Memorandum submitted by the Chartered
Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP)
INTRODUCTION
1. CILIP[1]
welcomes this opportunity to comment on the future of the public
library service in England. We have had a close involvement in
the major changes that have taken place in public libraries during
the past few years, notably Framework for the Future, The
People's Network, the work of The Reading Agency and the Public
Library Standards. There is much to applaud in these developments
but there also remain deep-seated problems and challenges that
must be tackled to ensure a healthy future for the service, notably
in regard to skills and competences in the public library workforce,
the level of funding of the service and the condition of much
of the public library estate.
2. Our written evidence to the last inquiry
into Libraries,[2]
undertaken by the Culture, Media, and Sport Committee in 1999-2000,
was extensive and covered the ground in some depth—most
of the points made then are still relevant today. The short timescale
for this inquiry means that we have focused our attention on key
points and messages and not endeavoured to provide a comprehensive
assessment and description of the modern public library service.
Our overall premise remains that investing in public libraries
is a remarkably effective way of delivering outcomes at a comparatively
low cost in a number of key policy areas such as lifelong learning,
social inclusion and cohesion, health, and economic regeneration.
Although packaged as a "cultural" institution in fact
the public library service operates across all facets of life
and recognising this multiplicity of roles and contributions is
important to optimising the contribution the public library service
can make to many of the cross-cutting problems being tackled by
Government and other agencies. Our response concentrates on the
role of central government—and DCMS in particular—as
well as addressing the issues raised by the Committee in their
call for evidence.
THE POLICY
FRAMEWORK
3. There have been a number of important
developments in public library policy since the last Committee
inquiry in 2000. The most important has been the publication of
Framework for the Future in February 2003; a report which
encapsulates the Government's vision for the public library service
over the next 10 years. This is the first time that there has
been a national vision for the service, signed up to by all the
major stakeholders, coupled with national priority areas for development.
It is an important achievement as it sets a shared direction and
enables a strong brand image for public libraries to be built
across England.
4. Work is now being undertaken, through
the Framework Action Plan being managed by MLA, the Council for
Museums, Libraries and Archives, on the three service priority
areas of Books Reading and Learning, Digital Citizenship and Community
and Civic Values. The object is to marry national "offers"
with local needs. There is also a fourth area of work in the Action
Plan to do with capacity building in the sector to enable it to
deliver the change necessary to modernise and transform services
through leadership and workforce development, peer review, and
improved marketing.
5. One feature of Framework for the Future,
less commented on but of potentially fundamental importance, is
the set of principles identified as integral to the modern mission
of libraries. These include the concept of "public value"
and the idea that public libraries should focus on areas where
public intervention will deliver the largest benefits to society.
This implies a targeted approach to audiences and is potentially
at odds with the more universalist aspirations of the 1964 Public
Libraries and Museums Act by which the Public Library Authority
has to "provide a comprehensive and efficient library service
for all persons desiring to make use thereof". The tension
between universal aspirations and specific priorities is a characteristic
of many public services and one that public libraries must come
to terms with.
6. There are other important national policy
initiatives of relevance to public libraries. These include the
recent DCMS consultation document on "Culture at the Heart
of Regeneration", the national Sure Start programme and
the DfES Five Year Strategy with its recognition of the importance
of personalised learning throughout life, and the Shared Priorities
agreed between ODPM and the Local Government Association. Public
libraries can contribute across all of these policy areas and
should not be thought of simply in the context of "culture"
however broadly defined. But recognition of the broad nature of
the policy horizons of public libraries remains patchy and this
is an area where much work and advocacy still needs to be done.
It is encouraging that DCMS sees the forging and facilitating
of the necessary partnerships at national level as one way it
can help to promote the role of culture in regeneration. However
the disappointingly slow progress towards joint working between
DCMS and DfES in the period since the last inquiry into Public
Libraries is evidence of the difficulties and constraints often
encountered in working across Government programmes and Departments.
