Dawn of the Unread, Merrick Cockell, Franchising libraries & Sieghart's message to the LGA.

Some stories that have recently caught my eye;

Dawn of the Unread

I was recently contacted by James Walker from 'Dawn of the Unread' who asked if I could help publicise the project and of course as it's a wonderful and creative idea I, and Voices for the Library, agreed.

see; http://www.voicesforthelibrary.org.uk/2014/06/dawn-of-the-unread/


Merrick Cockell

Sir Merrick Cockell, who served as Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea for 13 years and chaired London Councils for four, will be from July 2014 taking over as the Executive Chair, and Chair of the Board, of Cratus Communications. He's obviously delighted by this and by the appointment onto his board of Tim Grier, Nine years as Managing Director of John Laing Integrated Services. As you may remember JLIS ran Hounslow Libraries and then won the contract for Croydon, Harrow and Ealing libraries which they then very quickly sold on to Carillion.

“I am delighted to be joining Cratus at such an exciting time in their development. Having observed their work with John Laing pioneering contracted-out library services, I know that they are one of the few companies that truly understand how local government works. They know that elected members need to lead the revolution in local public services that is happening across the country and that the public and private sectors need to better understand and learn from each others’ strengths.”

Exciting times ahead then!!

(Thanks to me old mucker Ian Anstice for alerting me to this)


Franchising

I recently picked up from a Barnet source that they are considering 'franchising' their libraries and have got the idea from Lambeth and Staffordshire! Now this is the first time I've heard this term used in relation to public libraries and can only guess that it's another example of neo-liberal library speak and really means privatisation and/or the handing over of libraries to community groups, Social Enterprises etc. I asked campaigners in Lambeth and they hadn't heard of it and as for Staffordshire well as far as I can see they've just cut and volunteered like nearly everyone else!!

If anyone does know what the hell this is or has any info then please let me know.




William Sieghart's message to the LGA

The current edition of the LGA's 'First' magazine has a guest feature by William Sieghart, Chair of the panel commissioned by the Departments for Communities and Local Government and Culture, Media and Sport to produce an independent report on England's public library service.
It's worth reading as it gives a clear idea as to the direction that William and the panel think that public libraries should be moving and that is towards collocation, shared services and a more strategic national approach in relation to digital services and membership. I have serious reservations about collocation and shared services but depending on the detail could be persuaded on the national part.
And as for libraries in pubs, I wrote something about this last year;
http://dontprivatiselibraries.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/a-pint-and-book-please.html


I've met with William and have given oral evidence to his panel and although I can't yet discuss the detail I can say that he's very keen on what he/they see as 'pragmatic' solutions!
 

The LGA and ‘non-statutory’ Public Libraries

Library Campaigners were aghast recently at yet another announcement made by the LGA stating that Public Libraries were a ‘non-statutory’ service.

"The Local Government Association (LGA), which represents council leaders, has "mapped out" the likely impact of a 10% funding cut to county councils and unitary authorities in England in 2015-16.

It predicts that, on average, they would have to save £30m on top of the reductions already made.

This, it argues, would mean reducing spending on a "broad combination of non-statutory services which might include children's centres, museums, libraries and sports centres, as well as reduce road maintenance budgets, increase bus fares and switch off streetlights between midnight and dawn"."

 

This isn’t the first time they’ve made this claim, in a Bookseller article from 2010 a LGA spokesperson stated;

 

"A spokesperson for the Local Government Association (LGA) said: “Library services are a non-statutory service in that councils are not legally obliged to provide a library in every town. They have to provide a service, but there doesn't need to be a library—you could provide a mobile library, for example. Councils are legally obliged to provide other services, such as protecting vulnerable children and adults, and they are very expensive. We have a 28% reduction in funding over four years, so popular non-statutory services like libraries and leisure centres are being reduced. But it is very much a local decision and all councils will consult with local residents." The spokesperson added: “We have to be honest with people. We can't pretend we will be able to provide the same level of service in future"

If it’s said often enough and by an official ‘respected’ organisation then other people start to believe it as well;

ttp://www.theinformationdaily.com/2010/12/21/local-governments-response-to-the-cuts

"On public services, upper-tier councils predict that adult social care is the service most likely to be severely affected by funding cuts, despite the announcement of additional funding streams worth £2bn by central government. Almost every council will be cutting back a range of non-statutory services too, from libraries to weekly bin collections."

