Appendix
PUBLIC LIBRARIES:
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE SIXTH REPORT
FROM THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT COMMITTEE,
SESSION 1999-2000
1. The Government welcomes this timely and helpful
Report into public libraries and commends the Committee on its
constructive approach. We would like to begin with a comment on
the Committee's overall and final conclusion.
(xxiii) We can recollect few if any inquiries
that have generated as many submissions to the Committee. That
public interest reflects both the need for public library services
and the high regard in which they are held by millions of people
(paragraph 104).
2. As the Committee has noted at the beginning of
its Report, the 1850 Public Libraries Act was a key moment in
the country's development. It symbolised a sea change in attitude
about access to information—that everyone, regardless of
their background or income, should be able to refer to, and read
books of all kinds, great works of literature, newspapers, magazines
and local leaflets. Since then, public libraries have been an
ever present feature of our public services. The Government believes
firmly in the continued development of public libraries. We have
sought a radical programme to improve them, to transform how they
are perceived and valued by politicians and to improve further
their value to members of the public. We are pleased that we can
respond positively to the Committee's conclusions and recommendations.
They are laid out below, in the order of the Report, with our
responses.
(i) The Government's consultation paper on
public library standards was published after we concluded taking
evidence as part of this inquiry. Nevertheless, we welcome the
Government's efforts to put flesh on the bones of the requirement
in the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 to provide a "comprehensive
and efficient" library service. We expect that the new library
standards on which the Government is now consulting will assist
in driving up standards of public library provision. We also expect
that when the standards come into force they reflect the conclusions
and recommendations of this Report (paragraph 11).
3. We welcome the Committee's support for the process
we are undertaking, via the introduction of public library standards,
to define for the first time a "comprehensive and efficient"
library service as required of library authorities by existing
legislation—The Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964.
4. The consultation on the draft public library standards
closed on 3 July 2000 and we have begun collating and analysing
the comments. A final version of the standards will be published
later this year.
5. This timescale reflects a genuine consultation.
The draft standards were those which we think the library service
of the future should meet, but we wanted to hear the views of
all concerned. If the standards are to drive up quality, they
must focus on the right issues, and they must be challenging but
also realistic. The conclusions and recommendations of the Committee's
Report are very helpful and will be taken fully into account during
the next phase of work.
6. This commitment deals in part with subsequent
recommendations from the Committee, namely (v), (vii), (viii),
(xii) and (xxi), and is also referred to under (vi) and (xv).
(ii) The precise role of MLAC, or "Resource"
as it now prefers to call itself, within the library sector remains
shadowy. For example, there is no reference to the role of the
new body in the Government's recently published document on library
standards. We recommend that the Government clarify the precise
roles which it expects "Resource" to perform in the
library sector as a matter of urgency (paragraph 13).
(iii) The roles for MLAC are, of course, dependent
to some extent upon the resources available to it. Lord Evans
said: "If we do not get extra resources it would have been
rather pointless forming this new organisation". We agree.
It is incumbent upon the Government to send the right signals
to the library sector by increasing its financial commitment to
the strategic body which it has chosen to create (paragraph 14).
7. Resource: The Council for Museums, Archives and
Libraries published its Manifesto on 18 July 2000. In this, Resource
makes clear its strategic priorities for libraries, museums and
archives in the first year of its operations. However, we accept
that it is desirable to clarify Resource's remit in respect of
the public library sector. DCMS and Resource are discussing this
with a view to establishing a clear demarcation of responsibilities.
Announcements about the future funding of Resource were made in
the aftermath of the Chancellor's spending review statement of
18 July 2000.
(iv) There is a continuing tendency in some
analyses of trends in library services to stress the competition
between the book and new technology. This is a false antithesis.
Their development must be complementary not competitive. We are
convinced that the book will survive for the foreseeable future.
It will be supplemented, not superseded. The challenge for the
library sector is to ensure that the development of information
technology in libraries broadens library services and does not
take place at the expense of the book (paragraph 22).
8. We agree that the development of books and new
technology should be complementary not competitive. Developing
ICT in public libraries is in no way intended to replace their
traditional place as accessible stores of written information
and imagination. This is an important reason why people value
their public libraries as part of the identity of their community
and nation. Whatever developments take place in ICT, the book
will retain its preeminence because of its convenience,
durability and relative cheapness.