7. The current inquiry asks specifically
about new policy demands and new models of provision. The main
policy demands on public libraries are around social inclusion,
lifelong learning, and the development and support of sustainable
communities. The investment in the People's Network is bringing
new users into libraries and is helping to bridge the "digital
divide" between those people with personal access to new
information technology and those people who would otherwise be
excluded from such access. Innovative work around books and reading
both with children (the BookStart programme for example) and with
adults is paying dividends in terms of literacy and educational
attainment. The role of the public library in its local community
is reflected in the number of library services awarded Beacon
status: both for the Beacon theme of "libraries as a community
resource" and also for their contribution to other community-based
Beacon themes. While the basic model of provision remains unchanged
(responsibility with DCMS, funding through ODPM, delivery through
Local Authorities in their role as Public Library Authorities),
these gains in putting policy into practice result from new approaches
to service provision: a focus on national initiatives, greater
co-operation and partnership working, and closer integration of
library services with the strategic objectives of their local
communities.
INVESTMENT
8. As well as setting the policy framework,
Government has an important influence on the funding parameters
within which public library services operate. It is important
that public libraries demonstrate that they are using the resources
available to them in an efficient and effective manner. The current
£780 million annually invested in public libraries in England,
although only between 1 and 2% of overall local government expenditure,
is still substantial. We therefore welcome the work of MLA in
commissioning research, through the Framework Action Plan, into
the sources and levels of library funding and how it is used and
also into the possible efficiencies to be gained from joint procurement.
9. However it is a common complaint from
CILIP Members working in public library services that they lose
out within the current local government funding system. The major
services—education, social services—are seen to have
funding streams within the Revenue Support Grant that are protected
in one way or another and this leaves less in the pot for other
services such as libraries. This sense of inequity has been compounded
when, in the last Spending Review, the funding attached to the
EPCS (Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services) block of
the RSG for 2005-06 had the smallest increase of all blocks: an
increase which is not even expected to meet inflation.
10. There are also heavy liabilities on
public libraries as a legacy of years of under-investment. Library
buildings are known to be in a generally poor state and an audit
is soon to take place to establish the likely cost of bringing
the library estate up to acceptable standards. The bookstock is
also in a poor state and the "backstock",[3]
which is a unique offering of libraries, particularly so. Public
Library Authorities are also aware that the ICT equipment purchased
as part of the People's Network with Lottery funding will soon
have to be replaced without such assistance. It is regrettable
that some Authorities are introducing charging for access to the
internet as a result.
11. Many librarians are therefore worried
that the expectations raised in Framework for the Future
will not be met and the initiatives being developed through the
Framework Action Plan will not be sustained because of a lack
of resourcing. There is no separate funding stream for libraries
to meet the policy expectations of Framework or the service
requirements of the new set of Public Library Standards. This
makes the negotiating position of the Chief Officer responsible
for public library service within a local authority very difficult
when colleagues in other statutory services—such as schools,
for example—can call upon separate funding streams to help
an Authority meet its obligations. We recommend that DCMS establish
a Standards Fund with the support of the Treasury to help Public
Library Authorities meet the substantial capital needs they are
facing in buildings, stock and ICT, while leaving revenue expenditure
to the RSG.
12. In discussing investment it is important
to emphasise that when investment is made in public libraries,
they deliver. The effective implementation and impact of the People's
Network, the positive contribution made to the Sure Start programme,
the success of library services in the Beacon Councils scheme—these
are all testament to the ability of the service to deliver a good
return on a modest investment. Relatively small sums can lead
to large service gains when invested in the public library service.
REGULATION
13. A third area of government influence
is the development of a regulatory framework for public libraries.
It is pleasing to note that the first model of the current regulatory
framework, including Public Library Standards (from 2001) and
the then requirement on every English Public Library Authority
to submit Annual Library Plans to DCMS, can be seen to have increased
investment and improved performance across public library services.
We welcome the fact that this government seems to be taking seriously
its responsibility under legislation to "superintend"
the service.
