Recent developments
12. In 1998 the Government moved to establish national
standards for libraries and to put some meat on the bones of the
statutory duty to provide a "comprehensive and efficient"
service. The Government required all library authorities to submit
Annual Library Plans to DCMS.[17]
These plans were to incorporate reviews of past performance and
set out strategies for the coming years.[18]
In 2001 DCMS launched a set of 26 Public Library Standards the
aim of which was to create a clear and widely accepted definition
of a library authority's duty to provide a "comprehensive
and efficient service."[19]
In Standards and Assessment, which sets out the standards,
they were described as complementing Annual Library Plans. However,
towards the end of 2002, the system of Annual Library Plans was
discontinued and replaced by Public Library Position Statements.
These Statements were comparatively streamlined documents which
were said to be aimed at outlining a local authority's compliance,
or "engagement", with the Government's new strategy—Framework
for the Future.[20]
This strategy was published in February 2003.
13. In 2004 the original 26 national standards were
dropped and a simplified set of ten—the Public Library Service
Standards—were announced.[21]
Public Library Position Statements also turned out to be transitional
as DCMS then moved towards a system whereby authorities must report
on their performance against the ten national standards as part
of an annual return to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance
and Accountancy (CIPFA) who are sub-contracted to collate the
results.[22]
14. The table below (Table 1) summarises the development
of the library service and focuses particularly on those changes
introduced in the last seven years.Table
1:
| Dates | Developments
|
| 1850 | The Public Libraries Act
|
| 1964 | The Public Libraries and Museums Act
|
| 1998 | Annual Library Plans
|
| 2001 | Public Library Standards (26)
|
| 2002 | Public Library Position Statements
(replacing Annual Library Plans)
|
| 2003 | Framework for the Future
(national strategy)
|
| 2004 | Public Library Service Standards (10)
(replacing Public Library Position Statements and the original Public Library Standards)
|
15. On the release of the top ten standards Lord McIntosh, Parliamentary-Under
Secretary of State at the DCMS, stated: "The new standards
are fewer in number, but no less stretching. They mean library
users will now know what they have a right to expect, and how
well their own service is performing compared to others."[23]
We note, however, that the new standards document, Public Library
Service Standards, says that authorities should continue to
collect and monitor their performance against the original 26
standards (now dropped or amended); if they thought it "worthwhile".
[24]
16. Some witnesses, for example Mr Coates,[25]
suggested the Government's various initiatives had been weak and
failed to clarify who was responsible for the performance of the
library service. He said that: the DCMS had failed to make Annual
Library Plans function as they should have done; the first set
of national standards was produced without associated training
or guidance; the second set was published without analysis of
why the first set failed; and that Framework for the Future
was a policy statement without an accompanying management
strategy for meeting the needs of the public which, in any case,
have never been subject to professional assessment.[26]
17. Some of these criticisms were echoed by the DCMS's
own ministerial advisory panel which reported that: "At a
time when libraries are doing an increasing amount to contribute
to the shared priorities of central and local government, it is
a matter of concern that the regulatory framework that underpins
DCMS's and library authorities' linked statutory obligations has
been watered down with the demise of, first, Annual Library Plans
and, now, Position Statements." The ACL said that the current
set of 10 standards—which it had played a major part in
devising—were "hoped" to guarantee "at least
a minimum level of service for users across the 149 English library
authorities."[27]
18. In contrast, the 2004 DCMS report set out a picture
of more orderly progress. The Department said that the Annual
Library Plans (ALPs) were introduced in 1998 against "the
backdrop of the decline of some of England's public library services"
to encourage "better planning". The DCMS stated that
ALPs, having improved markedly over four years, were discontinued
in 2002 having achieved their aim. The wisdom of abandoning an
improving product seems to us to be open to question. The much
more "streamlined" Position Statements were said to
be aimed at eliciting the engagement of local authorities with
the Framework for the Future agenda. DCMS reported that
in September 2004, when the Statements were discontinued, 6% of
authorities had achieved an "excellent" assessment in
relation to the new strategy, and a further 81% had been assessed
as "good".
