 |
an
alliance of library user groups and supporters |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contact LLL
|
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LLL
Meetings:
7.30pm start at Camden Town Hall (Workshops may be held at other venues) |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2nd September 2010, 7th October 2010, 4th November 2010, 2nd December 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lewisham Libraries Closures Online Petitions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Here we go again!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For the third meeting to discuss 5 library closures we trekked through the London borough of Lewisham to seek out the prey in Sydenham. We almost made it to Crystal Palace because the officers had chosen the most distant hunting ground from Sydenham library that you could imagine. In spite of this, fellow trekkers had turned out in force, over 80 of them. Some of the enemy, councillors, other officers etc made us about 100. Nobody revealed that Sydenham library is actually in Bellingham ward, until one of its councillors let us know. Councillors did turn out. Three wards ere represented Sydenham, Bellingham and Perry Vale. Those present did vow to fight these proposed cuts. Interestingly each presentation is slightly different, almost as if they are trying to learn by all the mistakes they make, because nothing is thought through. Attempts at the Power Point presentation, the first, led to a map of SE London, showing all the public libraries. As Peter later pointed out, use our maps instead. One map shows the present library situation in Lewisham, the other shows Lewisham minus 5 libraries. It is available on this site and amply illustrates the desert created across a whole swathe of west Lewisham. The Sydenham Society news letter editor grabbed copies for use in their newsletter. Back to basics – our chairman this time was Steve Gough, in charge of Lewisham Buildings. This was the new strain of difficulty introduced. If the library buildings are closed not only will £830,000 be saved on staff but an extra £170,000 will be saved on building maintenance! Therefore the net save is £!m and as was said before Ms. Buckton has delegated powers from the Mayor to take decisions on projects of this amount. She keeps repeating it is for the Mayor, council and cabinet to decide. She accepted that Sydenham was popular, well-used (“like all our libraries”) so “we want to look at options to relocate the library provision into existing community buildings and possible establish new, mutually beneficial partnerships.” Unfortunately this building (a most attractive Carnegie, purpose built library) is in poor condition. The roof needs work and it will cost £250, 000 – that is the magic figure. It is ALWAYS £250,000! Any outreach support would not be on a daily basis, but you would retain IT and access for children’s activities. Nobody suggested the costs here. It is clear other options can prove expensive. QUESTIONS – there were so many questions and those present took no prisoners. How spending was prioritised actually revealed that Forest Hill Library (we were meeting closer to that than Sydenham library) had been renovated at a possible cost of one and a half million (officers were not quite sure.) Local Assembly members promised to look at the Council’s budget. As that part of Sydenham was an area of deprivation with 4 primary schools why were we here in the school holidays? Ms. Buckton is used to making things up as you go along, and thinking of answers on the hoof, so she did. It was not an unseemly rush, we had to be prepared! Primary school views would be taken into account as would those of families with pre-school children who could not turn up at 7pm. However TINA rules, nothing would meet the level of saving required except reduction in staff (or lost jobs) and transfer of buildings. Sydenham library is on the edge of Home Park, the chairman of the Friends of Home Park was devastated at the proposed loss of the library when they had worked so hard to make Home Park a decent, well–used place. A new children’s playground, an outdoor gym, a summer house in the centre and the library were integral to this project. This could hold the community together, so he focused on the social costs of closure and the damage to the whole surrounding area, where there was so little for people. If the building was not properly used everyone felt it would be a target for vandalism and destruction. Julia Webb expressed her doubt about the figures given, as did many others. She felt (what we always say – keep it ticking over) that the economic crisis was not permanent (we hope) so keep using the building as it is. Are the refurbishment costs urgent? The priority was to keep the library open. Ms. Buckton flunked her lines by saying “when the building closes” but was immediately challenged on this. She was accused of not answering questions properly and going on to the next, while presenting us with a fait accompli! Our friend, Cllr Best, at last spoke up and drew attention to Manor House library users being present and what benefits had been achieved at their library. My raised hand and “But…” were overridden but eventually I caught the eye of my friend Steve and managed to ask how it could be justified to put so much money into these other libraries (Forest Hill, Wavelengths, Manor House, Downham) with such long opening hours and end up by leaving other residents virtually bereft? They were paying the same taxes for others to enjoy the benefits. Yet again we had the democratic deficit. (My hobby horse.) Rounds of applause, as happened throughout the evening. Ms. Buckton’s non-answer centred on staffing cuts not being available in these libraries as they already had RFID (self-issue) so staffing had been cut to the bone. Peter’s moment, up he jumped shouting “I interject!” He pointed out that Manor House was fully staffed for all its opening hours and users often chose NOT to use RFID, but go to a librarian. We have since learnt that the system regularly breaks down in the Manor House so a member of staff is required. My turn to shout, “You are in danger of creating a two tier service.” More applause. But, I must add, not only does this invoke the 1964 Public Libraries Act, what about equal opportunities? Overall those present were very unhappy. The value of the library was uncontested, young Mums, small children, social interaction, community interests, the elderly, the unemployed and even those who just want a book. It is not rocket science. The panel of officers was accused of supporting excessively high salaries for some, would an impact assessment have an effect on the decisions? What about the statutory requirement to provide a “comprehensive and efficient service?” Don’t go there!!!! Finally, finally they were accused of being derelict in their duties. No attention had been paid to the condition of these buildings in spite of these officers having been around a long time, with money sloshing around the system. They had let us down badly and should not expect us to pay the price. Why not cut the PR budget? Why not discontinue the Local Assemblies, as libraries were worth more? No answer there though.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fahrenheit 451 in Lewisham Temperatures are rising in Lewisham as the battle to scupper the borough's library closure program intensifies. The directly elected mayor, Sir Steve Bullock, is a major target for the wrath of the protestors. He is regarded as a latter-day Savonarola, with extreme political expediency replacing the religious frenzy. Both motivations can be very destructive and Lewisham's residents fear that the contempt for education and culture exhibited for a short time in late 15th century Florence is replicated in their borough's administration.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
“ O, reason not the need!” Wednesday evening, 18.8.2010, found us in the rays of the setting sun trying to do just that! The Moonshot (!) Centre was our venue and we sat on a mock Greco/Roman arrangement of steep steps, totally inaccessible if you were disabled or infirm. Truthfully the Greeks and Romans did it better. This put the council entourage at somewhat of a disadvantage, being in the pit, and very vulnerable. It was the same old faces, facing us. It was the same old explanation. We were all prepared to “reason the need.” New Cross Library has some added refinements as problems. It is now in the control of Lewisham Homes, an ALMO, set up in January 2007. The library is housed in what is a shop site. The basement houses the Lewisham History Society collection, as there is nowhere else to go, and was always subject to flooding. It still is. As a reason for closure this is a non-starter. Why has nobody, either Lewisham Council or, now, Lewisham Homes, dealt with repair? If the library goes what will Lewisham Homes do? The usual suspects were put forward as possible alternative sites, but a proper, clear explanation of what was involved was not given. As time went on you could sense those present were not buying it. Having been through it all before (Fluff and Bluff, Bluff and Fluff) Anne and Alan, Pat and Peter grew weary, but hung in there. Minds drift off into wondering what exactly are the costs of “other options.” Experience says, “quite a lot.” Mostly everyone else was amazed and one or two were really angry. Bit by bit this picked up momentum. Of course it’s not well used, it is closed most of the time!. What it does do in a run down, deprived area is exceptional! Without this facility on the main road, the whole of New Cross would suffer. Libraries are social levellers! People were concerned about those who would lose jobs. They were even more concerned that highly salaried staff showed no signs of opting for pay-cuts, let alone redundancy. Nearly everyone present felt there must be another way. We cannot have staffing figures until December. The decision to close is to be made by November. We do not have proper costings for some libraries. How is it a fair consultation when the public does not have precise accounts of how its money is spent? My question on pools/leisure centres was answered, although I already knew the answer. Where council services are outsourced, as are all the pools/leisure centres and the parks/gardens, the council cannot escape from the contract. Therefore services such as libraries, still in council control, will take a heavier hit. On being a statutory service it is not a statutory service, although backed by Act of Parliament, in the sense of a legal requirement. SEE YOU IN COURT. Finally Ms. Buckton said proposals to close New Cross would be decided by the council in November and it was not her decision, or that of officers, to make. She may have forgotten that the elected Mayor arranged for the delegated powers of officers to include any project under £1m. Such a project is the non-spending of £830,000 over 3 years, about £277,000pa. If savings cannot be found to cover this, the top ranking officers are not worth their high ranking salaries. The best moment of the evening was Ms. Buckton flunking the question on the fee to be paid for ordering a book (50p) and her colleagues not helping her out. “Do you use the library?” some wag interjected. She promised Anne that as fewer books would be available in each outreach centre the normal fee would not be payable. Lost revenue? Councillors present from Telegraph Hill Ward opposed the library cuts and when challenged promised not to vote for the budget. New Cross Ward councillors started out like that but it’s not cut and dried as they may support an alternative venue. Cllr Maslin, Cabinet member for Resources was somewhat equivocal. You know what I mean. Cllr Best, Cabinet member for Communities yet again said nothing. She may speak up on Thursday, as Sydenham is her area. It has to be asked why the council allowed each building to get into the state it is in, yet when money was freely available they chose to spend £12m on consultants last year. Reason not the need!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The Future Library Programme