14. The current "lighter touch"
philosophy of the Government means that a revised model of regulation
is in the process of being introduced. A new set of Public Library
Standards has just been published (October 2004) and a further
set of impact standards are to be published next year based on
the Shared Priorities agreed between ODPM and the LGA. DCMS is
to be congratulated on achieving integration of the Standards
with the Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs). The next step
in the evolution of the regulatory framework must be to achieve
a stronger culture block within the Comprehensive Performance
Assessment (CPA) framework for local authorities with a weighting
equal to that of other service blocks (at the moment the culture
block is only weighted 0.5 in CPA). This will bring a welcome
coherence to the regulatory framework for libraries that will
be enhanced further by the scheme of improvement and development
through peer review also being established, through the Framework
Action Plan and in partnership with IdeA, for the service.
15. However there are still a number of
weaknesses in the regulatory framework that need to be addressed:
(a) The new set of Standards is lacking in
a number of ways—The Standard for internet access allows
charging for such access and therefore goes against the Select
Committee's recommendation in its 2000 report that access to multimedia
and networked services should be seen as an integral part of a
public library service and not charged for. There is even less
coverage of social inclusion factors in the new set of Standards
than in the first set of Standards. The Standard for children's
satisfaction rates is lower than that set for adults. A main concern
for CILIP is that there is no Standard covering the skills and
competences required of staff. The Standards are to be reviewed
on a rolling basis and we would hope that these matters will be
addressed through that review.
(b) We have already noted that within the
current CPA Framework "Cultural Services" (including
public library services) only attracts half the weighting of other
service blocks. This needs to change. Local decisions on the allocation
of resources are shaped by the pressure to improve the Local Authority's
CPA score. A lower CPA weighting for the service can therefore
mean lower investment by the Local Authority in the service.
(c) Enforcing the Standards—Although
we applaud the impact that the Standards and other regulatory
processes have achieved in helping to improve quality of provision,
nevertheless we are concerned that they will lose credibility
if they are not seen to be enforced. If Leaders and Chief Executives
of Local Authorities are to take the Standards into account then
those Standards need to be backed by something stronger than an
exhortation to best practice—either the "carrot"
of an improved CPA score or of access to additional funding, or
the "stick" of some regulatory sanction.
ADVICE
16. The other area of government activity
on public libraries is around advice, both to and from DCMS. Under
the 1964 Public Libraries and Museums Act the Minister with responsibility
to "superintend" the public library service in England
is to be advised by an Advisory Council, and in turn has an advisory
role in promoting the service. Departures by key personnel—recent
by the Chief Library Adviser within DCMS and pending by the Chair
of the Advisory Council on Libraries (ACL)—mean that the
structure of advice within DCMS is currently in a state of flux.
One option being considered is for MLA to undertake the role of
advising the Minister. We would counsel strongly against this.
MLA is an NDPB at arm's length from government: it is not part
of government. We believe that advice should be given, as at present,
directly to the responsible Minister from within the responsible
department. However we accept that there is a need to widen the
membership of ACL to include a broader spectrum of stakeholders
in the public library service.
SERVICE DEVELOPMENT
17. There have been a number of important
developments in public library service since the Select Committee's
last Inquiry into the service. Particularly notable are a number
of developments already mentioned in our evidence:
(a) The People's Network (PN)—Research
into the impact of the People's Network[4]
has shown that it has had positive benefits on users across a
wide spectrum of society—in 2003 there were 32,000 PN computers
in English public libraries providing 44 million internet access
hours and 11.7 million People's Network sessions were recorded.
There is evidence to show substantial use of the PN for learning,
finding work, keeping in touch with family and relations, voluntary
and community activities and for hobbies and personal interests.
Many Authorities are looking at the PN as an important element
in delivering e-government and e-learning. An interim research
report from the Tavistock Institute[5]
suggests that more needs to be done to address workforce development
issues in relation to the PN and to embed the new service firmly
in the culture of public libraries and the strategic objectives
of parent Local Authorities; and concerns remain about the sustainability
of the PN service without additional funds to support the service.
(b) Books and Reading—The Reading Agency
(funded in part by CILIP) has started to map the activity around
readers' groups in public libraries that has developed over the
last five years or so and estimates that there are at least 4,500
library-based reading groups with a very varied membership. A
survey of librarians working in the Chatterboox scheme—a
national network of children's reader groups based in libraries
and some schools—shows that 100% of participating children
were reading more widely, 91% of them had increased self-esteem
and greater confidence, and 41% used the library more. Research
shows clearly the link between use of libraries in early years
and educational attainment in later years; and also shows the
positive contribution made by libraries to work to improve levels
of adult literacy and learning.