9. ICT will complement, and sometimes actually boost
interest in, the other things libraries have to offer—just
as use of e-mail and the Internet have given new importance to
communication by reading and writing. ICT may, in some cases,
free library staff from their more routine duties and allow them
to offer better services for users, for example reader support
services.
10. The Government wants to see a modern public library
service enhanced by the ICT facilities which are increasingly
becoming a part of our lives, but continuing also to provide the
services which have won libraries their high standing in society
over many generations.
(v) The book stock is rightly seen as central
to the quality of a library service. The DCMS has recently set
out its proposed standards to monitor expenditure on books and
other materials and the quantity and quality of the book stock.
We welcome these standards in principle, although we have not
had an opportunity to examine them in detail. We note that the
Department canvasses the possibility of determining quality "as
a percentage of the titles nominated for the major literary prizes
in the year of the report combined with a selection of the top
500 bestselling titles". We are surprised that no reference
is made in the proposed criteria for determining quality to the
popularity of books as indicated by the Public Lending Right scheme
(paragraph 26).
11. The written word is at the heart of DCMS's priorities
for the public library sector—whether in historic collections,
reference books, works of fiction or digitised format. Ensuring
that book stocks remain uptodate and attractive is
central to keeping public libraries alive and is the magnet that
draws users to the multitude of other services that we have all
come to expect. For this reason, expenditure on books and other
materials, and its efficiency, will be among the proposed public
library standards and, as indicated in paragraph 5 above, we will
take full account of the Committee's comments about the methodology
for the unobtrusive testing of the quality of bookstocks. The
Committee will also be aware of the enhancement of the Public
Lending Right scheme that we were able to announce following the
Chancellor's spending review.
(vi) We recommend as a matter of urgency that
the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department
for Education and Employment hold discussions to coordinate
the supply and sources at community level of information and communication
technology with a view to ensuring public libraries take a lead
in such provision in view of their wider coverage and community
role. That pivotal role will open the way for access to public
libraries through new technology 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
(paragraph 28).
(xv) We consider it a high priority for the
Government to ensure that the development of networks for libraries
is effectively integrated with those for other public services
(paragraph 77).
12. Our aim is to ensure that ICT learning is delivered
to the widest range of audiences at locations which are easily
accessible to them. Public libraries have an important role to
play in providing ICT services and we see this increasing in the
future. DCMS and DfEE are working closely with Government Offices,
Resource, the New Opportunities Fund (NOF) and the University
for Industry (UfI) to ensure that the provision of learning centres
providing public access to the Internet and networked services
is co-ordinated effectively at the local level. Both Departments
recognise the important role libraries will play in this as well-established
and trusted community institutions but also recognise the need
for a range of types of provision, if we are to ensure that we
operate right across the digital divide.
13. In terms of access to equipment, the Lottery
funded Community Access to Lifelong Learning Programme (CALL),
administered by the New Opportunities Fund, will invest £100m
to support the establishment of more than 4,000 learning centres
in libraries across the UK by 2002. In England, these will be
complemented by some 700 learning centres targeted primarily at
socially excluded groups funded by the DfEE led Capital Modernisation
Fund ICT Learning Centre Programme and by the learndirect
centres run by the UfI. All these centres will have access to
the National Grid for Learning (NGfL )and libraries have been
taken fully into account in developing both the NGfL and the UfI.
UfI have been working closely with the Library Association and
of UfI's 315 learndirect Development Centres (as of mid-July
2000), 23 (ie 7.3 per cent) were situated in libraries. Policy
directions to the NOF for the CALL programme require that projects
funded under the programme must be compatible with the NGfL and
the standards set for the People's Network for public libraries.
Through these programmes, we aim to provide a range of centres
able to meet the different needs of the many client groups we
need to reach. Government Offices will be charged with the task
of ensuring that the roll-out of learning centres in each locality
is comprehensive and complementary. The Digital Scotland initiative
will address similar issues as will the National Assembly for
Wales ICT strategy currently in preparation.
14. We also intend to ensure that access to networked
services and content are, wherever possible, available across
all types of institution. All materials on the NGfL are freely
accessible to all over the Internet. The £50 million which
has been invested in the New Opportunities Fund Digitisation programme
will also produce a rich new seam of materials to support citizenship,
basic skills and understanding of our cultural heritage, and will
also be available to all via the Internet. DfEE are looking at
ways in which learning institutions of all types can build on
existing network provision to maximise inter-operability between
networks and provide cost effective access to learning materials
and other sources of information.
