seen as shining lights in recent library innovation, although the 30% “saving” that the council claims it will achieve because of it in Dudley looks, shall we say, slightly over-optimistic.

Changes

• Dudley – Employee-led mutual to run libraries/archives/adult learning from April 2016. Savings expected to allow for 11% budget cut 2016/17 to 30% 2017/18.
• Kirklees – Kirkburton Library given to parish council. and then loaned back to council at nil rent for five years with one paid staff and the rest being volunteers.
• Newham – Opening hours extended until 8pm all days except Sunday in 5 libraries. 5% increase in usage 2014/15.
• Northern Ireland – 144 voluntary redundancies since 2009, 19 more expected 2015/16. Bookfund reduced from £3.4 million four years ago to £2.7 million this year.

More >

Editorial
Public Libraries News has been going for five years now and so some of the councils I remember from the start of that time as going through cuts are going through it all again, with a pretty strong feel of deja vu for everyone involved. The Isle of Wight is one of those, with three more libraries and the mobile likely to be severely affected soon. 5 out of the then 11 libraries were passed to volunteers, amidst much protest in 2011. Legal action and an appeal to the DCMS (such appeals then not quite as hollow a joke as it is now) achieved little. From £1.8m a year in 2010, the budget was cut to £1.4m in 2011. There’s been further cuts since then but the further £280k proposed is likely to mean the libraries budget has been almost halved in six years. I hear that people who move the Isle from England are already surprised by how sparse libraries are. With these changes as well, it’ll be even less alright on the Wight.

Changes

• Anglesey – Consultation: opening hours, closures, co-locations and other options included.
• Isle of Wight – £140 cut 2015/16 leading to ongoing £280k cut from 2016/17. Cowes, Freshwater and Ventnor libraries to be run with town council support and/or have hours cut.

Ideas

• Walking and reading groups – Discuss a book while walking outdoors (health and wellbeing and reader development in one),

More >

Editorial

Lambeth council’s decision to cut libraries dominates the news today, with even a Labour MP coming out against the decision of her own party’s councillors. The decision to keep some libraries open by installing “gyms” – GLL-run mini leisure centres – within them has not gone down well but the main ire is against the council for cutting libraries at all.

More >

Editorial

It’s always interesting to hear viewpoints from loads of different people and, as sole proprietor of Public Libraries News, I read messages from pretty much the full way across the spectrum.  I have for some while been mentally categorising different people, groups and organisations about where they are on an imaginary “library line” and I’m going to share this with you now, along with the important caveat that not everyone is always the same on every topic, people can move position or may be not quite one label or another and I’m not going to place “good” or “bad” labels on anyone:

• Campaigners. Those often wanting no cuts to libraries at all. Often either from the left wing or from those who care deeply for public libraries or who work in libraries or all three.  Very likely, but not always, to question the whole belief in austerity or wanting a special exemption to be made for libraries on the grounds of the great things they do for the country. Highly likely to be completely against volunteers (calling them different names but not “community libraries”) replacing paid staff, outsourcing or any commercialization of libraries, believing that giving ground will irrevocably damage the merit of public libraries and lead ultimately to their adulteration. Likely to be concerned about the co-location of libraries with other services but not always automatically against them. Likely to call reductions in budgets “cuts” and unwilling to accept that the government actually has any strong feelings of support for libraries at all and, indeed, may be maliciously cutting them for ideological reasons. Could well be trade unions, Corbynites [Addition to original post: I mean this as those who voted for Jeremy Corbyn so really I mean Labour – Ed.]  or (pretty obviously) campaign groups but, really, could be anyone who really likes libraries.
• Pragmatists.  Often with beliefs around the centre of the spectrum, although can be left or right wing on many issues. Those who accept, even if they don’t like it, that austerity is happening, and likely to continue to happen until at least 2020 and that they need to work within that framework in order to do the best they can for libraries. They may also note that the government has been democratically elected, however imperfect that democracy may be. While privately (and even occasionally publicly) against austerity, volunteers or any of a thousand cuts to the service, this group will do what is necessary to meet budget cuts (they are likely, but not always, to call these “savings”), seeing it as something that needs doing.  Frankly, many would lose their jobs if they didn’t. Very likely to accept co-location of services as a more or less desirable option. So this is the group that may, with gritted teeth, install volunteer-run libraries (likely to call them “community libraries”) or indeed be library volunteers.  They will also look at the government agenda and see how libraries fit into it, arguing the case for them in terms the politicians understand and use themselves. Likely to be more senior librarians, professional bodies or New Labour but, again, could be anyone from any field.
• Believers.  Normally, although not absolutely always, on the right wing of the political spectrum.  Firmly believe in the need for austerity and the efficiency of private enterprise over public authorities, may even argue that “community-managed libraries” can be not just cheaper but often better than those run by paid staff.  Will see no problem in private enterprise taking over public services and may even see this a preferred option, with a willingness to see all sorts of services taking over large parts of public libraries if they will make money.  This group will see co-locating any other services with libraries as a no-brainer win. May be strong believers in libraries (and genuinely want to reform them for their own good) or may not see any “special” place for libraries at all and will expect them to fight with other public services for their slice of an ever decreasingly sized pie.  Very likely to call reductions in budget “savings” or “efficiency savings”. Likely to be technophiles, Conservatives (many Liberal Democrats and some New Labour too) or non library users but, as with all other groups, could be anyone.

