Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 151)
TUESDAY 30 NOVEMBER 2004
ADVISORY COUNCIL
ON LIBRARIES
Q140 Ms Shipley: How worthwhile are
you really? I am sorry if this sounds a little rude but we have
got no efficient performance indicators, we have got no mechanisms
for enforcing standards, we have got 50% roughly of the libraries
not up to par, we have got a lack of consistency across the country.
So if you are one of the major advisers—and you said that
your advice does not differ from the other major adviser, both
of you then—either (a) you are not advising strongly enough
on those particular issues or (b) your advice is being ignored.
Which is it?
Mr Macnaught: I do not think our
advice is being ignored. We have, as I say, supported the development
of the Framework for the Future action plan which is putting in
train a number of the remedial processes to address the issues
that they have highlighted. We take the fact that 50% of the authorities
have had a bad review from the Audit Commission very seriously
and we have supported a peer group inspection system and we have
supported the development of the leadership programme. These things
will take time but we take very seriously those issues.
Q141 Ms Shipley: But I put it to
you that there has been a Labour Government for seven years, so
is the Labour Government and are the Ministers actually listening
on those four things that I outlined or are you failing to tell
them strongly enough?
Mr Macnaught: I do not think either
is the case.
Q142 Ms Shipley: Well, they are not
happening. It takes time to put the performance indicators in.
Did you tell them that seven years ago? Have they taken seven
years?
Mr Macnaught: As I say, I was
appointed as chair of ACL two years ago and the Government has
been acting as fast as it can on our advice. The position on the
standards, as far as I am concerned, is that we are halfway there
in terms of improving the standards. The first thing that we did
was respond to the criticism from ODPM and chief executives in
local authorities that the previous standards were far too focused
on inputs and that as part of the trend in local government generally
we need to move towards outcome measures for libraries.
Q143 Ms Shipley: But were you so
off the mark waiting for them before you responded? Should you
not have been pushing years before that for these sorts of things—performance
indicators and mechanisms for enforcing them—because it
is pretty basic stuff?
Mr Macnaught: I can only speak
as Chair of ACL for the last two years and we did engage in that
immediately.
Q144 Ms Shipley: Only when you were
pushed because the Audit Commission came up with the information,
by the looks of it.
Mr Macnaught: It certainly was
not as a response to Audit Commission activity. It was part of
a recognition that in local government generally we need to move
towards outcomes.
Q145 Ms Shipley: What sort of teeth
do you think should be in place? Here is your opportunity to advocate.
Once you have tried all these things, and all these things have
been put into place, what sort of teeth should be available for
when it starts to fail still?
Mr Macnaught: I think the strongest
challenge for local authorities to adhere to the standards and
the advice from DCMS is the instrument that CILIP referred to
in their evidence of the CPA process because that is, in my experience,
the overarching issue that concentrates minds in local government
at the moment. So if the CPA process flags up that a local authority
is going to be marked down because it has not adhered to standards
properly and adequately that will have a lot of teeth and it does
not depend on the Advisory Council to target authorities particularly
because the CPA process will do that.
Q146 Ms Shipley: And how long would
the process take?
Mr Macnaught: The CPA process
is active at the moment and I know that local authorities will
be concerned about the element of the culture block within CPA
inspection and if there is evidence that the performance of libraries
is going to adversely affect their CPA score then the local authorities
will do something about that now, is my belief.
Q147 Ms Shipley: How do we measure
that they have actually done that? How long will the whole process
take between library failing identified; library put right? That
is put really simply but that is what everyone wants, everyone
wants the library to be put right.
Mr Macnaught: It can happen very
quickly. In two of my neighbouring authorities there are examples
where the first round of the best value inspections showed up
poor performance, the senior management has been changed, and
the performance has turned round in both authorities.
Q148 Ms Shipley: How long would that
take?
Mr Macnaught: Perhaps two years
to see some marked improvements in both cases.
Ms Shipley: Thank you, Chairman.
Q149 Mr Doran: I know you are here
as a witness from the Advisory Council but I am also interested
in the fact that you are wearing a hat as the Society of Chief
Librarians so you will forgive me if I pursue a point that we
have covered earlier and that is the number of government departments
which have an interest here. I notice from the Society of Chief
Librarians that there is a firm recommendation that the lead policy
on libraries should be transferred to ODPM. To contrast that with
Bob McKee earlier, I am not sure whether he took a strategically
pragmatic and cautious view or whether he wimped out. Contrast
that with the Advisory Council where you say that DCMS should
be making a much more robust case to larger government departments.
Wearing two hats, you are both recognising the problems but the
emphasis is slightly different. If you accept that there needs
to be a stronger lead taken by DCMS, how would you see them doing
that? What areas would you want them to concentrate on?
Mr Macnaught: The other hat that
I wear is Head of Cultural Development for Gateshead Council and
I believe in the importance of culture as a collective area of
activity both for government nationally and for government at
local level. Therefore, I am very happy to see libraries as part
of the DCMS, provided that joined-up support from the rest of
government can take place. I think that there is an issue about
ODPM providing greater evidence that they recognise the important
role that libraries can play across all areas of local government.
The shared priorities between local government and central government
include several areas that public libraries can support. Whether
they are in education or in neighbourhood development, there are
lots of areas that we can contribute to. I think that the greatest
support that we could receive would actually be for a follow-up
programme of investment in the public library buildings that we
have which, if I may suggest, could be funded through a new stream
of Lottery funding in much the same way that the People's Network
levered a great deal of support and enthusiasm from local authorities
and has undoubtedly embedded our role in the e-government agenda
generally across local authorities. I think similarly an ambitious
programme of supporting the bringing up to standard of our public
library building stock through Lottery funding, through a challenge
to local authorities but essentially one where every local authority
would be entitled to some funding support to improve their building
stock provided the local authority met certain conditions, would
be an enormous lever for government.
Q150 Mr Doran: That keeps you with
DCMS. Lottery funding is going to reduce over the next 10 years,
particularly if we are successful with the Olympic bid, so you
need muscle somewhere else.
Mr Macnaught: That is why we need
the support from ODPM to recognise the importance of this and
if they were to lever other support in embedding the important
role of local authorities in local government that could be a
huge achievement for the Government and it would address the chronic
problem that will always beset discussions between central and
local government about libraries which is that, by and large,
wherever you go, there are huge problems with the building stock.
Just as the Lottery funding is reducing so is main line capital
to local authorities and there is no obvious solution to this
on-going problem of our building stock, which is why I do think
that some radical proposal involving Lottery support would be
very helpful.
Q151 Mr Doran: If I could ask you
to ponder this. The idea of shuffling responsibility amongst government
departments is really just hiding the problem. What is coming
across quite strongly to me in this short inquiry (we have heard
a lot of it today) is that there is a failure on the part of those
interested in the libraries to be advocates in their own case.
I was quite taken by the evidence that we had from representatives
of the Audit Commission that where there were advocates then there
were better facilities. You obviously were an advocate in Gateshead
and you made the point yourself earlier that Gateshead had good
facilities but that is not the picture across the country so maybe
libraries and librarians as a profession and as the professional
organisations should be getting their act together?
Mr Macnaught: I agree absolutely
and within the Framework for the Future that is why the marketing
activity is essential, not as a superficial, advertising campaign
but more deep-rooted in advocating the importance of the public
library service in the 21st century. We do need to get much better
at that now, I absolutely agree.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr Macnaught, you
have rounded off a very valuable morning.
| 
