There is no local controversy which cannot be worsened by central government intervention.
Not many political parties say much about libraries in their manifestos. And they don’t tend to get raised as an issue on the doorstep – potholes, litter, crime and the level of council tax are much more popular topics.
Nor do canvassers hear a great deal about trees or the maintenance of municipal flower beds. But there are ex-councillors who will forever warn of the political dangers of cutting down trees, uprooting flowerbeds or closing a library.
In some ways libraries are like the local church. Most of us would not actually want to go inside (too quiet and serious) but would worry if it were turned into a bingo hall. Petitions will be signed (especially by those who do not use the library and now wish they had). Public meetings will be held and ultimately ministers will be contacted.
The Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 is itself a museum piece. It fusses about the location of Monmouthshire, then in pre-devolution limbo between England and Wales.
It requires libraries to maintain adequate (a term it does not define) stocks of books and other printed matter, and pictures, gramophone records, films and other materials. So it does recognise that we have moved on from the codex – but is inevitably not so hot on the internet or DVDs.
It also starts with giving a duty (no less) to the Secretary of State to ‘superintend, and promote the improvement of, the public library service provided by local authorities in England and Wales, and to secure the proper discharge by local authorities of the functions in relation to libraries conferred on them as library authorities by or under this Act.’.
Local authorities are also given a duty: ‘to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all persons desiring to make use thereof’.
There is little else other than an astonishing section which creates a National Advisory Council comprising in essence only qualified librarians.
As a piece of unenlightened legislation it takes some beating: centralism takes precedence over localism, and the expert over the wishes of the public, who are given no role whatever in the running of libraries except to elect councillors to local authorities which can then be ‘superinteded’ by someone in Whitehall who can know nothing of local circumstances.
It is this Act which the Government has wheeled out against the Wirral as it commenced its review of its library and leisure services. It is this Act which has persuaded ministers that they can define ‘comprehensive and efficient’ in whatever ways suits their whim.
The Charteris report into the Wirral published this week is a classic case of central government interference of dubious legality – an expert who has been brought in to substitute her prejudices (unchallengeable at the ballot box) for those of elected councillors who were taking reasoned and reasonable political risks for which they knew they were accountable.
(additional links added 1st Dec).
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
GUEST POST Forget your two-horse race: Increasingly it's a cavalry charge
Migration: another shooting in the foot
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Pure heart
Tiny Steps from Starmer but at least they are in the right direction!
Caron Lindsay
Greg Hyde
Big Tall Tim
Anton McNulty-Howard
Suzanne Fletcher
8 Comments
I can tell that you feel strongly about something, but have no idea what it is, beyond the fact that it has got something to do with libraries in Wirral.
good article
……………………..
Um, it would be nice to have some background on this issue….
This seems to be about a report commissioned in April due to lead to decisions in June/July which is just emerging from the works after about three times the planned delay. Par for promptness of Whitehall interventions to second-guess local authorities.
The powers of Ministers to second guess local authorites in specific fields are too many, too variable, too arbitrary, too accidental, too unaccountable, and too ill-defined. They were usually inserted in legisaltion at the behest of specific interests. They are used on the initiative of very varied parties who for one reason or another are unhappy with the policies or performane of the local authority; parties who usaully do not wish to contest the isssue politically in the locality.
Until the tangle of these powers can be sorted out properly, an interim measure could be to make any decision taken by a Minister using these powers subject to local referendum if the local authority objects to the decision. A suitable Private Member’s Bill?
(Disclaimer: I like what I have seen of the Wirral, I love libraries; and know even less about this case than the Minister.)
This may be controversial, but I cannot see any justification for spending public money on purchasing DVDs, CDs, paperback books and best selling hardbacks. Take all those out and you don’t have the same library service as exists today. I’m all for reference libraries and places where people can study peacefully and get access to the materials they require, but for everyone else there is iTunes (or Limewire), abebooks, charity shops, or even secondhand bookshops (yes, I do run a secondhand bookshop!)
Has somebody cut this article? It seems to have a few paragraphs missing.
I don’t think we do need more detail – a democratically elected local authority has taken a decision. We believe in localism. Therefore we should oppose central govt intervention, even tho’ we might campaign to reverse the decision locally.
Chris the ruling Labour/Lib Dem administration failed to make an assessment of local needs, and this is the primary reason why they were in breach of their statutory duties. Wirral Borough Council’s (WBC) Strategic Asset Review (SAR) was concerned primarily with saving money, it took the decision to close 11 libraries without a fully workable plan or a review of its library services. As Sue Chateris points out it, it was an indication of intent, rather than a fully worked out plan, and unfortunately they got it wrong. The decision by the Labour/Lib Dem administration to face up to the difficult financial situation is to be applauded, many of the councils assets, buildings and infrastructure are in dire need of modernisation and improvement, for the next financial year the situation will remain balanced, but between 2011-2014 WBC will need to find £65 million deficit in its budget, it is then that the people of Wirral will pay for the past financial mistakes.