You should be able to recognise everyone, or any organisation, involved amongst one of these three headings.  So, have fun putting people in these groups … but then bear in mind that life is never quite as easy as that and, people always have the capacity to surprise.  In case you’re wondering what CILIP is, I think it is in  the difficult position of being somewhere between campaigner and pragmatist. The Society of Chief Librarians is most definitely pragmatist (although it has elements of all groups amongst its members) and Judy Terry quoted below is stongly on the “Believer” side.  It’s pretty obvious who the campaigners are, although even within that group you will find disagreements.  What has happened with CILIP yesterday and today is the organisation trying to be pragmatist but coming up against the fact that many members (or ex-members) of CILIP are, naturally, campaigners. That’s quite a disconnect but one probably inevitable considering the situation … how CILIP react and learn from this and the developing situation (expect George Osborne to announce extra deep cuts to council budgets soon) will say much about it.

Changes

• Buckinghamshire – Volunteer library to be run from Waddesdon Secondary School.
• Gateshead – Chopwell Library to be moved into primary school to cut costs by £19k per year. Start-up cost is £129k.
• Leicestershire – Barwell Library will close as volunteer plan falls through.

Ideas

• Colouring for adults

More >

Editorial

Bad news in Barnet as major cuts are announced, although library opening hours will actually be increased due to using Open+ self-service remote-control technology.  Lambeth also announced major cuts but, again with far fewer closures than expected, due to GLL taking over some libraries as “healthy living centres”.  This adds another borough arrow to GLL’s quiver as it already runs libraries in Greenwich and Wandsworth.  Both Barnet and Lambeth represent challenges to the traditional view of libraries as, in both, considerable numbers of library staff will lose their jobs but the councils can claim, with a clear enough conscience to appear to the media with, that they have maintained a library service.  Meanwhile I am receiving via email and Twitter heart-rending stories of library staff losing their jobs and the impact it will have, in reality, on the service that councils provide.

I am also including today a feature about a storyteller and what he does for libraries and literacy.  This is the sort of project that Arts Council England, amongst others, support (although I don’t know if they have done so in this case) and shows the power of outreach and not being limited  to the buildings themselves.

Changes

• Barnet – £2.27m cut by 2020. 10 libraries to adopt Open+ technology to increase opening hours. Substantial cuts to staff, to be replaced with volunteers. Childs Hill, East Barnet, Mill Hill and South Friern to be volunteer run with council support. 46% of library staff cut, from 114 to 62 full time. Space will be let out for commercial and community use to raise money.
• Cornwall – Bodmin Library to move from dedicated building into a new council office on outskirts.
• Lambeth – Waterloo Library to close (transferred to an academy); Upper Norwood Library will become more volunteer; Carnegie, Minet and Tate South libraries to be passed to GLL as “healthy living centres” (with self-service library machines and no permanent staff). Durning, Brixton, Clapham, Streatham and planned new West Norwood Library will remain council controlled and funded.
• North Ayrshire – Consultation on reducing opening hours.
• Scottish Borders – Libraries to be run by Borders Sport and Leisure non-profit trust.
• Shropshire – Ellesmere Library to move from dedicated building into a Day Centre.

More >