Help navigation
- Wednesday, 16 May
Log in to TheBookseller.com
Blogs
Book to the future
25.10.11 | John Pateman
The Future Libraries Programme was intended to identify ways forward for the public library service within a context of deep public sector cuts. The hope was that 10 pilot schemes could share their learning and create the necessary savings nationwide. The scheme, badged as "support" to libraries by culture minister Ed Vaizey, suffered from the start from an ambitious timescale and limited financial resources. Four options for helping to ensure the survival of libraries in the 21st century were put forward.
1. Running libraries in partnership with the private sector, charities and other councils. While partnership working is generally a good idea, it is difficult to see how this can generate significant savings—particularly as over 80% of costs are spent on salaries.
2. Extending the reach and range of library services by integrating them with other community facilities like churches, shops and village halls, and providing public services such as health centres and the police surgeries in existing libraries. This is already common practice in many library authorities, and can help to defray and share costs—particularly those related to fixed assets such as buildings. But it still does not tackle the central issue of staffing costs.
3. Sharing services like back offices and mobile libraries with neighbouring local authorities to make stretched resources go further. The sharing of bibliographical and administrative functions and the merger of mobile routes can make some inroads into staffing costs, but these are only at the margins of the total salaries and wages bill.
4. Giving library users the ability to play a more active role in running library services themselves. This is the only real option for cutting staff costs and for achieving the level of savings required by local government over the coming years. But is it a price worth paying?
There is no doubt that the use of volunteers can add great value to a public library service. For example, they can make the workforce more diverse, bring in new skills and build a bridge between the library and its local community. But there are challenges around how to recruit, retain, train and manage volunteers, and Unison is implacably opposed to them being used as substitutes for paid workers. The trade union view is that volunteers should work alongside, but not replace, regular library staff. There is also the danger that a volunteer-run library could become a cosy private club, admitting those who it likes the look of and excluding the rest.
The Future Libraries report has been dismissed by many commentators as being both simplistic and limited, but I have a more sympathetic view. I know how difficult it is to try to square the demands of politicians, service users, local communities and staff. It is very hard—if not impossible—to please all of these stakeholders and build a library service that is fit for purpose, affordable and sustainable.
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.thebookseller.com/trackback/65547
Biography
Author's Blogs
Bloggers »
One of our favourite London based...
Salary commensurate with skills & experience
©2012 Bookseller Media Ltd rights reserved.
Comments: Scroll down for the latest comments and to have your say
By posting on this website you agree to the Bookseller comments policy. Comments go direct to live please be relevant, brief and definitely not abusive. Report any "unsuitable comments by clicking the links"
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first | Readers' most recommended
In anything there are a variety of stakeholders whose interests have to be accommodated - in business, in politics, in public service. There is a narrative that links them. It is for leaders to describe that narrative- and of no use to say - as you do here- that it is impossible. It just has to be done
So - if a business has to satisfy its customers, its shareholders and its employees, the role of those responsible is to reconcile how this can be. One could the customers must be satisfied to get income; the employees must be motivated to give service and the net of income to costs has to satisfy shareholders
Thus in the public library service - there has to be priority to satisfying the users and communities. The interest of staff has to be secondary to those and the political interest is achieved if management can make this work. Of course there is a way to do it. It is pathetic to see senior managers repeat that their work is impossible - it just isn't.
I do not think that John is saying it is impossible. He is saying that it may be impossible to please everyone. So he infers it may be possible but not everybody will be pleased with the solution.
In any case of a shifting society and economy very few people are pleased by the solution but a solution does exist.
Mr. Pateman should get down to Lewisham and see what is on offer. We used to have 12 libraries and therefore residents had access to the same service, not every day of the week, but enough. There are now 7 hub libraries run by Lewisham library service then there are the community libraries, with not enough stock or volunteers. The latter mean that there is now a two tier system which cannot give the people of Lewisham the same service.
Would someone somewhere explain why it is OK to offer a much reduced service for the same tax?
Where do fit for purpose, affordable (now we are getting murky) and sustainable work here? The officers of the council warned Mayor and Cabinet 3 of these community libraries might not be sustainable, but they went ahead anyway.
Such tinkering and meddling in what worked is a disgrace and a cheat.
As advised before, get on down to West Greenwich library too. See how a small library, in an area with deprivation and not open 24/7 really works!
Patricia Richardson
As i explained on another website, and Ms or Mrs Richardson failed to respond, we are NOT paying the same level of tax. We are paying less tax in terms of the service received. There has been a council tax freeze for a number of years, and one has been imposed by government for next year. This means the monetary value of council tax remains the same, but in real terms it brings in less for the council because inflation is driving up the costs of providing libraries all the time. So the council has less money to play with. This is at the same time as councils like Lewisham are having their other income stream, central government grants, cut by as much as 30%. In this situation it is INEVITABLE that there will be less library services (and probably less libraries) than there were before. In fact, it would be a miracle if this were not the case.
What Lewisham have done is to find a way to minmimise this inevitable cut. I use Crofton Park which is one of the community librraries and while it's not the same as it was it's still pretty good and is certainly better than no library at all. And, even if it (God forbid) did shut I can jump on the P4 bus and be at the central library in Lewisham Town Centre in less than ten minutes.
The scorched earth picture painted by those with the loudest voices in Lewisham isn't actually the reality. But, as ever, it's the loudest voices who get listened to.
I am glad Lewisham have done what they have done. They deserve praise and not condemnation.
For the record, I am just a Lewisham resident who has never worked, does not work, and does not want to work for the council.
Post new comment