Councils in danger of failing statutory duty on libraries, MPs warn

Some local authorities are in danger of failing in their statutory duty to provide a “comprehensive and efficient” library service, MPs have warned.

In a report, the Culture, Media and Sport committee claimed that some councils – because of cost saving pressures – had drawn up plans “without taking proper account of local needs for library services and the variety of options available to provide them”.

The committee suggested that other local authorities had managed to find innovative and cost-effective ways of continuing to supply the service.

John Whittingdale MP, Chair of the Committee, also warned that councils appeared to be “somewhat in the dark about what is expected of them and are making decisions which are being overturned by judicial review.”

In the last year, a number of local authorities have faced legal action over their plans for library services. Councils to have lost cases include Surrey, Somerset and Gloucestershire. The London Borough of Brent and Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council meanwhile successfully defended their plans.

But Whittingdale said: “This is an expensive, undemocratic and generally unsatisfactory way of making policy. Councils need to be given the support and advice they need to consult locally and develop a service that meets the needs of the local community and complies with their obligations.”
 
The report said:

• Re-introducing the Public Library Service Standards was not an effective response to this problem, “as these standards concentrated simply on what was measurable rather than giving a rounded indication of the quality of service or its responsiveness to changing customer needs and demands”.
• The Government, with the help of the Arts Council and the Local Government Association, should spread guidance encouraging a broader and more permissive interpretation of the ‘comprehensive and efficient’ requirement.
• Councils appeared to be unaware of the available guidance on this central statutory requirement, and lacked sufficient information about the requirements emerging from multiple judicial reviews of library service provision.
• Providing a comprehensive and efficient service did not necessarily require keeping open all existing library branches – “particularly if retaining buildings results in a token presence with shorter opening hours and fewer professional staff to lead key tasks such as supporting reading skills among children”.
• Libraries were often hubs of local communities. “While the provision of books and electronic access to information remain core tasks, libraries are often used for a far wider range of activities that benefit communities. Co-ordination with other service providers—especially in the areas of education and health—provides opportunities to enhance this.”
• In the Minister’s view, the wholesale transfer of library branches to volunteer groups was unlikely to meet the statutory criterion of providing a ‘comprehensive and efficient’ library service. But the committee said volunteer-run libraries can be "valuable additions to the service”.
• Councils which have transferred the running of libraries to community volunteers “must continue to give them the necessary support to maintain the service, otherwise they may be viewed as ‘closures by stealth’."
• There was scope for far more co-ordination and co-operation between authorities in providing library services.

The CMS committee called for a new approach to use of the Secretary of State’s existing powers, without requiring a change of legislation. This would involve "a modern approach to the supervisory duty that would emphasise developing the service, promoting best practice and supporting the service through intervention at a national level in areas where there are potential efficiencies of scale".

Whittingdale said: “The Minister has committed to producing a report on the cumulative effect of the cuts in local authority provision by the end of 2014. Enthusiasm over the scope for volunteers and for new models of provision is fine, but given the importance of library services a systematic look at the impact of funding cuts and re-organisation is needed.”

Responding to the report, Cllr Flick Rea, Chair of the Local Government Association’s Culture, Tourism and Sport Board, insisted that local authorities were working extremely hard to preserve library services in the face of cuts to council funding.

She said: “An impressive level of innovation and commitment has shielded libraries from the worst of the fall out but it is vital government recognises that councils can’t work miracles. Any further cuts will have a significant impact on services.”

Cllr Rea added: “It is pleasing the committee has not taken a narrow, bricks and mortar view of library services. A library in the 21st Century can be a whole range of things, from a small e-book borrowing point in a shop to part of a large cultural hub.”

The LGA has previously called on the Government to reform Britain’s library laws, which it described as “archaic” and “outdated”.

The Association argued in February this year that as long as local authorities were bound by the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964, which states that the principal function of a library is the borrowing of books, they would “forever be hamstrung” in their efforts to modernise services.

Philip Hoult