19. However, the degree of engagement with a new
agenda is, of course, not in itself a measure of the quality of
services. In 2002—the very year that DCMS dropped the detailed
Annual Library Plans, reporting "job done"—returns
against the original set of library standards, together with a
major report from the Audit Commission, "confirmed what the
Department had long suspected" in indicating that half of
all library services were unsatisfactory.[28]
In evidence to us, the Audit Commission asserted that, in its
opinion, this 50/50 split remained the position.[29]
20. We commend
the Government for attempting to establish a national strategy
for the provision of library services, and national standards
for the quality and performance of those services, in accordance
with its statutory responsibilities. We were, however, dismayed
by the chopping and changing that has taken place in the process
of trying to settle on a set of workable arrangements. We suspect
that the overall policy of granting "freedoms and flexibilities"
to local authorities may have been applied too liberally by DCMS
in this area to the detriment of improvements in library services;
not least the 50% of such services that remain persistently below
standard.
Trends
21. The following tables set out recent trends in
public library services provision (expenditure; opening hours;
books in stock and acquisitions; and opening hours) and use of
those services (book-borrowing; library visits; and stated reasons
for visits).
Table 2:
Table
3
Table
4:
Table
5:
Table
6:
Table
7:
Table
8:
22. We regard the overall picture to be one of decline—both
in provision and usage—especially in the provision of books
which many see as a library's key function. It is difficult to
argue that the library service is simply responding to reduced
demand from the community when: overall expenditure is rising
in real terms; demand for books and information from other sources
is also rising; and evidence shows that library improvement and/or
refurbishment schemes can boost visits and, in particular, book
issues by a significant degree.
We believe that a situation in which core performance indicators,
and gross throughput, are falling—but overall costs are
rising—signals a service in distress.
British Library
23. The British Library has a close working relationship
with local libraries nationwide.[30]
All public library authorities are registered users of the British
Library's remote document supply service which accounts for 45%
of total inter-library lending in the UK.[31]
The British Library's website, which includes selected British
Library material, can now be accessed via the People's Network
located in public libraries. The British Library has been sharing
its expertise with national library organisations on a range of
subject areas such as the positioning and marketing of libraries
and exchanging information on working with the business community.[32]
24. We commend
the British Library in its efforts to support and advise the public
library sector and recommend that such links be developed further
in the future with achievable targets being set to enable progress
to be monitored and assessed.
Public Lending Right
25. The Public Lending Right Act 1979 confers on
authors, and other contributors such as an illustrator, a right
to receive payment from central Government for the free lending
of their books by public libraries.[33]
The Public Lending Right Scheme (PLR) established in 1982, gives
effect to that right. Eligible authors currently number well over
30,000. The amount paid to each author under the PLRS depends
on how often their books were taken out but is subject to an annual
ceiling (£6,000) and floor (£5). The Registrar of the
Scheme makes an assessment on the basis of loans data from a large
and rotating sample of some 400 library branches across the country.[34]
26. The PLRS is obviously a pot to be shared by participants
rather than being demand-led; for example the "rate per loan"
determined in February 2002 was 2.67 pence. Total funding for
the Scheme has been increased to £7.4 million for 2004-05.[35]
Overall, £77 million has been distributed to eligible authors
since the Scheme started.[36]
The importance of the Scheme should not be underestimated and
Jacqueline Wilson told us that PLRS payments were a crucial element
of income for less well-established authors.[37]
Table 9:
| PLRS resources
| 1982
| 2004
|
| Total eligible authors
| 7,562 | 32,000
|
| Total funding (£m)
| 2.0 | 7.4
|
| Funding per eligible author
| £264 | £231
|
Public Lending Right Review
Table
10:
