Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120
- 124)
TUESDAY 30 NOVEMBER 2004
AUDIT COMMISSION
Q120 Mr Doran: That is helpful. Moving
on, at the national level you have identified a number of problems,
lack of clarity in the statutory definitions, for example. I was
not clear when you answered Derek Wyatt's question, were you suggesting
that that needed new legislation or could all of this be dealt
with by government guidance or whatever? That is before we get
on to your framework. We will come on to that in a minute.
Mr Curtis: I am not an expert
on that but the Department has produced public library standards
and one would have thought that you could derive public library
standards from legislation. They do exist at the moment. I suppose
you could say they are not standards in that as set out local
authorities are being told you do not have to meet all of them
so are they therefore a standard or just a loose expectation,
but the definition at the moment, as it sits and as I read it,
enables anyone to interpret it in their particular way. Therefore,
we need legislation to ensure a tighter interpretation. But again
just to reflect upon the Framework for the Future document, that
talks about—and I think this came up in CILIP's evidence—the
expectation that the Library Service should focus on areas of
greatest need, but how does that fit with a remit which says you
have got to provide a comprehensive and efficient service.
Q121 Mr Doran: Is that measurable
in your terms?
Mr Curtis: I think you could certainly
identify particular outcomes or particular activities that would
start to hit your policy priorities. For instance, if we look
at another area of our remit, and that is sport provision or exercise
or recreation provision, Sport England is piloting and developing
a measure of participation in sport or moderate activity. You
can never prove that taking exercise is going to—I suppose
researchers have done this, but the notion is that there is a
link between exercise and healthier communities, therefore you
have a proxy measure there in terms of exercise and you can make
a judgment about the performance of a local authority and its
contribution to a healthy community. Likewise issues around provision
of Bookstart and so forth. You might say that the level of participation
by children and young people in a library service is a good proxy
indicator of the contributor of the Library Service to literacy
standards and future reading. I think those things are measurable.
Q122 Mr Doran: Just finally, you
threw the idea into the pot of a framework and that has got its
attractions. Another tool that government uses is targets. Do
you think that would have an effect on measuring and improving
the Library Service?
Ms Dean: Absolutely. If we had
the strong strategic direction then as part of that there would
need to actually be a system by which we could measure whether
or not that direction was being achieved and that can only happen
through performance measures by identifying what the criteria
of success would be and by looking at each authority's performance
against that. In fact, in some areas for some authorities, particularly
those with mixtures of affluent and deprived areas, perhaps we
need to be looking much more at neighbourhood or ward level data
around the provision of public library services rather than just
at the authority level. It would enable authorities then to pick
up where their opening hours are in relation to deprived communities,
for example, and those most in need of access to public library
services.
Mr Doran: Thank you very much.
Q123 Chairman: It was suggested to
us by a witness last week that libraries got sufficient funding
but do not spend it efficiently. What is your comment on that?
Mr Curtis: I think what we have
said in our various publications is that performance management
is often not the libraries' strongest suit. If performance management
is not a strong suit it means that you are not necessarily getting
the most out of your resources. Again, we have said in our evidence
and said elsewhere that issues around procurement, for instance,
and back office functions, could perhaps be better managed, and
it will be a matter of further investigation from the Audit Commission
this year.
Q124 Chairman: Local authority services
25 years ago were assessed in a very different way. We had what
Neville Chamberlain started out in Birmingham and what then became
known, curiously, as "municipal socialism" whereby local
authorities were expected to provide facilities like libraries,
museums, sports facilities, swimming pools and so on, and they
were not approached on the basis these had got to make money or
be closed down, but they were intended, as it were, as loss-making
services which were an amenity to the public. Nobody wants to
see money wasted but do you not think it would be a very good
thing if we went back to that kind of ethos rather than judging
every single thing—and I realise that is your job which
is why I am asking you the question—by some exterior criterion
of cost-effectiveness. How do you say that a swimming pool is
cost-effective other than people using it? How do you say that
a museum is cost-effective other than there it is and people can
take advantage of its beauties and learning?
Mr Curtis: I think the issue is
about getting the best out of the resource you have got. It is
an issue of value for money. It is not an issue of making a profit
but it is ensuring that the public pound works as hard as it ought
to for the public who has contributed it in the first place. There
is nothing wrong with something that is loss-making as long as
you set out deliberately to make the loss. The difficulty is when
the resource controls your decisions rather than your decisions
controlling the resource.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
That was very instructive. We are most grateful to you.
| 