On 16th August, the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) announced which local government groups had been chosen to participate in phase one of the Future Library Programme. This partnership between national and local governments is intended “to help the library service during the current challenging financial situation, with an ambition to ensure libraries play a central role for communities in the Big Society”. Ten proposals have been chosen by the DCMS from the fifty-one submissions, representing over 100 local authorities. The ten projects will be offered practical support and advice in this phase. There are two London groups included on the chosen list. These are: Other chosen groups are: The DCMS press release states “ the programme 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.” In the present financial climate, it is highly probable that the “cost savings” part of the programme is intended to be the overwhelmingly dominant one, with all other items serving to produce that outcome. History suggests that the “needs of the public” are unlikely to be considered very deeply and will be interpreted in such a way as to support the cost savings proposals. Perhaps library users should consider this initiative to be a damage limitation exercise. The cost savings will be obtained by hook or by crook. The national government is determined to obtain them and local government is in no position to resist. The local government preference is always for the simplest solution to a problem and there is no doubt that, as far as public libraries are concerned, that means library closures. Recognition that public libraries can make a huge contribution to education and social mobility has been lost in local government. Right wing Councillors consider public libraries to be a waste of public money (everyone can afford to buy books for themselves, is their argument), left wing Councillors consider them to be a subsidy for the middle classes and moderate Council Members are often simply not interested. Thus, the quick fix of library closures is almost irresistible for the political class. There is a possibility that the Future Library Programme will force everyone to rationally consider that future. So, some good may come out of it. Both the chosen Future Libraries Programmes from London are based on developing cross border cooperation. The south London one envisages cooperation over a very large area, but the west London proposal is limited to just two local authorities. It is obvious that the project most likely to succeed is the low key, low risk one in the west of the capital. There are just too many axes grinding in the south for anything worthwhile to be achieved, apart from large quantities of hype. However, the southern group has the potential to do the most good, if its worst performing boroughs (Lambeth & Greenwich, with 134.513 & 146.979 active borrowers per thousand residents respectively) can be brought up to the standard of the best borough (Bexley, with 261.081 active borrowers per thousand residents). Sadly, with the heavy emphasis on cost reduction, it is also very possible for the best boroughs to be dragged down towards the worst - for the group to adopt the worst practices of its members, rather than the best. One of the problems that the south London group will have to untangle is the one caused by the Lewisham library closure programme. There, the Council is proposing to close five of its libraries (over 40% of existing libraries). The threatened libraries are sited outside the borough’s central area and the proposals will therefore result in a withdrawal of service from Lewisham residents living on the periphery of the borough. For those Lewisham residents who live in the affected areas and have difficulty travelling, this is a disaster. Lewisham Council is targeting mothers with young children and the sick & disabled. So, the “needs of the public” part of the Future Libraries Programme is already compromised in south London. Most of these needy people will simply stop using public libraries entirely (the best possible outcome from the viewpoint of a local authority seekinf cost savings). A few will demand to be served by the Home Library Service (if it survives the cuts) and will thus receive a poor substitute for what has been withdrawn. For those Lewisham residents who can travel easily, there is the choice of travelling to central Lewisham or travelling to a neighbouring borough. As the closure program is totally driven by financial considerations, Lewisham Council would clearly prefer the latter option to be chosen. Not a good start for a project dedicated to improving cooperation between neighbouring authorities. Reference: AT Aug 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In response to a protest to Ed Vaizey (Minister for Culture, Communications & Creative Industries) from a library friends group in Lewisham; the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) stated that the proposed massive reduction in library services in the borough “ do not necessarily constitute a breach of the 1964 Act” (the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964). The letter (click to view) was not actually from the Minister, but from a military sounding “Public Engagement and Recognition Unit”. The subaltern in charge of the unit admitted, “The Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport [Jeremy Hunt] does have a statutory duty to ensure that public library authorities in England provide a “comprehensive and efficient” library service.” The problem is that Secretaries of State at the DCMS have invariably avoided "engagement" with and "recognition" of the more difficult public library issues. In essence, there is little difference between the Lewisham response of the DCMS under Conservative Jeremy Hunt and the initial Wirral response under Labour Andy Burnham – its someone-else’s problem. The someone-else, according to the DCMS, is a combination of the Museums, Libraries & Archives Council (MLA) and the Local Government Association (LGA). One of these organisations is in the process of being wound-up and the other is specifically tasked with representing the body causing the problem and its peers. This traditional DCMS “catch 22” scenario is meant to insulate the department from the real world, but the desired outcome is always achieved at the expense of library users throughout the country. Ed Vaizey has promised that he will meet library users representatives in the autumn. Let us hope that this meeting will be early enough to have an influence on the rapidly developing Lewisham situation. It is unfortunate that library users have to rely on obtaining a meeting with a busy Minister to get their voices heard. Library users have had a national organisation for a quarter of a century and it is difficult to understand why this has not been part of the decision making process for many years. If it had been, the Wirral debacle would have been quickly resolved, with far less embarrassment to the DCMS. 1964 Public Libraries
and Museums Act, AT Aug 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
“Armed with a list of points, 2 maps and copies of e-mails, I set off on Saturday morning [7th August], very enthusiastically, to talk to the Labour Councillor in Grove Park ward. Being a bit of a Pollyanna I was not downhearted at receiving no reply to my two e-mails, as her Conservative ward colleague on the Council had not replied either. My concerns were the proposed closure of Grove Park Library and the possible loss of Adult Education at the Grove Park Centre. It was hoped they would have been interested in the 2 main facilities their ward offers, hence my attempted visit. It was not to be. Would you believe these poor over-worked councillors take August off, “like the MPs“, I was told! Having only been elected in May and facing a crisis on all fronts, according to our elected Mayor, one hour a month, in August, is just too much for the poor dears. So, London has the benefit of my words. There will be an impact on the whole of Lewisham’s library service if these closures go ahead. While on the Mayor’s Commission on Libraries and Learning (2008/2009) the Mayor did mention he “had seen the books” and it was not pretty. But, at no time was it suggested any library closures would result. Read the Commission report on Lewisham’s website, if it has not been removed in haste to fit with the latest scenario. At the first Blackheath Village consultation it was noticeable that officers were running the show. It occurred to me that they were treading a very fine line between presenting policy and promoting policy. Two of the Blackheath ward councillors did make comments, however, Cllr. Best – the Cabinet member for Community Services -was in the back row and contributed nothing on behalf of the elected administration. Ms Buckton – Head of Community Services – on £131,000 (+ some pennies) stated that once these libraries had gone they would never come back. How is it that an unelected, unaccountable officer is able to make this decision in perpetuity for all Lewisham councils to come, all future politicians and officers? Does it exceed her brief? Does it exceed her powers? Will she never retire? Unfortunately Sir Ian Mills had revealed that discussions had begun on the future of Blackheath 4 months earlier. That would have been the end of March, before the elections. So why was this not put before the electorate? We all know why, but it is still worth asking! Another aspect not tackled is that all Council buildings come under its Building Services department. These costs are not part of the library budget. That needs further investigation and we are currently asking for the library budget book. Otherwise it is extremely difficult to unravel the complex spending involved in the different bodies and business contracts providing buildings. Interestingly, of the five proposed closures, two are not owned by the Council. By closing the other three the Council is literally “shutting itself down.” No comments necessary. As they used to say at Saturday morning pictures, after the cartoons, “That’s all for now folks!” But this story will run and run. Why is it impossible to consider that the service should be kept “ticking over” until such times as it maybe revived? Why go out of business? There is more to this than meets the eye.”
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lewisham Library Closures Update Residents living towards the periphery of the borough of Lewisham have been targeted by the Council for library closures. It is unknown how pleased adjacent boroughs are at being forced to dip into their shrinking resources to provide library services for the abandoned Lewisham residents. Of course, the danger is that the adjacent boroughs will simply retaliate with similar closures and provide the next step in spreading the practice throughout London. If this does happen, Lewisham Council will bear a heavy responsibility.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
An estimated 40 redundancies are expected in the Harrow Library Service as a result of the borough's move towards self service in the libraries. The borough intends to install 22 radio frequency identification (rfid) self-issue machines. The installation of the machines is at the heart of Harrow's "Better Deal for Residents" program which is designed to save £50 million over three years. More: AT Aug 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The future of Blackheath Village Library, as explained at the FIRST Lewisham
consultation meeting on 28th July 2010, as if!
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Until a few days ago, the answer to that need was to point your browser at “Whats In Londons Libraries”. Now, trying to use that simple remedy will only result in frustration. The service has been quietly withdrawn “due to financial constraints”. Further, the London Libraries website (www.londonlibraries.org) will be unavailable from 31 July 2010. No official announcement has been made - presumably "due to financial constraints". The catalogues of each of London’s 33 library services are still available on line at present and will have to be interrogated individually. After George Osborne announces the results of his Comprehensive Spending Review on 20th October, how long will this be the case? AT July 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| "Yes
Minister"
On 26th July, Jeremy Hunt; Secretary of State at the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS); announced that his department was considering disbanding two QUANGOs. These were the UK Film Council and the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA). There was an immediate flurry of adverse comment from people in the film/arts world about the possible Film Council demise, but almost none about the MLA. Whilst the MLA is not completely friendless, it has a less than glorious history to justify its existence. Its support from local government is distinctly half-hearted and most library users’ organisations believe that it has failed to consider their views in any meaningful way. The MLA considered itself to be part of a command structure – simply implementing the dictates of government. It completely failed to realise that it was just as important to pass back to government information about the population’s views on those dictates - it did not know them or wish to know them. It thus failed both the government and the population. Few will miss the MLA, when it finally disappears, but there could be some adverse side effects. The MLA was the financial conduit for several useful programs (quangos are responsible for 13% of total government expenditure) and it is unclear what will happen to these. Presumably, the DCMS will deploy a less expensive mechanism for this task. The "Read Before Burning" report from the Institute for Government suggests that " the new administration must avoid repeating history [Mrs Thatcher's Bonfire of the Quangos] and that reform of arm’s length government must go beyond a simple ‘numbers game’, the traditional post election cull of ALBs [Arms Length Bodies]." The removal of the MLA from the scene is just the start.
AT July 2010 Adendum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lewisham has proposed that it should close five of its 13 public libraries to accommodate expected funding cuts. It is moving, with great haste, to the consultation stage and has set a date and venue for a meeting on each threatened library. It should be noted that all meeting dates are in the summer holiday period. This means that many Lewisham residents will be unable to attend and places a large question mark over the effectiveness of the consultation process. The meeting arrangements are:
An exasperated comment from one Lewisham library user, Pat Richardson: Last week we were invited to 2 events. Local activists held a demonstration outside the Town Hall. We were then able to sit in on the Mayor and Cabinet meeting which was discussing proposals for cuts, pages of them, almost £3m of them, for starters! Unfortunately we missed the entertainment and had to read about it in the Daily Telegraph on Saturday and our local News Shopper on the following Wednesday. Now, whatever you think of Sir Steve Bullock, the elected Mayor of Lewisham, he is a pretty smooth political operator but chaos set in on Wednesday. Having quite evidently lost his cool and forgotten to switch off his microphone witnesses recalled he swore at hecklers. Then he actually wondered what planet the public present were living on. Really the public should have had an opportunity to put the question to him. It was he, dear reader, who allowed the spending of £12m on consultants during the last financial year! It was he who sanctioned the purchase by the council, late last year, of the run down Catford Centre for £11m (and we do not know where that money came from.) And he knew what the future held because he told a group of us in 2008! He cannot escape responsibility because he is an elected Mayor and all decisions could be agreed or rejected on his say. No Cabinet Member is going to disagree as their position in Cabinet (and pay) depend on his support! A fine mess I got myself into, and that is probably the source of his irritation. But, they got the Show on the road. The following evening we had been invited by the council to attend the meeting of community and local groups. Firstly we were addressed gently by The Chief Executive, Barry Quirke (salary £199,000pa) plus extras for being the Returning Officer. We were given the Quirke version of why the country was in such financial trouble, and not a mention of Mr. Micawber, annual income and all that. The Mayor then stepped up to the podium for his 5 minutes to support the agenda, but no hecklers were heard. We were asked to busy ourselves in groups and come up with a thought that might help to bridge the financial gap and what we were prepared to put up with, really. Peter and I really do wonder why we take part. After 10 years and a literal bonfire of unquantifiable amounts of cash we are worse off than 10 years ago. How can that be? How has it come to this? Down in the bunker, that passes for a Town Hall, they must be really worried or all this activity would not go on. Arranged are 5 separate consultation meetings over each of the libraries proposed for closure. Currently the public has no leverage. There is no election on the horizon until 2014 - I am discounting Boris and the GLA. However, the results of “CUTS” will be kicking in by then, so maybe it is not so short- sighted. In all the information churned out one element was missing and it will be my first suggestion – to show goodwill, all employees at the council earning over £100,000 pa should offer to take a 5% cut in salary. Residents may then see a completely different picture and take on board the seriousness of our predicament.” Pat |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| DCMS Leads by Example
On Tuesday 20th July, the Guardian stated that up to 50% (minimum 35%) of the Department for Culture Media & Sport (DCMS) staff will be made redundant, as a result of forthcoming funding cuts. In addition, the department is expected to move out of its prestigious headquarters building in Cockspur Street.
Reference: AT July 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lewisham is often among the first London boroughs to introduce a new concept to its library service. So, it is rather unfortunate that it now seems to be the lead borough in introducing a very old concept to that service – library closures. In the Autumn of this year, the closure of 5 (at least) public libraries in the London Borough of Lewisham will be announced. These closures are expected to save the borough £800,000 and, of course, free-up the sites for development from which the local communities will get little benefit. At present, Lewisham has 12 libraries, so the closure of 5 of these (42%) is an enormous blow to literacy in the borough and, as a direct result, to social mobility in the area. The libraries chosen for closure are:
The last time Lewisham attempted to close public libraries, there was intense resistance from residents and this was ultimately successful. The rationale behind that campaign is set-out here (click). Rumours of the preparation of similar closure programs are widespread throughout London and, like Lewisham, many of these will be put before Councils in the Autumn, for implementation in 2011.AT July 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public Lending Right Scheme Cut Back
Authors are not the first group of people that springs to mind as probable victims of the recession and, to be honest, they are just one small group in the great host of people similarly afflicted. However, their plight does need to be recorded. For every block-buster novelist, such as J.K. Rowling or Ian Rankin, there are hundreds of authors who barely make a living from their writing. In 2007, the Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society found that the average income for an author in the UK was £16,531. Thus, for the majority, the money they receive from their books being lent to the public by libraries is not just a welcome bonus, but an essential part of their income. For every loan of a book, its author receives slightly over six pence. The money for this payment is drawn from the Public Lending Right Budget, for which the Department for Culture Media and Sport has responsibility. The department has already cut the budget by 3% and it is expected that it will cut further, as it struggles to live within its diminishing means. It appears that saga authors, children’s authors and crime writers are particularly vulnerable to falling revenue from the PLR budget, as they are disproportionately reliant on income from public library lending. Of course, public library closure programs will have a marked affect on this income. Thus, for practical as well as idealistic reasons, authors are enthusiastic supporters of user groups that oppose such destructive policies. For library user groups seeking publicity for their campaigns, this is anopportunity not to be missed. Reference: http://www.plr.uk.com/allAboutPlr/whatIsPlr.htm AT July 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
At the Remodelling Libraries Conference on 1st July, Mr Vaizey launched a new, expert support programme led by the Museums Libraries and Archive Council (MLA) and the LGA Group (Local Government Association Group). They will work together to support councils as they adapt to the current economic challenge, helping them to deliver the key services valued by communities while driving down costs. The programme will initially undertake intensive, proactive work with approximately 10 library authorities. The most effective methods developed by these projects will then be shared throughout the wider public library network, so that everyone can benefit from the work. The Minister reinforced the Government’s commitment to a high quality library service. Of course, “a high quality library service” can mean anything that Mr Vaizey wishes. The LLL Charter, endorsed by both the Library Campaign and the MLA, is a very good definition of what a high quality library service should be. At present, there are few library services which pay more than lip service to the aspirations contained in this document. There is a danger that the need to save money will reduce this number further. Therefore, the favourable remarks made by the Minister about the Charter are encouraging. It is important that the recommendations which come out of the MLA/LGA initiative should be judged against the LLL Charter. LLL
Charter , Ed Vaizey’s
speech: http://www.dcms.gov.uk/news/media_releases/7216.aspx ,
MLA comment: http://www.mla.gov.uk/news_and_views/press_releases/2010/public_charter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unison, the public sector trade union, held an inquiry into the state of Britain's public libraries on 11th February and took evidence from Rachel Cooke, an Observer journalist, and authors Joe Craig, Michel Rosen, Sue Townsend & Ann Thraite, plus many others. A report on the day's proceedings has been written by Steve Davies, Senior Research Fellow at the Cardiff School of Social Sciences and has just been published. It can be obtained from Unison by accessing their Comms Online Catalogue at www.unison.org.uk/resources/publicity.asp . Alternatively, a request for a copy can be requested by email from stockorder@unison.co.uk AT June 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The recent KPMG report “Payment for Success” claims that it “offers the chance to fundamentally change what is achieved out of spending on public services”. So, it appears to be no different from its many predecessors but, like those, it does have some interesting suggestions – suggestions which are capable of producing bad outcomes as well as good ones. It is accepted by most people that public services in Britain are somewhat poorly managed. However, the difference between the UK and other countries with similar systems is not enormous. Unfortunately, that small difference costs the nation billions of pounds per year and that is the target for this report. In the short term, local government has to find savings of £1.165b and, in the long term, much more. When faced with a funding short fall, the traditionally, knee-jerk reaction of Council Members and Officers is to first cut the library budget. This time the problem cannot be solved simply by following this well-worn path – the sums involved are far too large. Indeed, the scale of the required savings are so great compared with the average borough library budget (approximately £6m in London) that it may well be not worth the inevitable backlash which will result from yet further reductions in an already degraded service. Of course, this is unlikely to stop library budget cuts being applied and these will probably be accompanied by claims that the service to the public will not be reduced. In reality, the service will be reduced and it would be better to admit that. This would allow Council Officers to concentrate on minimizing the adverse effects, rather than wasting time trying to convince the public that it should not be worried that irreparable damage will be inflicted on cherished services. All is not well and difficult decisions do have to be made. These decisions should be made rationally and should aim at minimizing the long-term harm which will result. The good times will return and local government will then be faced with the task of repairing what has been damaged by the cuts. It is imperative that the actions taken now are capable of being reversed in the future, if it is found