15. In terms of virtual access to library materials,
the draft public library standards proposed that library authorities
should provide online access, to international standards and 24
hours per day, from remote locations to their catalogue, reservation
service, community information service, enquiry service and full
information about the range of library services available.
(vii) Library authorities must try to steer
a course that satisfies the competing claims for ideal opening
times. We expect the published library standards to provide local
authorities with further guidance on minimal opening hours for
individual libraries and ensure that library authorities adopt
opening regimes that take account of the needs of the client population
(paragraph 30).
(viii) We recommend that any standard for the
location of libraries should be linked specifically to modes of
transport and in particular to measures of the quality of public
transport provision. We further recommend that the standards as
finally issued should require authorities to assess the community
value of individual libraries, a value which goes beyond internal
definitions of user satisfaction, even if this community value
is not readily susceptible to statistical analysis (paragraph
39).
16. We have already said, at paragraph 5 above, that
we shall take full account of the Committee's comments in drawing
up the final standards. We wholeheartedly support the Committee's
view of the community value of public libraries. They are a cornerstone
of our cultural life and a central plank in the delivery of wider
educational, social, and economic benefits. They are accessible
and egalitarian, and provide a platform for self development,
a gateway to knowledge and catalyst for the imagination. Above
all, however, they are highly respected and widely used by the
public. Nearly 60 per cent of the nation's population are users.
It is this bond with individual users and communities that represents
the single major strength of public libraries.
(ix) This Committee has received many letters
expressing the concerns of library users about reduced opening
hours and library closures. Although we did not consider individual
cases of closure or reduced access, we share many of those concerns
and welcome the requirement for local authorities to "justify
library resource reductions". In addition, we consider that
no such reductions should take place without extensive public
consultation, a full explanation of the justification and full
analysis of the implications. Some library campaigns have achieved
their immediate goals in preventing closure. However, if the effect
of this achievement delays the development of improved library
services, then this Committee fears the victories of library campaigns
may prove Pyrrhic (paragraph 40).
17. Under the legislation, the ultimate responsibility
for deciding how to manage and organise a public library service
is for the relevant local authority. While we will continue to
ensure that the requirements of the Public Libraries and Museums
Act 1964 are met, we cannot prevent all library closures and we
recognise that, where the service is being fully reviewed and
restructured, there may be a case for some service point closures.
Mr Alan Howarth made this clear in his evidence to the Committee
and emphasised also that restructuring should not be used to mask
closure programmes. In any changes, we believe that the feelings
of the local population should be taken into account and we fully
endorse the Committee's view that major service changes, including
reductions, should not take place without extensive public consultation,
a full explanation of the justification and full analysis of the
implications.
(x) This Committee is concerned that the relevant
authorities recognise that different disabled groups have specific
and distinctive requirements for access to libraries and that
funding allocations reflect this fact. We endorse the Library
Association's suggestion and recommend that the Government seek
to expand the Share the Vision model to all disabled groups (paragraph
47).
18. We will discuss with Resource the possibility
of extending the programme of support for the development of library
services for blind and partially sighted people to cover other
people with disabilities.
(xi) We welcome the commitment that mobile
libraries will provide access to information and communication
technology and urge the Government and local authorities to make
urgent efforts to overcome the barriers to such access (paragraph
50).
19. The Government has given an express commitment
to providing convenient public access to the Internet. Through
the New Opportunities Fund Community Access to Lifelong Learning
(CALL) Programme our priority has been to ensure that Internet
access will be available in all static library locations. Additionally,
£5 million from the Programme has been set aside as a challenge
fund to encourage innovative solutions including mobile library
connectivity. A number of areas have already piloted use of ICT
in mobile libraries, including some projects funded through the
DCMS/Wolfson Programme; an example is Walsall's LAMPOSTS project.
However, at present the technology frequently limits the range
of services it is possible to provide through mobile facilities.
20. The DCMS/Wolfson Programme has also funded library
led community access terminals sited in other locations, such
as rural post offices, community centres and GP surgeries. From
September this year, we will see a rapid increase in the numbers
of learning centre locations through CALL, the DfEE Capital Modernisation
Fund ICT Learning Centre Programme and the
University for Industry and we will continue to monitor
how these centres meet the needs of rural communities and what
further measures may be needed. The Government's proposals for
the development of the rural post office network will also help
to complement library provision.