 

And then it gets out into the twitter sphere, Jack Blanchard from the Yorkshire Post tweeting;

 

"Libraries, art galleries & other non-statutory services provided by councils will face 80% cuts by 2020, LGA believeshttp://tinyurl.com/b2xbm94"

Now I’m sure that anyone that knows the LGA’s attitude to defending Public Libraries won’t be surprised by these announcements, clearly shown by this comment made by Chris White, but what they might not know is that the LGA, in cahoots with the DCLG, has been actively lobbying to have, as they see it, the ‘burden’ of statutory duties lessened for local authorities and yep you guessed it this includes the 1964 Act.

 

The LGA makes no bones about this, in one of their reports from 2012 they state;

"Councils cannot, unaided, change the legal

or institutional framework that dictates their

service responsibilities, limits their scope

to do things differently, and constrains their

revenue base. Councils cannot repeal

the statute law that requires care must be

provided, library service provision must be

comprehensive and efficient, roads must

be maintained, equality must be promoted,

or – even – that local newspapers must be

provided with copies of papers for council

meetings."

"The most direct option is to change the

law. Parliament could repeal a proportion

of councils’ 1300 statutory duties and

councils would cease to fulfil them.

A variation on this approach would be to

exploit legal ambiguities to stretch the

boundaries of what fulfilling a statutory

service obligation involves. Councils could

work with their communities to develop a

shared and reduced set of expectations

about what a park should look like or what

the condition of a well-maintained road

should be. As the latter example illustrates,

though, providing “thinner” rather than fewer

services carries legal and moral risks, as well

as political ones."

 

Another report from 2012 states;

 

4. Could councils stop providing some services?

“One way of bridging the gap between expenditure and income would be for local authorities to stop or radically reduce the provision of some services. The kind of provision which is likely to be most under threat as the squeeze described above continues will include coastal protection, economic development, youth services, elections, licensing, recycling, swimming pools, leisure centres, libraries, planning and housing regulation. Such provision is not unimportant, but it is unlikely to be protected if budgets decline as projected on the basis of existing plans and social care expenditure is maintained. Of course, it has always proved difficult for councils to cease providing services. There is a risk of legal challenge and the possibility that local MPs or ministers would oppose such radical change. But if the scenario outlined above comes about, it is hard to see how all the services listed above could be protected. Unhelpfully, some of this provision is important to the promotion of growth.”

 

 

So it all becomes a bit clearer then, if you keep pushing the message that Public Libraries are ‘non-statutory’ then it becomes easier to pull the rug from under them thus allowing local authorities to close, cut and divest them.

 

see also;

 

http://alangibbons.net/2013/05/letter-to-lga-chairman-libraries-are-statutory/

'Beyond Books and buildings: should councils close their libraries to save money?" - the LGA's vision for Public Libraries!

The Local Govenrment Association (LGA) is holding its Anuual Conference and Exhibition between 26-28th June 2012 and one of the sessions taking place today is 'Beyond Books and buildings: should councils close their libraries to save money?" this coincides with a new LGA report 'Local solutions for future local library services'.

The Conference session is being chaired by Flick Rea, Lib Dem Councillor for the Fortune Green Ward in Camden, who also sat on the board of the London Libraries Change Programme and now sits on the LGA's Culture, Tourism and Sports Board, and the speakers are Cllr David Hodge, Leader of Surrey CC, and Steve Bullock, Mayor of Lewisham who sits on the LGA Workforce Board.

