Alan Gibbons’ Blog

Dear Councillor Foulkes,

I agree that the DCMS inquiry into Wirral Libraries opens up a welcome debate about the role of libraries in our national life and local communities. I disagree with almost everything else in the statement the council has issued.

You say that this is a time of recession. It is, but the decision to cut eleven of the borough’s 24 libraries was taken BEFORE the full impact of the recession had hit. Any strategic choices should have been based on rational planning over a number of years. I am also disturbed that you raise the cost of care for the elderly, child protection and education. Each area of spending has its own budget and should be considered on its own merits. The mention of these areas feels like cheap emotional blackmail.

You then say that you are relocating to easy to access locations in multi-purpose buildings. This is made to sound like careful planning, not the rushed SAR that caused popular uproar. An underfunded library in a One Stop Shop would hardly be progress. Where proper refurbishment and reorganisation have occurred across the country there has been long-term preparation. This does not seem the case in the Wirral. Nothing was in place prior to the threat of closure. Indeed, your original statements mentioned the cost of buildings as the main rationale for the changes, not a concern for an integrated, progressive library service. You even mention the carbon footprint of libraries as if cutting almost half the branch network is somehow environmentally friendly! The strategy is not green, nor are the people of Wirral.

You further talk about residents’ proximity to their library. So why was there such a huge, almost unanimous outcry, not just by your political opponents but by huge numbers of traditional Labour and Lib Dem voters? You hint at one point that protest groups and blogs have manipulated the public’s dismay unfairly and that, because they are not local taxpayers, they have no right to protest. I live in Liverpool -a real outside agitator!- and many Campaign for the Book supporters live in other cities or abroad. They devote their time and energy to support the people of Wirral because they care about reading and public services. They have no other ulterior motive. You seem upset by many of your critics. There is even a jibe at the Museums and Libraries Archive executive (MLA). I think it would make for a more mature debate if we discussed the issues seriously instead of throwing half-formulated accusations about. Finally, you do raise one serious issue. The way people access information is changing. Libraries should change too. Does this mean we should close half the branch network? I think not. 

Your actions caused an immense outcry yet you do not seem to be able to engage with the protestors’ concerns. The Campaign for the Book believes we need the strongest branch network possible. We believe that when book stock and book borrowing fall we should have an energetic strategy to turn the situation round. We believe that there should be the maximum consultation possible, involving the MLA, library consultants, local users’ groups, staff and trade unions. Wirral council should be prepared to step back from its hugely unpopular course and be prepared to listen properly to the people’s concerns. This has not happened yet. Holding consultation meetings then ignoring the views expressed is totally inadequate.

I hope that the DCMS review will lead to a thorough rethink of Wirral’s ill-conceived plans.

Yours faithfully,

Alan Gibbons

Organizer, Campaign for the Book

This entry was posted on Friday, April 24th, 2009 at 7:54 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.