(xii) This Committee is pleased to note that
the Annual Library Plans include an emphasis on social exclusion
issues, and trusts that that emphasis will lead to continued improvements
in this aspect of library provision. We recommend that the implemented
national library standards provide more specific guidance on the
promotion of social inclusion. We further recommend that the Government
ensure the collection and publication of comprehensive statistics
on library use by all socially excluded groups (paragraph 51).
21. The draft public library standards recognise
the role that public libraries have to play in tackling social
exclusion but, as we have said in paragraph 5 above, we will take
full account of the Committee's views in the next phase of work
on the standards. Many of the elements of the proposed standards,
such as those relating to location, opening hours, charging policies,
enabling ICT access and providing items in alternative formats
which meet the needs of disabled people, are in line with the
Governments's social inclusion policy. However, the proposed standards
relate to the core statutory service which public libraries are
required to provide, and much of the activity to help people overcome
their exclusion is above this core.
22. We are grateful to the Committee for recognising
the emphasis that Annual Library Plans place upon social exclusion
issues and we shall continue to monitor how well the Government's
social inclusion policy is being implemented in respect of public
library services. DCMS will discuss with Resource how best progress
can be assessed.
(xiii) We recommend that the Government and
the higher education funding councils support the continued establishment
and development of collaborative, crosssectoral initiatives
between public libraries and libraries of all institutions of
higher education, based on the principle of open access (paragraph
62).
23. Collaboration between public libraries and academic
libraries is currently working successfully in some places. The
Higher Education Funding Council for England already supports
collaboration and access to major holding libraries and has made
funding available for this. It will continue to encourage and
disseminate good practice in this area. The Education and Libraries
Task Group of the Library and Information Commission (replaced
by Resource since April 2000), which reported to the Secretaries
of State for Culture, Media and Sport and for Education and Employment
in March 2000, concluded that improvements in cross-sectoral co-ordination
were desirable. The Government has taken note of the Task Group's
Report, Empowering the Learning Community, and proposes
to establish an Inter-Departmental Steering Group, comprising
officials of DfEE and DCMS, to give full and thorough consideration
to the Report's recommendations in the light of current developments
and Government priorities. In addition, a wider consultative group
comprising representatives of external organisations will be established
to provide advice to the Steering Group in relation to the Report's
recommendations.
(xiv) It is a matter for regret that the potentially
invaluable role of public libraries was neglected during the development
of the National Grid for Learning and the University of Industry.
If there is to be continuity in the delivery of information and
communication technology, it is essential that, even at this late
stage, libraries are seen to be at the centre and not at the periphery
of the delivery of these new services. However, the role now envisaged
for public libraries in Lifelong Learning by MLAC and Ministers
appears to be in line with the best traditions of the public library
service. We recommend that the Department for Culture, Media and
Sport and the Department for Education and Employment work together
with library authorities to ensure that libraries can play an
integral role within the wider delivery of Lifelong Learning and
that funding arrangements reflect this (paragraph 69).
24. The role of public libraries was not neglected
in the development of the National Grid for Learning (NGfL) and
the University for Industry (UfI). Connecting libraries to the
Internet has always been part of the NGfL Programme and is included
in the Government's targets for 2002: "connect all schools,
colleges, universities, public libraries and as many community
centres as possible to the Grid". In our response to recommendations
(vi) and (xv), we have described the arrangements DCMS and DfEE
have set in place, working with other key agencies, to ensure
that libraries play their full role in the delivery of access
to ICT to their communities. Similar arrangements have underpinned
the development of the NGfL and the UfI. A further £20m has
been made available through the New Opportunities Fund for training
for all public library staff. This training will ensure that library
staff are, as a minimum, equipped to offer assistance to members
of the public in the use of ICT equipment and, further, to ensure
that library staff are able to support lifelong learning needs
through the exploitation of electronic content and services. Library
authorities have responded with enthusiasm to this programme.
Plans from 62 library authorities have so far been approved by
the New Opportunities Fund for commencement in the coming months
and further submissions are due in the Autumn and Spring of 2001.
It is expected that all 40,000 staff will have completed their
training by 2003.
25. The DCMS/Wolfson Fund for 2000-01 focuses on
reader development, building on the achievements of the library
sector during the DfEE-sponsored National Year of Reading. DCMS
will continue to work with DfEE and other partners such as the
National Reading Campaign and the National Literacy Trust to promote
libraries' work with readers.