"Libraries are among the most valued services councils provide. The library landscape is also changing radically in light of budget cuts, the Localism Act and the Big Society. From sharing back office functions, to locating libraries in shops and empowering communities to play a bigger role, councils are finding innovative ways to give people access to quality library services. Councils are looking beyond books and buildings, opening up libraries for a new generation of users, forging new partnerships and putting them at the heart of the community.
So, are there alternatives to cutting library services? How can libraries achieve modernisation and digitalisation as well as value for money?
Delegates will hear the latest cutting edge thinking from LGA and local government and have a chance to have their say."
Outline of the session taken from http://sites.idea.gov.uk/annual-conference-2012/2012/01/24/w13/

A media release relating to the report 'Local solutions for future local library services' can be found at http://www.local.gov.uk/web/guest/media-releases/-/journal_content/56/10171/3622109/NEWS-TEMPLATE and copies can be requested from ben.knowles@local.gov.uk, i've requested one but haven't yet had a response!

The themes and innovations talked about in the media release are not particularly innovative or new, libraries have been offering these services for years but what is new is the unprecedented push towards co-location, sharing services, private finance and volunteers, this neo-liberal agenda is also being adopted by ACE and of course the DCMS.

And i quote;

"A library in the 21st century can be a whole of things, from a small e-book borrowing point based in a shop to a part of a cultural hub which supports everything from education to lifelong learning to health, volunteering, art projects, smal business, job hunting and social care"

The LGA along with ACE and the DCMS have a clear vision for Public Libraries and that is to divest and diversify, they want to position 'libraries' within the leisure market in order to make them more attractive to private firms or failing this to hand them over to charities or volunteers!

This is not what the vast majority of library users want, they want local libraries that are publicly funded and accountable, staffed by paid professionals and housed in buildings which are accessible and easily identifiable as libraries, not 'library hubs', 'library plus', 'discovery centres' and shiny multi-million pound town centre libraries built at the expense of the local network and they certainly don't want library staff issuing death certificates, as in Kent Libraries!

How can i make these statements about what library users want, i hear you ask, well through 20+ years of asking them, through information gleaned from local newspapers, online forums, friends groups, feedback from other campaigners and by reading and digesting every relevant report i come across! For a fairly comprehensive overview of the reports, inquiries and research conducted on Public Libraries over the years see http://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/p/links-and-documents.html

It may be worth noting that the LGA's chair is a Conservative and the largest grouping is Conservative, it represents 373 councils across the UK and the councils pay an annual subscription ranging from £10k to £70k, see http://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/2012/06/vital-for-communities.html for more info.

The No Future Libraries Programme!

"No future for you no future for me
No future no future for you"

The Sex Pistols

The 'No' Future Libraries Programme!

In the Autumn of 2010 Ed Vaizey hailed the conception of the Future Libraries Programme as "an ambitious change programme for libraries", the programme, initially launched in July 2010, was to be taken forward by the The Museums Libraries and Archive Council (MLA) and the LGA Group (Local Government Association Group) with "promises to build momentum on the ideas that have been generated and spread learning between library authorities to achieve cost savings, new partnerships and governance models, and to take advantage of digital opportunities. Central to the programme is the vision for library services to have greater connection with other local services and an ambition for services to be designed around the needs of the public, rather than based on organisational boundaries."

Ten areas where chosen;

• Northumberland with Durham
• Bolton, with Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan
• Bradford
• Lincolnshire, with Rutland, Cambridgeshire, North East Lincs, Peterborough
• Suffolk
• Oxfordshire with Kent
• Herefordshire with Shropshire
• Cornwall with Devon, Plymouth, Torbay
• Lewisham with Bexley, Bromley, Croydon, Greenwich, Lambeth and Southwark
• Kensington & Chelsea with Hammersmith & Fulham

these areas would each be given a project and the overall feedback from each project suggested four models of change;

Shared services across council boundaries

Reviewing the location and distribution of service points

New provider models of delivery

Divesting library assets and services to community ownership and management.

The final programme report and the reports relating to the projects can be found at; http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=22776393

Make of it what you will, all i'll say is that without exception every authority that participated in the programme has cut their library service, this includes library closures, cuts to opening hours, jobs and stock funds, volunteer run libraries and privatisation!

Oh! and i forgot to mention that 10's if not 1000's of pounds was spent on consultants such as Shared Intelligence the same lot being used by the Arts Council England on their 'Envisioning the library of the future' project!