(c) Libraries as a Community Resource—This
was a theme of Round Three of the Beacon Council scheme and the
large number of library services awarded Beacon status provides
compelling evidence of the important role played by libraries
in their local neighbourhoods. The Beacon library services illustrate
the creative and innovative ways in which libraries can enhance
their community role, reaching socially excluded people and promoting
community cohesion.
(d) Learning—Support for the learner
is a growing area of activity for public library services. A number
have become LearnDirect centres (although some have found offputting
the current rules and regulations to participate as LearnDirect
centres). Many library services are members of their local Lifelong
Learning Partnership and provide Information, Advice and Guidance
services signposting appropriate learning opportunities. To give
one example of the many learning-related programmes being undertaken
by public libraries, the recent LearnEast project, supported by
the Social Fund of the EC, brought together public library services
in the East of England to look at how learning opportunities based
on the People's Network could be extended to marginalised groups
(including refugees, travellers, unemployed people, people from
minority communities, people with disabilities and others) and
help to improve the skills and confidence that those groups need
in order to gain employment. The independent evaluation of LearnEast
shows how successful libraries can be in reaching marginalised
communities and how positively the learning opportunities were
received. It also indicates that more needs to be done to integrate
learning and learner support into the main public library service
and its culture. CILIP is currently discussing with DfES officials
the ways in which "learning through libraries" can contribute
to the objectives set out in the recently published DfES Five
year strategy for children and learners.
18. The above examples are indicative of
the types of service development work that public libraries are
engaged in, reflecting the new policy demands and the new approaches
to provision mentioned earlier. Increasingly such developments
are being supported at regional level as well as local and national
levels, reflecting the aim outlined in Framework for the Future
for "a strengthened regional capacity to support library
authorities." There has always been a regional dimension
to the work of public libraries (notably in interlibrary loans)
and now this is being extended with examples of joint procurement,
joint ICT development, joint training of staff and joint access
agreements across libraries in a regional or sub-regional area.
The establishment of the MLA Regional Agencies and of regional
bodies such as Learning and Skills Councils and Regional Development
Agencies, allied to the regional structures of the Society of
Chief Librarians and of CILIP provide a good platform for future
developments at this level.
KEY ISSUES
19. As can be seen from the points we have
made so far our overall prognosis for the public library service
is positive and optimistic. However there are a number of important
issues and challenges to be faced, some of which were identified
by the Committee in their call for evidence. We cover the most
important below:
(a) Workforce Development—As the chartered
body for library and information professionals there is no other
matter of such central concern to CILIP. We are concerned by several
issues related to the workforce of public library services. The
Framework for the Future Action Plan is concentrating on
leadership within the sector and that is important. However leadership
cannot be separated from an holistic consideration of workforce
issues. Where, for example, will the future leaders come from?
It is a matter of concern that many of the courses of professional
education in the UK no longer offer a public library option and
most students do not opt for a career in public libraries. The
skills of an information specialist are now widely sought in the
private sector and in other public agencies and the starting salaries
for professional level posts in most Public Library Authorities
cannot compete. In addition public libraries as part of local
government suffer from the negative image of local government.
One way forward is for public library services to pay more attention
to developing their own staff and there is encouraging evidence
of in-house training and development within Local Authorities
often linked to the award of the Investors In People standard.
We believe that the new Framework of Qualifications to be launched
by CILIP next year will play a major part in helping to reskill
the public library workforce and to provide accredited recognition
for the expertise of library staff. Amongst the major innovations
in our new Framework of Qualifications are: a new qualification
for library assistants; accreditation of work-based training programmes;
much greater flexibility in the routes by which a person can achieve
chartered status (the full professional qualification); and a
scheme of accredited continuous professional development for those
who have become chartered. We look forward to working closely
with the new Lifelong Learning Sector Skills Council, with Public
Library Authorities, with MLA, and with other interested parties
in addressing the pressing workforce development issues faced
by the sector.
