« Synchronised Suicide | Main | Ed Vaizey »
July 12, 2008
The MLA
This blog has consistently criticised the MLA for the following reasons
- Their role is to provide English national leadership in the fields of Museums, Libraries and Archives. Of these the largest, by a long way, is the area of public libraries. Public libraries attract more state funding, employ more staff, have more visitors and public dealings than Museums and Archives combined, by a long long way.
- Since its start in 2000 the MLA has never attempted to understand what the public needs from its public libraries. It has never even tried to make an educated assumption about what these needs might be in language that the public would recognise. Nor has it at any time attempted to analyse in any detail at all whether libraries at present satisfy the requirements the public have. It has never analysed the data which is available nor sought to find data could provide the basic information needed to do this work
- It's use of data has been defensive and selective as has its response to criticism by the public, officials and the press.
- Instead it has, on the other hand, made an endless stream of statements and launched 'initiatives' about what it believes that libraries ought to do. These have been presented in the context of a variety of other Government programmes. For example: libraries have a part to play in the pursuit of social inclusion, improved learning, helping employment, in all these cases the statements have been made without any serious and meaningful analysis about how a public library could genuinely, as a library, assist in tackling the same problems the Government was approaching. Instead its claims of the role of libraries have been naive, trivial and therefore unproductive. The ideas and schemes of the MLA have been devoted to turning libraries into places which are not libraries- community centres, rental stores and even venues for rock concerts. A library is a library- it already plays many of the roles that help improve society-- but only when it is a good library. It is the collection of literature and other material and the availability of them in congenial practical surroundgins that makes a library able to play a social role. That is that simple and obvious historic deduction that has never been grasped by the current generation of library managers. For thousands of years all regimes throughout the world have understood that, only for a current clutch of professional experts to miss the point. The latest claim of the role of public libraries as a participant in the cultural aura of the Olympics is the most laughable of all these intellectually lazy endeavours.
- Public libraries in England are operated by local councils as part of local government. The leadership that is needed is of help to councillors, who by the nature of local politics, frequently change roles and change places. They need help. But the MLA has never attempted to provide this help in a humble and purposeful way. It has never recruited the kinds of support and experience that those councillors will need. It has never attempted to understand the practical issues which face a councillor in the conduct of his or her responsibilities. In all these years, rarely have councillors been part of the MLA's community in the detailed and supportive manner which is essential.
- It has failed to realise that the body of librarians - CILIP- has a different core interest to that of the public. CILIP is a body concerned about the wellbeing and status of its members. The public wants well stocked, open, attractive public libraries. These two objects are not the same and cause a conflict of spending priorities, which councils have to resolve. The consequence of such analysis would have made clear that the MLA's role needed to be dissasociated from and showing leadership to, CILIP as well. Too often MLA has appeared to be the same thing as both CILIP and the Society of Chief Librarians when frequently their role should have been to stand well apart from them
- MLA has wasted public money on a list of failed initiatives and projects in a manner which is shameful if not criminal
We are now a year into what was to have been a new regime. Roy Clare took up his post before our current Prime Minister took up his. There is no sign whatsoever that the new Chief Executive nor the new board have any grasp of the problems nor the expertise, energy or powers of analysis that the public library service so desparately needs
The public library service is not generally in need of funds or of public affection- they already abound. Its continuing and abject failure to be useful, which is to be seen on almost any visit to any public library, and its hastening demise, are as result of the failure of those who operate it. Plain and simple.
The MLA is in effect a 'sponsored' and directed department of the Government's Ministry called the Department of Culture Media and Sport. In 2005 the Culture Select Committee on Public Libraries called among many other recommendations for the DCMS 'to raise its game over public libraries.'
When the Culture Select Committee reconvenes as surely it will, it will, one hopes, be gravely disappointed to find what little attention was paid to all those recommendations it made-- not least the hope that the DCMS and MLA would be more effective, They have not been and this blog is certainly not convinced that they ever will be.
There is a need for a national body for public libraries-- but what matters is who operates it, what experience they have and what they do. At the present time the MLA does not have the right people to look after public libraries, nor does the DCMS. They don't have the right agenda and they don't have the experience to do the job.
It is time we stopped messing about - for the sake of the public
Posted by Perkins at July 12, 2008 10:02 AM
Comments
I do not know about other parts of the country, but here in Hove and Brighton there is a possibility for further deliberations, in advance, about plans and "initiatives" for the library system.
The Hove and Brighton Council's committee system - which was so useful during the long campaign to save Hove Library - has been taken away by the Government with the Local Government Act but there is the Scrutiny set-up. Here, this has been configured to scrutinise decisions before they are finally taken. (Elsewhere it might be afterwards.)
Either way, residents and concerned councillors should make use of the Scrutiny system - much vaunted by Hazel Blears for "empowerment" and all that jazz. It could provide a chance to prevent some of the bookless, "one-stop shop" horrors with which the library service has to contend across the country.
Posted by: Christopher Hawtree at July 14, 2008 10:36 PM