necessary/desirable. Thus, the outlook for public libraries in Britain is dire. The country is in a financial mess and the most senior levels of local authorities have an attitude somewhere between antipathetic and antagonistic. At present, the only proposals on the table are those contained in the KPMG report. The lack of understanding and less sympathy for the work of public libraries within Councils’ Directorates has been caused to a large extent by a confused message that has been propagated by the library profession. Library users have not suffered from what often appears to be a slavish commitment to fashion and have consistently supported the original public library activities – book lending & education (the drivers for literacy and, therefore, social mobility). In this, the users have been simply reflecting the needs and wants of their local communities. As far as libraries are concerned, “Paying for Success” seems to be advocating a model close to that of many US public library services. There, many public libraries are fairly basic and run by volunteers. Of course the top tier of US public libraries are very impressive places, but it is not the top tier of UK pubic libraries which are likely to be badly damaged/destroyed by poorly managed budget cuts. Professional librarians have, almost universally, condemned the KPMG report. However, the profession has not produced any viable alternative suggestions on how to save money. The document’s objective is just that and it is very relevant to the country’s present situation. If there is a will within government to consider radical changes to the way public libraries are run, it would be sensible to start by properly listening to what real library users consider to be important. It will be difficult to obtain a priority list acceptable to every single library user, because they each have a unique set of reasons for using a library. Nevertheless, there is much common ground and this is roughly what that list will look like:
Volunteer participation is generally considered to be the least important part of any public library operation. Most users are very happy that libraries use paid staff. Of course, they are not so happy about paying the taxes that make this possible, but the connection between the two is not usually made. In London, only twenty local authorities used volunteers in libraries during 2007/08. Although this number has been slowly increasing (the figure for 2006/07 was 17), this has not been caused by a great demand from users. Of those Councils which do use library volunteers, very few use them in a serious way and none to the extent that would be required to make a very significant budget contribution (there were only 724 library volunteers in the whole of London in 2007/08 - see spreadsheet). If volunteer run libraries is the method by which local authorities intend to drive down costs, they will find that they have chosen one that will take some time to produce noticeable reductions. Indeed, if it is intended that there should not be a major reduction in the service offered to the public, the initial costs could well be greater than before. Recruiting and training volunteers to a high enough standard will cost a lot of money and, due to high volunteer turnover; a fairly high proportion of this cost will be a permanent part of the budget. The use of volunteers is no panacea. There are inevitably going to be cuts to the offered library service. The next level up the priority list will have to be addressed, as well. It is here that much of the library professionalism is centred. That professionalism is important, but only to a limited number of people in any one week. It is thus vulnerable to the efficiency test, but will severe cuts at this level be enough to produce the required savings? Perhaps not. The further up the priority list the Council knife is applied, the greater will be the backlash from the public. Unfortunately, the cost of that backlash does not appear in the KPMG calculations. There will be local government blood on the carpet, if the simplistic KPMG arguments are slavishly followed. Flexibility is required from everyone, not just users and staff. Reference: AT June 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In December 2009, the DCMS commissioned Ipsos MORI to carry out research into public library usage in England and the findings of that investigation have now been published. Ipsos MORI interviewed a representative sample of 5000 people aged 15+ and found that 81% of library users visit a library to borrow a book. This figure is very similar to the finding of a recent survey in the inner London borough of Camden. In Camden, it was found that borrowing books was the prime aim of 82% of library users. These very high percentage figures have been achieved in spite of a massive reduction in book stock in virtually all of England’s public libraries and would indicate that the number of books within a library has little bearing on the behaviour of library users – they still keep trying to find something suitable. However, a high percentage of a decreasing overall usage would actually suggest that users who are dissatisfied with a library’s book stock simply stop going to the library (confirmed by CIPFA active borrower figurers) and, therefore, also cease using its other facilities. The situation may well be far worse in London than in the rest of the country, as Londoners are the least likely to borrow a book from a library according to the survey. The overwhelming importance of the book lending activity in the nation’s public libraries is a constant theme of all library user group statements and it is one which is, equally constantly, ignored by library authorities. There are many new, exiting activities which can be carried out in public libraries and the boring, old-fashioned one is pushed down the library service priority list. The Ipsos MORI report clearly shows that there is a great mismatch between the priorities of library users and library authorities and, most likely, is just one additional piece of evidence to be ignored. Of course there is more to the research findings than a confirmation of the importance of book lending. Some of these are already well documented, such as the fall in library usage in the 20 – 30 year age group. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the report is the analysis of the employment status of library users. The investigation found that the unemployed were apparently the least likely people to use libraries. This is a group that could obviously benefit greatly from the help available in public libraries, but which seemed slightly unwilling to do so. The detailed analysis showed that only 28% of the unemployed group borrowed books (the lowest figure of all occupation groups) but, more encouragingly, 54% carried out research on jobs/health/training/local events (the highest figure of all occupation groups). In fact, although the headline figures for the unemployed appeared poor, this group became very focused in the way that it used public libraries and it concentrated on what mattered most. The overwhelming priority was to find employment. This is confirmed by the high interest that the group showed in learning about and using computers. References: AT June 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Armageddon for London’s Public Libraries?
Department
for Culture, Media & Sport Crumb of Comfort Local Government Association comment: http://www.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/11410179 AT May 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Overdrive, the e-book distributor, is now five years old and its public library service is only a little younger. Its competitor in the UK, Bloomsbury’s Public Library Online is still an infant at one year old. These are the organisations on which the UK’s public library services rely, as they slowly rollout their e-book offerings. Whilst many of the problems that inevitably afflict a new service will have been removed from both systems, it is not surprising that there should still be one or two left. The most obvious problem is the lack of an agreed e-book format. The battle over which format will come to dominate the field is ongoing, but has not yet reached the ferocity of the Betamax/VHS video format one. As the e-book battle is about a software format and not about hardware, this is more of a nuisance than a major obstacle to progress. However, there may be a major problem for library services in a period of austerity. The automatic deactivation of the downloaded e-book after the initial loan period (usually two weeks) deprives library services of an income from overdue charges. As overdue charges are usually accidentally incurred, this may seem to be an advantage from a user’s perspective. Nevertheless, the lost revenue has to be made up from other parts of the library’s revenue budget and, as a consequence, the general user does not gain anything in total. The magnitude of the problem can be gauged from the following table
The problem is clearly something that cannot be ignored, especially by the outer London boroughs. Potentially, the removal of £50k - £100k from library revenue budgets would be crippling. Of course, this assumes that the overdue payments actually go into the library budget rather than the general Council pot. The easy solution for library services is to charge for the hire of an e-book. Many Library Services would be very happy to equate an e-book with a CD or DVD purely because it is an electronic version rather than an ink on paper one. Whilst this may not be a definite breach of the 1964 Museums and Libraries Act, it is certainly not in the spirit of the Act and is something that library users should resist. Overdrive and Public Library Online are creatures of the book trade. So their prime objective is to maximise revenue for themselves and the publishing houses. It is unrealistic to expect them to eagerly seek a solution to this problem. However, they may be well advised to take it seriously, while they can. Google is lurking just below the horizon. In some boroughs, all that is required may be a little lateral thinking. The home library service is not cheap to run, but is an essential lifeline for the housebound. The issue of free e-book readers to people who use this service would quickly give a significant cost saving and an improvement in service. Perhaps this is the balancing item for the loss of overdue charges. References: 1964 Museums
and Libraries Act, Public Library Online: http://www.exacteditions.com/ Overdrive: http://www.bookaisle.com/default.asp Essex
Libraries E-Books (an MLA Case Study): AT May 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jeremy Hunt has been appointed Secretary of State at the Department for Culture Media & Sport (DCMS). This now combines the responsibilities of the old DCMS with that of the 2012 Olympics. He stated in his first interview with the BBC that "The Olympics is our number one priority and what we need to do is to grasp the opportunity." As the Olympics will be a sport and media fest of major proportions, there will be little time left for him to spend on the cultural aspects of his remit in the next few years. This does not bode well for the public library sector in a period when it expected to be under considerable pressure to cut costs. Mr Hunt has been the
MP for South West Surrey since May 2005 and has served as Shadow Minister
for
the Disabled (2005 – 2007) and Shadow
Culture Secretary (2007 – 2010). He is thus not totally new to the
problems experienced by the UK’s public libraries.