(b) Accessibility—There have been some
welcome improvements in the accessibility of library services.
The increase in opening hours that has occurred since the Public
Library Standards were introduced in 2001 is particularly to be
welcomed. However as previously mentioned we are concerned at
the state of the public library building stock and whether it
is fit for purpose in all cases. Although we must await the results
of the public library buildings audit we expect a large backlog
of essential refurbishment or renewal work will be revealed. Dilapidated
buildings clearly discourage use and are likely to offend the
spirit if not the letter of the Disability Discrimination Act.
Another aspect of accessibility is the cultural rather than physical
barriers that can discourage people from using libraries. These
can be complex in nature but the vision in Framework for the
Future puts service for disadvantaged people at the centre
of its Community and Civic Values theme. Although some Public
Library Authorities have done a great deal to address social inclusion
issues, much remains to be done across the sector as a whole.
A further aspect of accessibility is the way in which library
services meet—or do not meet—the needs of people with
disabilities. There is, for example, some excellent practice with
regard to service for people with visual impairment: but provision
is patchy and has not yet been extended (as the Select Committee
recommended in 2000) to other forms of disability. Finally, any
assessment of accessibility needs to take account of the virtual
use of public libraries (such as electronic access to the resources
available in libraries, or the use of online enquiry services).
Data on virtual access is not yet included in official statistics
or in the new Public Library Standards. This clearly needs to
change if the true accessibility of public library services is
to be properly assessed.
(c) Users/non-users—This is closely
related to the access theme above. The need to consider non-users
is rightly emphasised in Framework for the Future as a
disproportionate number of those non-users will come from marginalised
groups within society. The difficulty for library services with
constrained and committed resources is in balancing the needs
of existing users against the need to reach out to non-users.
In our written evidence to the Select Committee in 2000 we stressed
the importance of providing for the needs of minority groups.
In particular we recommended that the "Share the Vision"
model of provision for those who are blind or visually impaired
should be extended to cover other disabilities and welcomed the
fact that the Committee endorsed this approach in its report.
It is disappointing to report that there has been little real
progress on this although the Gateway project being managed under
Framework for the Future could lay the basis for this development—the
object of Gateway is to update the online Share the Vision Best
Practice manual to cover all disabilities and to train staff in
its use. We remain of the view that some form of pan-disability
organisation advising on and facilitating provision in libraries
is vital. The Inquiry asks specifically what can be done to increase
the public's use of local libraries. There are three parts to
the answer: one is to involve local people in the planning of
local services—through for example a process of community
profiling—to ensure that those services are shaped to meet
local needs; one is to provide adequate investment in infrastructure
so that the experience of using local libraries is a positive
one based on attractive and accessible buildings, good quality
bookstock, up-to-date technology, and high-calibre staff; and
the other is to focus on customer service, both in the library
and out in the community, supported by effective marketing and
promotional activity.
(d) Wider than culture—We reiterate
our opening comment that public libraries should not be contained
within a cultural "box". They address all aspects of
life and contribute to the agendas of a number of different government
departments. A key role for DCMS is to increase understanding
of this at national level and especially with departments such
as DfES, DoH, DTI and ODPM. There is a perception within the library
community that at present DCMS carries insufficient weight and
authority within Government to do this successfully. Just as government
needs to be more "joined up," so libraries need to work
together more extensively and effectively. We welcome the Inspire
project that is to be rolled out across the English regions, facilitated
through the MLA Regional Agencies, providing a framework within
which local access agreements can be secured between libraries
in all sectors allowing learners to use the most appropriate and
convenient library resource in their area. In the context of linking
public libraries with specialist libraries—whether academic,
corporate, or national—we would make three further points.
One is the need for a strong partnership between the public library
community and the British Library and we welcome the work in progress
to develop this partnership. One is the need for a consistent
and reasonable approach by Public Library Authorities to charging
for interlending services: we are aware of one case in recent
months when DCMS intervention (at the behest of CILIP) was necessary
in order to prompt a Library Authority to reduce interlending
charges to a comparatively reasonable level. The other point is
the need for government to take on board the recommendations made
recently by the Science and Technology Select Committee regarding
open access to scientific research publications. The more that
different types of library service collaborate for the benefit
of users then the more that such matters become relevant for public
libraries as well as for institutional and specialist libraries.
