The Good Library Blog

Tim

We don't expect much from the MLA and you may have dragged this comment out of them. But nonetheless is it not a day for at least minor rejoicing beacause for the first time in their somewhat miserable history they are actually saying - gosh we have a problem here?

Maybe they even have a strategy - no grow up Phil!

Could you elicit a further response - how many library services will face big time budget reductions next year?

Or am I just hopelessly romantic even at my advanced age?

Phil

Phil

Firstly, the appraisal of property was one of the recommendations of the Select Committee last year, which the MLA agreed to undertake. But,yes, I think you are right, there is a moment of celebration because they have conceded there is a problem, and I suspect the problem will catch the headlines.

Parliament also asked them to identify a strategy for putting the buildings right and saying where the money would come from. They haven't done that, so far as I can see.

On your second point, they just won't know which councils will present budget problems. They have no access to that information.

That, in turn, makes a really important point which is that the MLA keeps posing as if it were somehow responsible for the public library service. Of course they aren't- local councils are responsible and the only useful role the MLA could play would be to try and help local councils do their job. While they posture as being in charge, I believe they confuse people.

But they WILL say there isn`t enough money and people will believe them because as we all know building work costs a lot more than new books. So there will be a cry of 'We would certainly repair all these buildings if only.....'

The MLA report on library buildings in England makes grim reading, and I am sure that situation in the rest of the UK is no better: but you’re quite right – there is money in library budgets which could be used for improvements.

A glance at Appendix 1 of your Libri report Who’s in charge ? gives a clue about where too much library funding goes. In Hampshire, apparently at least10% of the staff appear to have managerial or administrative functions only.

Anyone with any experience of public libraries knows that such top-heavy management structures are the rule, rather than the exception.
We know such hierarchies are expensive, but are they efficient? Given that UK library managers have presided over a catastrophic decline in book funds (the source of their core service) to a mere 8.8% of total budget and a dramatic fall in use levels, they are certainly not effective.

But there are libraries in the UK where things are done very differently. Cardiff has a population of more than 330,000, with 20 libraries, and it has had no post of ‘Chief Librarian’ since 2001. The service is run by a team of 5 senior librarians, led by a Library Development Manager.
All, except the Development Manager, have other responsibilities as well - stock, children’s services, etc - and their total salaries are less than £145k a year, from a library budget of nearly £5 million.

Since 2001, Cardiff’s stock budget has risen, although from a very low base, by nearly 300% (to more than 20% of total budget) and there has been a successful building programme, in which more than 25% of the city’s libraries have been completely refurbished or replaced. The service has one of the highest satisfaction rates in the UK for requests for specific titles.

Against the national trend, issues and use levels are rising, slowly but steadily.

There are doubtless many aspects of the service that could be improved – there is a desperate need for more frontline posts, and longer opening hours, with more promotion of the service to non-users, for instance – but it’s very doubtful whether the presence of a ‘Chief’ would make any difference at all to achieving these.

But until the local councillors responsible for running libraries have to account for the costs of their management hierarchies, these funds will remain under-used.