26. As mentioned in paragraph 23 above, DCMS and
DfEE are working together to consider what actions should be taken
in the light of the Report of the Education and Libraries Task
Group of the LIC: "Empowering the Learning Community",
which deals with the need for collaboration between public libraries
and all types of educational libraries.
(xv) We consider it a high priority for the
Government to ensure that the development of networks for libraries
is effectively integrated with those for other public services
(paragraph 77).
27. This is dealt with at paragraphs 12-15 above.
(xvi) We strongly support the British Library
in its endeavours to continue its digitalisation of internationally
important books and manuscripts. We recommend that, wherever possible,
those images should be freely available on the Internet. We consider
that support for this process should be considered a high priority
for Lottery or Government funding as appropriate. It should be
the Government's avowed aim to establish the British Library as
a hub for the United Kingdom and the international library network.
This will enable the British Library to become a universal resource
rather than the preserve of a relatively small number of users
on the site—a library for the many not just for the few.
The expansion of the British Library's role should not be at the
expense of and should in no way compromise the performance of
the British Library's core statutory functions (paragraph 86).
28. DCMS agrees that the British Library's digital
developments play a central role. By collecting, preserving and
allowing access to digital material such as CD-Roms and online
journals, the Library maintains a comprehensive collection of
publications in different formats. DCMS welcomes the Library's
proposed work over the next 10 years to create a digital store
which will revolutionise remote access services. The Library also
plays an important role in using digital technologies to increase
access to its historic collections and exploiting the educational
opportunities offered by digitisation. The Library has submitted
a major Lottery bid to the New Opportunities Fund for a digitisation
project to create links between local, regional and national history.
DCMS strongly supports the Library's work to increase access through
new technology and is encouraging it to build upon its successes
in this area to provide remote access around the country.
(xvii) We agree with the Local Government Association
that it would be inappropriate for library funding to be ringfenced
by central Government. However, it should be the responsibility
of local authorities to protect funding levels for libraries and
ensure that they reflect properly the wider value of library services
and their role in society (paragraph 91).
29. We accept that public libraries should remain
a local funding responsibility, and this means that detailed funding
decisions on public library services are for the local library
authorities concerned—County Councils, Unitary Authorities,
London Boroughs and Metropolitan Districts. They should remember,
however, that the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 requires
library authorities to "provide a comprehensive and efficient
library service for all persons desiring to make use thereof"
(ie those who live, work or are in full-time education within
the authority area). The terms "comprehensive and efficient"
are not defined within the 1964 Act, and, hitherto, there have
been no statutory standards to underpin the legislation. However,
the 1964 Act does say that, in fulfilling its duty, a library
authority must ensure that "facilities are available for
the borrowing of, or reference to, books and other printed material
and pictures ... sufficient in number, range and quality to meet
both the general needs and special requirements of adults and
children."
30. We remain committed to the statutory requirement
to provide library services. The public library standards that
we propose will provide a clearer definition of what is meant
by the existing statutory requirement on library authorities to
provide a 'comprehensive and efficient' library service, set in
the modern context. We want to see the standards lever more resources
into public libraries in those authorities that have not been
giving them sufficient priority.
(xviii) We recommend that the Government encourages
local authorities to pursue vigorously the scope for support for
public libraries from the private sector through sponsorship or
other means (paragraph 92).
31. We accept that there may be scope for greater
support for public libraries from the private sector and we will
investigate ways of improving it. Annual Library Plans provide
a starting point. The Guidelines which we have issued to assist
library authorities with preparation of their Annual Library Plans
2000 ask authorities to report on the opportunity for introducing
new services funded by new sources of income. In our analysis
of the Plans, provisionally scheduled for publication early next
year, we will identify this information.
(xix) We recommend that the review of local
authority funding should specifically examine the funding of regional
cultural facilities, including libraries, and consider whether
adjustments to the Revenue Support Grant formula should encompass
the additional cost burden of such facilities that serve a wide
population. We further recommend that local authorities be permitted
to charge for library services provided to businesses located
outside the geographical area of the funding local authority (paragraph
96).
32. The Government recognises the value of the major
cultural institutions, including libraries, provided in the major
cities, and that there is a cost attached to their provision.