(e) Investment—If the good work done
by public libraries is to be continued and if the vision within
Framework for the Future is to be realised, then there
needs to be adequate investment in the public library service.
We have argued in this evidence that public library services represent
an excellent return on investment; and that modest increases in
that investment will produce substantial returns in relation to
key government policy goals. Some of this might come through smarter
and more efficient working, but additional capital funding is
clearly required in certain areas such as buildings, stock and
ICT. This would best be delivered through a Standards Fund, resourced
either from government provision or from the Lottery. This needs
to come on stream quickly, but, if not in place already by then,
it will need to be included in the 2006 Spending Review.
RECOMMENDATIONS
20. We would ask the Committee to consider
especially the following:
(a) The need to acknowledge the cross-cutting
nature of public library provision in helping to meet key national
policy objectives of a number of Government Departments and the
Shared Priorities agreed by ODPM and the LGA; and the need for
DCMS to drive this cross-cutting agenda through active engagement
with the programmes of other government departments.
(b) The need for further investment in the
public library service, possibly through a Standards Fund, once
the necessary work has been done on budgets to ensure that they
are being spent efficiently and once the capital needs (in buildings,
stock and ICT) have been identified.
(c) The need to provide stronger support
for the regulatory framework if the Public Library Standards are
to influence service improvement.
(d) The need to continue to revise the Standards
in the light of experience and comment, and, especially, the need
to develop a Standard on the skills and competences of staff,
to amend the Standard on internet access to require access to
be free at the point of use, and to set the Standard of satisfaction
rates for children at the same level as that for adults.
(e) The need for the Secretary of State for
Culture, Media and Sport (and the relevant Minister acting on
the Secretary of State's authority) to continue to be advised
by an Advisory Council reporting directly to the Minister and
located within the responsible department; and the need for that
Council to be extended in membership to include all the major
stakeholders in public library service.
(f) The need to recognise as a priority the
serious nature of the problems facing the public library service
in terms of workforce development; and for the key government
and local government agencies to work with CILIP, MLA, the Society
of Chief Librarians and other stakeholders to identify the size
and nature of the problem and set in train necessary actions to
address the issue.
(g) The need for the Select Committee to
reaffirm its recommendation in 2000 that the Share the Vision
model should be expanded to all disabled groups.
(h) The need for government to revise the
CPA framework in order to give public library services equal weighting
with the other major statutory services.
(i) The need for government, through the
regulatory framework, to ensure a consistent and reasonable approach
to charging for interlending services.
(j) The need for government to give due recognition
to the recent recommendations on open access publication made
by the Science and Technology Select Committee.
(k) The need for Public Library Authorities
to continue to explore opportunities for collaboration and partnership
at local, regional and national levels, including partnership
with the British Library.
21. Finally we would like to commend DCMS
and MLA and other stakeholders such as the Society of Chief Librarians
for their work on Framework for the Future and on the Framework
Action Plan. It is an important step in the right direction. The
policy is in place: investment now needs to follow.
November 2004
1 CILIP, the Chartered Institute of Library and Information
Professionals, is the professional body for library and information
professionals in the UK. We have over 23,000 members working in
all sectors of the economy, including public libraries, schools,
higher education, government, the corporate sector, media, learned
societies and voluntary groups. Amongst our core activities we
award professional qualifications, support the continuing professional
development of members and advocate the importance of libraries
and information specialists to all parts of the economy. Back
2
The written evidence was submitted by The Library Association,
one of the two organisations that merged to form the Chartered
Institute of Library and Information Professionals in 2002. Back
3
Stock that is not the latest publications but which forms the
"canon" of previously published works. Back
4
Brophy, Peter, The People's Network: moving forward. MLA,
2004. Back
5
Sommerlad, Elizabeth and others, Evaluation of the People's
Network and ICT training for public library staff: interim report.
Tavistock Institute, 2003. Back
|