As was widely anticipated, Ed Vaisey has been made the Minister for Culture in the department. From 1996-2004 he was director of a public relations company before turning to politics. He was Shadow Culture and Creative Industries Minister 2006-2010. Other appointments
to the team are: YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZBkzkrdXqE&feature=youtube_gdata |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has revealed that claims by the film and recorded music industries about the devastating effect of intellectual property piracy have been grossly exaggerated. The 41 page study, which took a year to complete, was undertaken at the request of the US Congress and considered the affects of piracy on digital music, films, and software. Whilst e-books were not specifically included in the list, they obviously fall into the same category as the considered subjects. As the software associated with e-books is still in a state of flux, the study is very relevant. The piracy hysteria generated by the film/music industries is in danger of distorting the development of the e-book format to the detriment of the public. Public libraries will therefore also be disadvantaged in their difficult adjustment to the new technology. The study commented on the methods of measuring the affect of piracy: “Each method has limitations, and most experts observed that it is difficult, if not impossible, to quantify the economy-wide impacts." This leaves the field clear for massive exaggeration by the film and music industries – something in which they are both well practiced. The GAO found that three commonly cited reports could not be substantiated or traced back to an underlying data source or methodology to support claims that piracy was destructive to the film or recording industry. Reports from the Business Software Alliance and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) were also found to have been highly speculative and overstated. In spite of this, one of these is still being used officially. The GAO study did not suggest that there was no piracy/counterfeiting problem, but simply made the point that it had been overstated. The draconian measures which are being forced on the public by hasty legislation are therefore probably unnecessary for the defence of intellectual .property. They are more about the defence of an outmoded business model. GAO study: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10423.pdf AT May 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In the coming months, everyone is expecting many attempts to close public libraries in order to help bail-out an economy ruined by incompetent national politicians and greedy bankers. Library closures have long been regarded by local authorities as easy option cost cutting. One London borough, Walthamstow, has found that this can be far from the truth. About three years ago, Walthamstow closed one of its libraries without any prior notice and certainly without consulting the local residents. Since then, those residents have been a thorn in the side of the Council. They organised themselves and have been battling to get the library reopened at every possible occasion. The received wisdom is that once a library has been closed, it will never reopen again. The Council was probably counting on simply out-waiting the Walthamstow residents, but it miscalculated. The fight is still going on and it is the Council which is beginning to tire. The St James Street Library Campaign have issued its latest press release (click to view) and it is looking a little hopeful. The moral of the Walthamstow story is that it is better to act before the Council shuts your library, rather than after. Form that Fiends Group now. AT April 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Almost all cultural objects published, painted, photographed or released anywhere in the world before the 20th century are within the Public Domain and therefore can be freely used and reinterpreted to fuel the creation of new treasures. However, the dash to digitise Europe's cultural heritage is now putting these Public Domain Rights in jeopardy. Some digitisation contracts grant exclusive rights that restrict access to newly digitised works for years or even decades. The European Online Library, Europeana, has responded to this retrograde trend by publishing The Public Domain Charter: “a statement that calls for the Public Domain to be kept freely accessible to Europe's citizens”. The intension of the Charter is to ensure that material held in trust for the public for generations, often at taxpayers' expense, should not enter the private sector when it is digitised. The Charter can be found at: AT April 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Manifesto for London's Public Libraries LLL has published its Library Manifesto in advance of the general and London Council elections. It calls for the Mayor of London to take a hands-on role in the improvement of London’s libraries and deliver the changes promised by the London Library Change Programme (LLCP)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"The Government Must" With those three, uncompromising words, CILIP (the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals) begins its Library & Information Manifesto 2010. The Manifesto sets out CILIP's "six priorities for the next Westminster Government to ensure that quality library and information provision continues and improves". These priorities are:
Most public library users would find nothing to object to in the CILIP wish list. However, considering the expected assault on the county's public libraries, it would have been better not to leave the subject of public library user entitlement to the last. It does give the impression that it is the least of the priorities, in spite of being the one which directly affects the most people. Reference: www.cilip.org.uk/manifesto AT March 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"What future for Blackheath Village Library?" was the title of a meeting at The Bakehouse on Tuesday 16th March in which Antonio Rizzo, Head of Lewisham Library Services, explained how change might affect the local library service in the next few years. The revitalized Blackheath Village Library Users’ Group wants to know what you want from the library. Contact them at tel 020 8852 4032 • email: se3villagelibrary@yahoo.co.uk. The Blackheath Village Library Users Group newsletter can be found by clicking here. THE
newly refurbished West Greenwich Library and
the beautiful East Greenwich Library are
the subjects of Pat Richardson's write-up about this part of south
London. It incidentally shows how important
the
presence of a Friends Group is to the continued existence of a public
library. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There is no doubt that this country is in dire financial difficulties. A toxic mix of political hubris and banker greed has produced the worst economic downturn since the 1930s. The UK’s private sector has been suffering severely and the country’s gross domestic product has fallen by a massive 6% but, so far, the public sector has escaped virtually unscathed. The badly damaged private sector produces the wealth which funds the public sector. Therefore, this state of affairs cannot continue. There is no magic formula which will allow it to do so. Public sector cuts are inevitable. It is better to accept this and plan properly rather than to simply deny the fact. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mein Kampf – Freedom of Information or Censorship? One of the sillier aspects of copyright law is the insistence in many countries that the copyright holder has complete control of the work for 70 years after the death of the author. Perhaps this excessively long period has more to do with the fact that lawmakers are frequently spare time authors than with ensuring a flat playing field in the book trade. However, that is the situation that we have to live with. One of the difficulties this causes is actually determining when an author died and, thus, when copyright runs out. This is definitely not a problem for Mein Kampf. Nearly everyone knows when Adolf Hitler died. The copyright clock started ticking in a Berlin bunker in 1945. Therefore the book can be freely reproduced in most countries from 2015 onwards. As the deadline approaches, interest in the book has begun to rise. New editions have been printed and there are more planned. This presents a dilemma for public libraries. Should they have these books on their shelves? There is no doubt that Mein Kampf is of historic importance. However, the ideas contained within it are not generally acceptable, but neither is censorship. The Institute of Contemporary History (IfZ) in Munich has obviously been thinking about the problem and has arrived at a good compromise. It intends to publish an "annotated version" of the book. The annotations will consist of historical notes about the Third Reich and its policies. Compromises tend to satisfy nobody and this one will probably not stop a furious debate and the quality of the annotations is critical in this. With the rise of right-wring political parties such as the BNP, there will be a great temptation to use these notes for anti right-wring propaganda. If the authors of the notes succumb to this temptation, the resultant book(s) will be no better than the unannotated one. It is certain that there is going to be a very difficult judgement to be made in library book selection in the next few years. AT Feb 2010 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Another Chapter in The Google Book Settlement Saga A US federal judge has rejected Amazon's request that he withdraw his preliminary approval of a settlement between Google and US authors & publishers to allow Google the right to digitize millions of books. On 1st December, U.S. District Judge Denny Chin said that he would conduct a "thorough fairness analysis" of the settlement on 18th February next year and Amazon would be able to argue its case then. The original agreement between Google and US authors & publishers was criticized on monopoly & copyright grounds and for its probable consequences in non-US countries. These criticisms have resulted in major changes. One of these changes has restricted the agreement to the United States, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom i.e. to major English speaking countries. UK public libraries have an interest in the small print of the final settlement, as Google has promised free access to all US public libraries to its archives. Each library will be allowed to have one terminal with this access. It is unknown whether the DCMS is attempting to ensure that this facility is extended to UK public libraries or whether it is content that the UK is treated as a poor relation by the agreement. AT Dec 09 More information: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Wirral MBC is Found to be in Breach of its
Statutory Duties
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost Reductions in London’s Library Services It is no secret that the UK economy is in grave difficulties and that all local government services will have to deliver cost reductions in the near future. When this has happened in the past, Councils have taken the easy option and simply cut those services provided to the public. The easiest to cut have been library services and, as a consequence, these have tended to be the most severely reduced. Coincidently (possibly), the London region of the Museums, Libraries & Archives Council (MLA) has commissioned an investigation of methods of improving the efficiency of London’s library services. At least in theory, these should reduce costs without reducing the quality and quantity of the provision to the public i.e. exactly what local authorities will be seeking soon. The investigation took into consideration the views of both library staff and Councillors but, very noticeably, not library users. The MLA is thus following its usual top down attitude to service provision. A report has been written and this will be discussed at a meeting on 1st December by borough Councillors responsibility for library services. The main thrust of the report is the often-cited cost reduction potential of amalgamating some or all London’s library services. However, some other options were considered. The option list was:
All options were considered to be desirable except for two – privatisation and shared job descriptions & HR resources. Whether library users would be similarly enthusiastic is unknown, as they have not been asked and, one suspects, they will not be asked - just told. AT Nov. 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Amazon Kindle is Really on its Way to the UK – More or Less Amazon has announced the availability of its Kindle eReader to customers outside the USA. It is not easily available, as these customers still have to purchase their Kinder from the Amazon US on-line store and pay a premium for the privilege. In addition, there are countries excluded from the new offering, such as Canada, China, South Korea and Singapore. Blogkindle.com has analysed the availability of the Kindle worldwide and its operating restrictions in each country. Kindle 2 World version will start shipping on Monday 19th October. The International version of the Kindle 2 is identical to the one that was released in February, apart from its use of the AT&T 3G network for book downloads and internet connections in the US (the Kinder used Sprint before) and roaming partner networks in over 100 non-US countries. UK customers will find that the actual cost of buying a Kindle is approximately $345, or $65 more than the list price, due to import duties and shipping. Amazon also charges an extra $1.99 every time a book is downloaded outside of the U.S. Blogkindle.com has generated the following information for the UK market:
The UK is an important market for Amazon and it cannot afford to provide second class service to its British customers for very long. The announcement appears to be an attempt to mitigate the damage being done to the Kinder market potential by its long period of unavailability outside the USA. More or less available is better than not available. More information: http://blogkindle.com AT Oct 2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Margaret Hodge is the new Minister for Culture, Creative Industries & Tourism
within the DCMS. Soon after her appointment, in an interview with the Sunday
Times, she said that local authorities should not cut library services as
part of the expected reduction in public spending. They should, instead,
concentrate on encouraging increased use. So, the underlying message appears
to be: central government cuts – ok, local government cuts – unacceptable.
