|
|
 |
| |
Library services are being cut behind people’s backs
• I ATTENDED the little-publicised committee meeting on Wednesday where the council’s new plans to Grow Your Libraries [by shrinking them] were under consideration.
Councillor Flick Rea did her best, and asked a few sharp questions, but it is frightening that a decision of such importance should be decided by a single individual and in the space of less than one hour.
The three skilled delegations – from Unison, Holborn library users and Camden History Society – got three minutes each! This was a travesty.
And now we see (Library consultants’ £2,000-a-day bill, October 29) that consultants planning the library cuts – that’s “Invest to Save” in council newspeak – were paid £2,000 a day, totalling £47,000 which would have paid salaries for some of the 14 skilled library workers whose jobs are to go.
These plans are being rushed through before new machines are even in place to see if they work, let alone if they can adequately replace experienced staff.
Unison was not given a sight of the new staffing grades and plans until just two hours before the meeting.
The council’s assistant director of culture and environment Fiona Dean continued to repeat that her plans would “flatten management layers” when, in fact, the plans expand into three tiers of senior managers [with pay upgrades too], while 30 per cent of the most expert library staff will be lost and two of the lower posts will face a pay cut.
I attended the meeting as a concerned user of Camden’s brilliant local history collection.
We learned from the chair of the Camden History Society that this collection had achieved 16 per cent more users in the last year – just about unique in London boroughs.
But the council’s reward for the manager whose work over decades helped make this success possible? Planning to eliminate his job and “restructure” the post in a way that would effectively cut staffing to the local history department itself.
Shockingly, both the council officers and Cllr Rea maintained that the public had no need to be consulted on any of these plans because staffing the libraries is “an internal matter”.
I couldn’t help noticing that the library cuts that have been turned back are in leafy Hampstead, and there has also been some concern for local history, but none for those areas where Camden people really need the public service most.
It is only people like me who have the contacts to find out what is planned and protest. Others, who would suffer far more, are having their services cut behind their backs.
Book loans are more needed than ever in this recession, and libraries are also the greenest way to enjoy reading.
Libraries without staff able to help people negotiate the catalogues, find out what’s on the shelves or keep the space safe and quiet, would not be providing a service at all.
At the meeting, it was said that the cuts would prevent the library service being sold off further down the line but, in reality, a restricted service will cut support for libraries and make them more vulnerable.
AMANDA SEBESTYEN
Bayham Street, NW1
One word!
• ONE word comes to mind concerning your report (Library consultants’ £2,000-a-day bill, October 29) about the absurd amount of money paid to the American firm of GYL Library Consultants, £47,000 just to go around looking at a few libraries and come up with “ideas”, and then the council’s refusal to disclose the outcomes of this operation on the grounds that they have not yet decided how to act on it.
That word is privatisation.
In the absence of any clear information from the council, it would be reasonable to assume that their secrecy is due to the fact that they are planning to privatise Camden’s libraries and that GYL is a contender in that process.
Were they to attempt to privatise in public, there would be an outcry. So they’re doing it behind closed doors.
Tom Muirhead
Address supplied
Honestly!
• COUNCILLOR Flick Rea, Camden’s executive member for culture, was reported in the October 29 New Journal as suggesting that there was “no evidence that the library service will improve as a result of the changes” about to be implemented.
This is refreshing honesty from a senior member of Camden’s ruling coalition.
Of course, what she said has been patently obvious to everyone; but, in the past, both council officers and members have never allowed obvious facts to influence what they say, once there was an agreed storyline.
There is no doubt that secrecy and outright lying have been council policy for many decades. This, more than anything else, destroyed the last administration. Credibility, once lost, is almost impossible to regain.
Perhaps the outright lie is no longer to be part of the Camden communication toolset. We can only hope.
If there is such an intention, it will be under continuous attack from those within the council who are eager to interpret the facts to their advantage.
The only way to combat these, less than honest individuals, is to adopt a policy of openness. Secrecy allows a little bending of the truth to develop into simply lying.
Although the Camden area forums have slightly lifted the curtain of secrecy on council operations, there is still an assumption that the council can drop that curtain whenever it feels like it. Cllr Rea’s statement that a library staff restructuring should not be subject to public discussion is an example of this. The operation of the library service is critically dependent on the way that its staff is deployed. A change to this is a change to the service offered to the public. The public should be given the chance to air its views, when it is affected. Far too often it is just ignored. A new attitude within the council is long overdue.
It is obvious that Camden will have to make many unpalatable decisions in the near future to accommodate a large reduction in funding caused by the recession.
These decisions will undoubtedly lead to some reductions in the quantity and quality of services provided to the public. If the same attitude about disclosure is adopted as for the Growing Your Library scheme, there will be a backlash of even greater proportions than was experienced in that case. It is in nobody’s interest that this should occur.
Alan Templeton
Chair, Camden Public Libraries Users Group, NW6
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