The presence of such facilities is, of course, a major benefit
to these cities, providing the cultural backdrop that attracts
inward investment and supports the existing infrastructure.
33. In the case of libraries, there is concern, and
some circumstantial evidence, that library authorities adjoining
major centres with regionally important facilities neglect their
own provision. The introduction of public library standards will
go some way toward closing this loophole. In addition, we wish
to underline the existing provision in Section 9(1) of the Public
Libraries and Museums Act 1964 for library authorities to contribute
to the costs of other library authorities. This is our preferred
option for dealing with the additional costs associated with regional
library services, as it allows local solutions to be tailored
toward local circumstances.
34. The Government will very shortly be publishing
a Green Paper setting out a range of options for reforming the
local government finance system, and seeking views on those options.
The Committee's recommendation concerning the funding of regional
cultural facilities will be considered again at the stage when
the Government is assessing responses to the Green Paper, and
it is clearer what the overall system of finance is likely to
be.
35. Subject to two main restrictions, library authorities
are entitled to charge for their facilities. The first restriction
is that charges may not be imposed for any facilities set out
in Section 8(3) and (4) of the Public Libraries and Museums Act
1964. These include the provision of reference services to any
person and the lending of written material (which can be read
without the use of any equipment) to those who live, work, or
are in full-time education in the library authority area. The
second restriction is that only those facilities set out in regulations
made by the Secretary of State may incur charges.
36. Charges may, therefore, be imposed upon businesses
located outside the library authority's area for any facilities
for which charging is authorised under the Library Charges (England
and Wales) Regulations 1991. It is for each library authority
to decide whether or not to charge for such facilities, the frequency
of such a charge (for example, upon each use of the facility or
on the basis of an annual subscription) and whether concessions
are available in certain circumstances. Authorities are required
to make their charges known in advance to members of the public
by displaying them in each library.
(xx) Library authorities are at present entitled
to charge for networked and multimedia services. However, while
it is true that charging for networked services may regulate demand
for a popular service we believe that networked and multimedia
services must now be regarded as core services of public libraries
together with books. Present policy separates them through charging
whereas they should all be regarded as staple services. That being
so, although Mr Howarth doubted that charging would exclude some
users, we consider it is now time to assert that Internet and
multimedia services are as much core library services as books.
Therefore, we recommend that there should be no charges placed
on networked and multimedia services (paragraph 99).
(xxi) We recommend that the Department for
Culture, Media and Sport seeks to develop further standards relating
to charges and fine income before implementing its library standards
(paragraph 100).
37. We have already said, at paragraph 5 above, that
we shall take full account of the Committee's comments in drawing
up the final standards.
38. Although library authorities are entitled to
charge for networked and multimedia services, many do offer free
access to networked services and the Internet. Of those which
do charge, many have policies in place to allow free or reduced
rate access to people who may be less able to pay a charge. Guidance
issued to library authorities by the New Opportunities Fund for
funding for infrastructure under the Community Access to Lifelong
Learning (CALL) Programme notes that Internet access should normally
be offered free of charge and where charges are to be made, the
authority is required to explain how it intends to meet the needs
of people at risk of social exclusion.
(xxii) We recommend that the Department for
Culture, Media and Sport as a matter of urgency should allocate
funding of libraries to a specific National Lottery fund (paragraph
103).
39. National Lottery funding has been made available
to develop new services in public libraries through the New Opportunities
Fund Community Access to Lifelong Learning (CALL) Programme, which
has ring-fenced £100 million for infrastructure and equipment
to support the development of learning centres in libraries, £20
million for ICT training for public library staff and a £50
million programme for digitisation of materials. Public libraries
have also benefited from awards from the Heritage Lottery Fund.
The Committee will be aware that local authorities have a statutory
duty to provide a "comprehensive and efficient" public
library service and that the purpose of the National Lottery is
to provide funding over and above the existing obligations of
Government, both local and national.
(xxiii) We can recollect few if any inquiries
that have generated as many submissions to the Committee. That
public interest reflects both the need for public library services
and the high regard in which they are held by millions of people
(paragraph 104).
40. Over the past three years, we have made significant
progress in developing public libraries to fit the new century.
Much remains to be done. The Government wants to ensure that the
public library service becomes even more popular and fondly regarded
in the community and by its users in the future than it is today.
We believe that, with the continued commitment of all the stakeholders,
the future of public libraries is assured.
| 