The method by which this remarkable stratagem would be accomplished is
that of turning public libraries into quasi-commercial organisations. The new minister does not seem to have got a firm grip on her Culture portfolio yet and she also appears to have under-whelmed in the tourist part of her remit as well. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6851139.ece |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Every Library is a Local Library One possible disadvantage
is that local authorities with no interest in the literacy or culture
of their residents will find it easier to dismantle their
public library services. AT Oct 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ereaders are the new fangled, pocket-sized, electronic gadgets designed to allow owners to easily carry around up to 1000 books and read them wherever the user happens to be. They are usually sold with 100+ ebooks already in the memory, but only a few of these are likely to be what is really wanted by any one person. So, it is necessary to add to this collection. Publishing houses in the UK and US are increasingly offering ebook versions of books in the current lists and, for some new additions to their lists, they have even started offering the ebook versions before the printed versions. Additionally, a very large number out-of-copyright books have been available for download for some time, free of charge. Between these extremes is a long list of books which are out-of-print but not out-of-copyright. Most of the books on this list will never be reprinted, as the demand for them is too small to justify the cost. However, the cost of making them available for downloading is quite small. In the US, this new book supply opportunity has been seized upon by Google and the legal framework for it to become a reality is being put into place (Main2.htm#GBS). Wherever the US goes, the UK is not far behind, even if it is not always very happy with the scenery. So, the advent of the ereader has hugely increased the number of books available to the public in a convenient form and many of them cost nothing to acquire. Every day that passes produces more ebooks to reinforce this situation. So far, the sources of electronic books have excluded public libraries, although traditional book retailers are increasingly offering them for sale. The net result is that in a world of increasing book availability, the widespread public library policy of reducing book stocks is in danger of making them irrelevant for the majority of the population. Once public libraries are seen to no longer serve any useful purpose for the majority, they will be closed. The fact that this will seriously disadvantage the poorer sections of communities will have little influence on local authorities desperately short of money. It is unrealistic to expect the deeply conservative library services of the UK to follow market trends closely. However, there are signs that they are beginning to react and a mechanism for extending the book lending service to ebooks is starting to take shape. At present, ebooks published by Bloomsbury, Pearson Education, Random House, Rosetta Books, Wiley, Harlequin, Harper Collins, Taylor & Francis, and McGraw Hill Education are available from pioneering public libraries (Essex, Croydon & Dorset). Obviously, this list is heavily biased towards publishers of text books and non-fiction works. The reason for this is that academic libraries are well ahead of public libraries in adopting the new form of presentation. As more public libraries take up the new option, the balance will change. One of the advantages of the new loan mechanism is that the borrower does not have to go to a public library to borrow a book. Providing he/she has a computer or suitable ereader, e.g. Sony’s Reader, all that is necessary is to go on-line to the library service’s website and download what he/she wants. This is an enormous advantage for the house bound and the very busy among us i.e. for almost everyone. It is also a great advantage for the library service, as it extends its reach right into the homes of its borrowers and potential borrowers. Further, it removes the restricted opening hours tyranny to produce a very cheap 24/7 service to the public. Once a borrower has downloaded his/her selected books, he/she has the use of them for the period defined by the library service. At the end of that period, the downloaded book becomes unreadable and it should be deleted from the computer/ereader. If the borrower wishes to continue the loan, it is necessary to download the ebook again i.e. the loan has to be renewed, just like a printed book. There has to be at least one disadvantage to any innovation and this development is no exception. In this case, the downside is that the expertise of the library staff is not available via the computer or ereader. However, it is possible to provide some of this with on-line programs giving borrowers alternative titles/authors to those which are sought. The friendly chat is lost though. Further information: AT Sep 2009 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The future of reading: A public value project |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The
Arts Council has something it calls its Literature Team and this is
seeking to engage organisations and members of the public in a
debate about
the role and value of reading. This project is intended to be one
of the inputs to the development of a programme to promote reading.
This will be
aimed at “raising the profile of reading as a creative activity
and strengthening its position within national, regional and local
policy agendas
and the plans and activities of cultural agencies. It will also be
a vision, setting out shared aspirations for the future of reading
and
galvanising
a wide range of individuals and organisations, particularly libraries,
to help make that vision a reality.” AT July 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Meltdown
It is not news that the UK economy is in a bad state. The OECD predicts that the British gross domestic product will fall by 4.3% this year, producing a significant fall in government income, and there is not expected to be a return to economic buoyancy for some time. Thus, heavy cuts in government expenditure are forecast from 2011 to compensate for this fall and also to pay for the recent fiscal stimulus. The magnitude of the required cuts is subject to fierce debate and estimates range from 7.5% to 20%. These are average figures and there will be services which fare better and services which fare worse than the average. For instance, health can be expected to be less affected than culture. In fact, culture will probably be one of the most heavily cut areas. Public libraries are firmly in this sector, although it could be argued that they are also in the education area. Thus, it is inevitable that central government money allocated to public libraries will fall substantially in the coming years. However, this is not the only bad news for library services. Past experience suggests that central government will try to pass more than a pro rata funding cut onto local government in general and to London local authorities in particular. Thus, London’s Councils will be in desperate trouble and will cast around for any way of saving money. Again, history suggests that, in this situation, one of the first budgets to be cut will be the library budget. When budget cuts are demanded, the choices are: improve efficiency or cut services. Sadly, most Library Services will automatically opt for the latter, as it is the easy option for senior managers. The value of sales in Britain's £4bn book publishing industry fell 6.5 per cent in the first quarter of this year. People are earning less and becoming unemployed at an increasing rate. They simply cannot afford to buy books as before. Of course the poor have always had this problem and their local public library provided the answer. Sadly, falling book stocks in the UK’s libraries have limited the degree of help available from this source. Now, those stocks will undoubtedly have to stretch further, as the new poor also turn to the traditional provider. Thus, library services
will have to meet a greater demand on an already inadequate resource
and there is a grave danger of further mindless cuts to that resource.
Library users need to start preparing their defences to against further
reductions in library book stocks or worse - remember the Wirral
and Swindon (click to see Shirley Burnham's
desciption of the Swindon mess). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Google Books Investigation A long awaited
U.S. Department of Justice formal investigation has started into
possible antirust violations in the Google Book settlement with US
publishers and authors on digital publishing rights. Google is proposing to allow all public libraries in the US free access to all digitised books from one terminal. For more terminals, the libraries would have to pay. Whilst the Google Book situation is a little unclear at the moment in the USA, it is completely opaque elsewhere in the world. If it is allowed to go ahead, it will have enormous affects outside the USA. However, there seems to be no interest from other governments. AT July 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No not the
Tardis, but possibly a library link. Roy Clare, the head of the
MLA, has proposed a third tier of public libraries which will have
book stocks of about 1500 books. He specifically suggested that
the new type of library, christened “library links”,
could be housed in doctors’ surgeries or post offices (I
thought that post offices were being phased out), but he has obviously
not thought this through. A telephone box would hold approximately
1500 books and BT is not very keen on them any more. Therefore,
he could solve a problem for two organisations, local authorities
and BT, if the existing public libraries are replaced by telephone
box libraries. Of course, library users may find that this new
public service is a little limited, but when has that ever been
a valid consideration? Perhaps quite innocently, Roy Clare has wandered into the library closure minefield. There are just too many people around (both library users & staff) with bitter memories of past slight-of-hand exercises for this particular initiative to pass unchallenged. http://www.thebookseller.com/news/89615-clare-calls-for-mixed-economy-of-libraries.html AT July 09 Five Months Later: The BBC has reported that the village of Westbury-sub-Mendip in Somerset have bought a telephone box from BT and have turned it into a library containing approximately 150 books and CDs. It is open 24 hours per day. So, what it lacks in size, it makes up for in persistence. Actually, the villagers use the telephone box as a convenient way of swapping books and CDs. However, that is really what a public library does. The only difference is that the original purchase was made by an individual and not by a local authority. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DCMS Ministers
More information: http://www.culture.gov.uk/about_us/our_ministers/default.aspx/ AT June 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Scanning Delivers the Goods The scanning of documents and artefacts in libraries and museums around the world has been going on for a couple of years now and the results of this are beginning to appear on the internet. The big national libraries, such as the British Library and Library of Congress were among the first to start this process and we can now see what has been achieved in their websites ( www.bl.uk/onlinegallery , http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/browse/index.html ). The BL offering has some particularly interesting, world-class subjects e.g. the da Vinci notebooks (www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/leonardo/accessible/introduction.html ), Mozart’s composition books for 1784 – 1791 (www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/mozart/accessible/introduction.html ) and Jane Austen’s “History of the World” (www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/austen/accessible/introduction.html ). The huge libraries and museums of the developed world are not the only organisations digitising collections and Unesco has provided a website for these other, less well-known, establishments (www.wdl.org/en/ ). For instance, it is possible to view Christopher Columbus's diary for 1493, in which the explorer describes his discoveries, from the Center for the Study of the History of Mexico Carso ( www.wdl.org/en/item/2962 ). This is only the beginning. The central libraries and museums of the world have such large collections that it will take decades to scan all those items of general interest, let alone those of purely academic interest – the New York Public Library has scanned 30,000 items in 9 months, but has 50 million items to go. In the short term, the present economic chaos will probably slightly dampen the ongoing increase in the digitisation rate. However, the experience of the past two/three years and the lessons which have been learnt are now beginning to significantly improve the quality of the scanned images. Further, it has been discovered that it is possible to combine techniques from other fields to produce images of documents and artefacts which have previously been impossible to view by any means. The use of multi-wavelength scans, CAT scans and X-ray technology to read invisible images and brittle scrolls without unrolling them is now feasible. This would have made the reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls very much easier. However, there are very many scrolls in a similar or worse condition than them which now become candidates for serious investigation. A large range of new and forgotten knowledge is on the brink of becoming accessible. AT May 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| New
Powers for Local Government?
In a new report, the Communities and Local Government Select Committee of the House of Commons stated “that local authorities need both sufficient formal powers and more general autonomy to pursue a leading local leadership role”. The Committee recognises “the frustration that, regardless of their track record, local authorities remain subject to invasive central government scrutiny and interference”. and urges “the Government to take a more flexible view of decentralisation, and to deliver on its promises of earned autonomy”. Full report: AT May 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Library
Service Modernisation Review AT May 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Andy Burnham, Secretary of State at the DCMS, has removed the telescope from his blind eye and has seen that there is considerable, countrywide opposition to the proposed mass closure of (11) public libraries in the Wirral. The previous DCMS position of "not minded to intervene at this time" has been modified to: “They [public libraries] should never be an optional extra for local authorities." The Secretary of State has ordered a local inquiry into Wirral Council's plan and the Council has promised that the libraries will remain open during the inquiry. Laura Swaffield’s Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals blog commented: “It will open up quite a can of worms. The last time anyone even tried to do this intervention thingie was in 1991. One can almost (I said almost) sympathise with Andy for trying to dodge it” Perhaps it will open a can of worms. However, that is not what Andy
Burnham will want. A quiet burial would be his preference and he will
choose a Chairman of the inquiry who will be sympathetic to this viewpoint. AT April 09. Addendum Sue Charteris' report is due in June, and the Secretary of State's decision will follow shortly after. Reference: http://www.culture.gov.uk/reference_library/media_releases/6121.aspx |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The 2008 Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) scores for Local Authorities have been published by the Audit Commission. The CPA measures how well councils deliver services for local people and communities. The new report contains comparisons of council performances since the last set of results was published for 2007. Each score is on a scale from 1 to 4, where 1 is the lowest score and 4 is the highest. The relevant category for libraries is the Cultural one and the table below gives each London borough’s score for that. The change assessment given below covers all council services, but can be assumed to be a measure of the commitment to the improvement of cultural services as well as other services. Only one London borough has been assessed as not improving adequately. This is Haringey, where there are well known problems. In general, the lowest assessment made for any service is 2. The exception to this is for "children & young people’s services". In this very sensitive area, a more critical regime now seems to exist and some “1” assessments have been made. As is to be expected, Haringey appears in this list, but no other London borough. The inevitably low 2008 Haringey score highlights the overly rosy picture which the CPA usually gives of local government performance. The 2007 scores for this borough were 3 star overall, 3 for culture and improving well (see LondonCPAScores1.htm). There was no indication that things were about to fall apart in Haringey - rather like the assessment of Enron by its auditors.
AT Mar 09 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unison, the public sector trade union, has launched a campaign in support of public libraries or, more accurately, in support of public library jobs. The campaign, “defend the public library service” pointed out that there had been 60 public library closures in the UK during the last year and that more were planned. Like some library users, Unison disapproves of a shift towards computer services within public libraries and the fall in expenditure on books. Worryingly, it suggests that the use of volunteers is a cause of reducing services, rather than a method of maintaining and improving services. It would be interesting to find out if there was any concrete justification for such a allegation – beyond the long standing antipathy to a community helping itself. The demands put forward are not completely restricted to special pleading on behalf of library staff, but do have some relevance to users. “Taking stock: the future of our public library service” is a 59 page Unison document which has recently been published and contains a lot of useful data on national trends in library service provision. This data has been abstracted from CIPFA publications, so can be considered to be reliable. However, care must be exercised in using it to make comparisons with individual local authority performances. A better method of carrying out comparisons is to compare the individual authority with its peer group e.g. an inner London authority should be compared with all 12 inner London authorities. More information: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bloomsbury, the publisher, is to offer free, non-commercial, downloading of books from the internet. Initially the books will be in the social sciences and humanities areas. It intends to build thematic lists on current global issues and expects to have approximately fifty new titles available by the end of 2009. Bloomsbury is assembling a high-power advisory board for its new venture, drawing in academics from the British Library, MIT, Open University, Max Plank Institute, LSE and Johns Hopkins University. The works will also be sold as books, using the latest short-run technologies or Print on Demand. The Print on Demand method of distribution is ideal for academic publishing, as it avoids the high set-up costs of normal book printing. Academic authors
are not primarily interested in earning money from their books. They
are more interested in gaining greater peer recognition for themselves
and for the ideas which they espouse. As their works will not be
subject to the normal long production process, the authors will benefit
from having them distributed very quickly. Also, the books will be
capable of being searched more easily and need never go out of print. Further information: http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/ |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Online Library (described here in Sep 2006), Europeana, was launched on 20th November and proved immensely popular. It received 10 million hits an hour and promptly crashed. The site was relaunched in early January 2009. More than 1,000 cultural organisations, including The British Library in London, are making contributions to the library. National libraries from all over Europe have contributed printed and manuscript material, including digitised copies of rare and valuable books, such as the Gutenberg Bible. Also among these institutions are the Louvre in Paris and the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam which have supplied digitised paintings and other objects from their collections. The intention of Europeana is to provide digital access to information on Europe's history; in the form of image, text, sound or film; which is held in libraries, archives or museums. The Institut National de l'Audiovisuel has supplied 80,000 broadcast recordings from the 20th Century, in addition to early footage shot on the battlefields of France in 1914, and The British Library has provided access to its vast collection of sound recordings, covering British accents and dialects, British wildlife, and early ethnographic wax cylinder recordings. Internet users will be able to access more than two million books, maps, recordings, photographs, archive documents, paintings and films, without charge.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mobile phone conversations, teenage chatter & giggling, the hiss of espresso machines, the rattle of coffee cups and a liberal scattering of food waste - these are all desirable attributes of a modern public library. At least they are according to national politicians. It is a well known phenomenon that, as politicians claw their way up their particular greasy pole, they become increasingly divorced from reality. Their contact with ordinary life is restricted to a very few hours per week and they begin to live more and more in a fantasy land containing only other Westminster-village virtual people. Of course, part of the fantasy is that they all believe that they are in close touch with their electors. In these circumstances, it is not surprising that the nonsense of noisy libraries should be given such wholehearted support by some of these arbiters of what is good for us. It is the nature
of adversarial politics that everything is viewed as a black & white
issue. In real life, most issues are actually just shades of grey
and the noisy library is one of those. If the argument was about
what should go on in large, modern libraries only, there would be
some sense in the suggestions. These buildings usually have some
spare space that can be used for coffee shops etc and their structures
can often be fairly easily modified. Even in this circumstance, care
must be taken in applying these transiently fashionable concepts,
to avoid more people being driven away from libraries than are attracted
to them. A few simple rules should be used to ensure that it is the
library user that is really the beneficiary, rather than the victim,
of any changes: The vast majority of Britain’s public libraries are more friendly institutions than the large monuments to civic pride that politicians and librarians love. However, they are also small and elderly – suitable for their original purpose of housing a largish collection of books, but little else. The addition of a few public-access computers into each of them necessitated considerable modification to their layouts and often resulted in the loss of bookshelves. Perhaps the politicians believe that the loss of bookshelves is a bonus and should be encouraged. Surely they cannot be that out-of-touch, or can they? The main supporters of the noisy library idea in the Palace of Westminster are Andy Burnham MP and Lyn Brown MP (ref: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-libraries-should-be-about-books-955421.html , http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/04/lyn-brown-libraries-mla ) AT Nov 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public
Library Volunteers in London
The subject of Library Volunteers is becoming a popular topic of conversation among members of London’s Public Library Friends groups and the new issue of CIPFA Library Statistics has some data to add substance to those conversations (see below). Just over half of London boroughs have public library volunteer schemes,but there appears to be enormous variability in how the boroughs use those volunteers. Some have very few volunteers and use each of them intensively. Others operate in exactly the opposite manner. Inner London boroughs (42% have volunteer schemes) are less enthusiastic about volunteers than their Outer London counterparts (60% have volunteer schemes). Some boroughs (3 of the total of 17 boroughs with volunteer schemes) are so off-hand about this form of help that they are unable to say how many hours of work are freely given by their volunteers per year. However, on average, London’s public library volunteers give only one hour per week to their library service (allowing for holidays). For the widespread, major improvements in service which advocates of volunteer programmes suggest is possible, there has to be a great increase in this commitment. Relying on a large number of people coming forward is unrealistic. As with all published statistics, the CIFA figures are historic and tell us nothing about what has happened since the end March 2007. Because of this, the picture painted of the Hackney library service volunteer activities is quite average – an average number of volunteers occasionally helping out in the borough’s archives. This picture changed radically in March 2007, when Hackney reopened a library which had been closed since 1996. This small library is completely volunteer run and has proved to be a notable success. A LLL delegation visited Woodberry Down Community Library and has come away impressed. A report on the visit can be viewed at: VolunteerLibrary.htm
AT Aug 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HBOS plc compiled
a very useful digest of population statistics just before it fell
victim to the Credit Crunch. The statistics were taken from the Office
for National Statistics (ONS) estimates and show that the four local
authorities with the biggest percentage population growth between
1997 and 2007 are all in Inner London. These are the City of London
(40%), followed by Westminster (29%), Kensington and Chelsea (26%)
and Camden (25%). Population growth in the rest of Greater London
is not far behind these leaders. For comparison, the country, as
a whole, only increased its population by 5% in the same period. AT Oct 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brave New World No, not the Aldous Huxley book but a study of the possible affects of digitisation on the publishing industry. This “Brave New World” is a 120 page report containing an in-depth analysis of the changes that are beginning to be forced upon the book trade. The sober assessments of the study are in marked contrast to the hysterical reactions of the music industry when faced with the same problems and they deserve wide consideration. The report can be freely downloaded (see below). More information: http://www.booksellers.org.uk/documents/digitisation_of_content/Brave%20New%20World.pdf AT April 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Fact
not Fiction 2008 - Facts and Figures about London’s public
libraries
The MLA, London has collected a wide range of statistics about London’s public libraries in a new document. It is well worth reading and is available for download from: http://www.mlalondon.org.uk/uploads/documents/Fact_not_Fiction_2008_v6.pdf AT July 08 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Return
of the Public Library Philanthropist?
The beginning of the public library movement was marked by the support of public-spirited individuals. Visionaries, such as Andrew Carnegie & John Passmore Edwards, were willing to use their energy and wealth for the betterment of less fortunate citizens. Now, in the UK, these nineteenth century philanthropists are only dimly remembered and are considered to have little relevance to present day circumstances. However, under the influence of tightening local government finances, those circumstances have been changing for some time. For over twenty years there has been a slow drift away from a firm official belief in the importance of providing the poor with free access to a wide range of literature. That belief is now quite conditional - hemmed-in by many provisos. The nature of the link between education and the public libraries has been almost forgotten. The library safety net has been allowed to decay and many more people are now falling through it. In contrast to the UK, the USA has never lost a strong voluntary aspect to the delivery of public library services. Thus, it is probably not very surprising to Americans that a financier, Stephen A. Schwarzman, should donate $100m to the New York Library Service. Indeed, one member of the NY Public Library’s board thought that he should have given more – an astounding reaction when viewed from this side of the Atlantic. Are there no UK billionaires interested in improving the literacy of their fellow citizens? There is little doubt that they will soon be sorely needed. Reference: AT Mar 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HarperCollins, the publisher, has begun to make available selected books on its website. The free electronic editions are complete books, not extracts. Since November, HarperCollins has provided electronic extracts from about 15 of its current books and has obviously found that the initiative has paid-off in higher sales. The HarperCollins move is a shrewd one. Although the entire contents of a book may be freely available via the internet, the rather clumsy nature of current computers, PDAs and e-book readers makes reading the complete electronic book an uncomfortable experience. Browsing the books, as in a bookshop, is another matter. The release of the Apple MacBook Air does not really alter the basic premise. Meanwhile:
What was predicted in the LLL technology webpage a long time ago is beginning to happen. The digitisation process is building momentum and will result in fundamental changes to the way public libraries operate. More Information: AT Feb.08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The 2007 Comprehensive
Performance Assessments (CPA) were published on 7th February. These
provide a measure of the quality of services provided by English
councils to their local communities and their commitment to improving
these services in the future. More information: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First Consultation on the Amendments to Copyright Exceptions Recommended by Gowers On 8 January 2008 Lord Triesman, Minister for Intellectual Property, launched the first of a two part consultation on the recommendations made by the Dec. 2006 Gowers report on Intellectual Property. Lord Triesman pointed out that it was necessary to ensure the IP protection systems are “robust enough - and sensible enough - not only to protect the rights holder from illegal activity, but to ensure that the consumer and user can make sensible use of protected works and also respect the rights attached to them.” The consultation
will cover recommendations for changes to copyright law that will: AT Jan 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Busy
Libraries
Busiest London Libraries Based on Issues/Year
More information: http://www.cipfa.org.uk/press/press_show.cfm?news_id=32026 AT Jan.08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Provisional
Local Government Finance Settlements for 2008/09 to 2010/11. On 6 December 2007, the government announced details of the provisional local government finance settlements for the three years 2008/09 to 2010/11. London Local Authorities are extremely disappointed with the settlements which they believe completely fail to recognise the extent of service and financial pressures on local authorities in the capital. The London Councils will receive an increase in grant well below the average for England in each of the three years. As London has been repeatedly penalised in this way over the past decade, services to residents have been under pressure for some time and this has resulted in library closure programs being proposed in Brent, Southwalk and Waltham Forest. The public library service is one of the few services in which central government allows local discretion to exist. Thus, it is easier to cut library services than almost any other locally provided service to the public. It is the Local Authority, of course, which receives the criticism of library users, whilst central government is able to claim that it is in favour of public libraries. Perhaps it is in favour of public libraries outside London, it is certainly not within London, as its policies make it inevitable that they be cut back for the 7 million Londoners. Oxford University’s Department of Social Policy & Social Work recently published “The English Indices of Deprivation 2007”. In this, London was ranked as the second most deprived region in England in absolute terms (after the North West) and the third most deprived region in % terms. London was also ranked bottom in a measure of the least deprived areas i.e. prosperity was spread more widely in all other regions. If these facts are combined with the knowledge that local taxation is not based on the ability to pay, the conclusion can be drawn that the poor of London are being forced to subsidize the rich in other regions. More information: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/doc.asp?doc=21594 AT Jan 08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Public
Library Materials Fund and Budget Survey for 2006-08
Loughborough University’s
LISU research unit has published its Public Library Materials Fund
and Budget Survey for LISU found that total library expenditure for the UK fell by 0.3% in 2006/07, with a further fall predicted for 2007/08. Although the reported fall was small, LISU suggested that it was particularly disappointing as, at this time last year, libraries were predicting an increase of 3% in spending for 2006/07. Expenditure on materials fell by 1.5% in 2006/07 and a further fall of 2.3% is expected for 2007/08. Within this overall fall, spending on books continues to decline slowly and, although spending on audio-visual materials (including electronic resources) rose slightly in 2006/07, it is predicted to fall again in 2007/08, by 1.4%. Staff expenditure represents approximately 60% of overall public library expenditure, so small percentage changes in this figure has a far larger affect than other elements in a public library service’s budget. LISU reported that staff numbers have fallen for the first time for many years, and are predicted to fall further in 2007/08. The most expensive staff members are the professionally qualified ones and much of the decrease has been in this area. Free download from: http://www.nielsenbookdata.co.uk/controller.php?page=91 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The
Literacy Disaster The score for England in 2006 was 539 and was 527 for Scotland. The highest 2006 score was 565 for the Russian Federation. The average score was 500 and the lowest score was 302 (South Africa). The 2006 study found that children’s performance in England and Scotland had fallen in the previous five years. The reading performance of children in England had fallen from third to 19th in the world and Scotland also fell, from 14th to 26th. Top scoring Russia only managed to equal the Scottish score in 2001. In England, the Department for Children, Schools and Families commissioned a separate report on the findings, from the independent National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER). This concluded that lower achievement among the better readers had contributed most to England's overall fall, rather than the small increase in the proportion of weaker readers. Perhaps the most worrying comment from the NFER is that there had been significant increases in the proportion of English 10-year-olds with the "least positive" attitudes to reading and who said they very seldom read stories or novels outside school. The fact that both England and Scotland had a 2006 score somewhat above the average value of 500 has been suggested as a mitigating circumstance. However, if allowance is made for the extra year of schooling provided in these countries, this appears very much like grasping at straws. It is obvious that the rate of children's progress in most other countries is greater than England or Scotland. Ed Balls, Children, Schools and Families Secretary, suggested that the same story was emerging from the government's consultation on its Children's Plan as from the Pirls study. He said "I'm calling today for everyone's help to get our children reading more and to kick-start a new national debate about the value of reading." As the public libraries have traditionally provided the UK’s educational safety net, Mr Balls would do well to ensure that Library Services are provided with sufficient funds to take up his challenge. More information: http://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/pdfs/downloadable/PIRLSreport.pdf |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Contact LLL at | email
us : mail @librarylondon.org |
Saving
Your Library Lewisham
Council tried to close 3 of its public libraries a little while
ago. You can read about the methods used to successfully fight
against this at |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
31
Milton Park London N6 5QB |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
020 7607 2665 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chair: Tim Coates |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See our Key Facts for each Borough's Library Service, with links to each Borough website Disclaimer:disclaim.htm |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
UNIVERSITY
TO VILLAGE HALL On 18th July 05, Libri published a report entitled “From University to Village Hall” This hard-hitting document can be found at: http://www.libri.org.uk (pdf only) The LLL comments on the report can be found in webpage: Uni_to_V_Hall.htm The MLA review of the report can be found at: http://www.managinginformation.com/news/content_show_full.php?id=4109 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Library Campaign
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
