Latest news: Following the Judicial Review, on 16 November 2011, Judge Martin McKenna ordered the unlawful plans below be quashed. GCC has now published a revised strategy, announced on 16 January 2012. See links to the revised proposals and our reaction to them here
A quick guide to the council’s plans for our library service:
The council will stop running at least 10 of our libraries
- These are: Hester’s Way, Matson, Brockworth, Bream, Newnham, Mitcheldean, Tuffley, Minchinhampton, Berkeley and Lechlade
- The council is going to ask the community to pay for and run these libraries
- If we can’t take on this expensive and difficult task, the libraries will close.
- Some of these libraries are in the most deprived areas of the county
Mobile libraries and the housebound library service will stop
- The elderly, disabled and other vulnerable members of our community will be particularly affected by this cut.
Another 7 libraries will probably close
- These will be: Bourton, Moreton, Nailsworth, Stonehouse, Churchdown, Prestbury and Wotton.
- The council says it needs partners to help pay for and run these libraries and share the premises. If these people can’t be found, the libraries will have to close.
- Even when run by the council and a partner organisation, they will have a severely reduced service with less books, less services, self-service machines and minimal staffing (around 3 hours per week).
- The council’s name for these will be “library link”.
Another 11 of our libraries will have a greatly reduced service
- These are: Bishop’s Cleeve, Up Hatherley, Chipping Camden, Fairford, Tetbury, Winchcombe, Lydney, Charlton Kings, Quedgeley, Hucclecote, Cinderford and Longlevens
- They will have less stock, fewer services and less staff. They will only open 3.5 days a week.
- The council calls this “library express”
24-hour ‘virtual library’
The Council says that lost library services can be replaced by a ’24 hour online virtual library service’. They say that they will invest in and improve the current online library service, but haven’t said where the money for this will come from. This will be no use at all to the estimated 4 in 10 people in our county who do not have internet access, many of whom are likely to be elderly people or those on low incomes.
Why are these plans so bad?
- The plans are based on a “conversation” with the public which had 5000 respondents. The council says these plans are what we want. But 5000 is only 0.83% of Gloucestershire’s population. It is not possible to tell what a whole community wants from the views of less than 1%
- The areas where libraries face closure include the most deprived and most isolated in the county. The elderly, disabled, the unemployed, children and other vulnerable people will be particularly affected by the plans
- Some areas targeted are facing significant other cuts, including the loss of youth centres and bus services
- We will end up with a “postcode lottery” where if you live in the ‘right’ area of Gloucestershire you will have access to services that others do not
- The proposal for volunteers to run libraries with minimal assistance from the council is unfair and misguided. The public should not be expected to pay again for a service paid for in their taxes, particularly if they live in less affluent areas
- Running a business as complex as a library will be beyond the means of most volunteers in terms of funds, skill, time and effort required. There are reasons why professional librarians exist!
- Other libraries in the country have tried similar systems, in which libraries are run mainly by volunteers. These have not worked well. Gloucestershire’s plans are more severe than these. They are effectively experimenting on us by trying something that has never been tried before.
- It won’t save much money! Libraries only represent 1.45% of the council’s budget, yet 43% of the service is being cut
- The plans may be illegal. Under the 1964 Public Libraries and Museums Act, councils are obliged to provide a “comprehensive” library service. It is possible that the council will be failing this legal requirement
But how else can the council save money?
Councillors who’ve met with our group have said that the cuts can be made elsewhere without affecting frontline services so severely. Although some form of cuts are expected to most public services, we feel it is disproportionate to cut 43% of a service, especially as libraries represent a tiny section of the council’s budget (less than 1.45%!)
It is likely that cutting libraries will actually result in increased costs to other public services. The Job Centre and Citizen’s Advice Bureau refer people to libraries. They will have to replace the services that libraries offer. Schools will have to provide new services, as crucial services for children will be lost. Many doctors use the “books on prescription” service to help patients understand and cope with medical conditions. Losing this may result in increased costs to the NHS.
As a group, we are demanding a transparent, independent and comprehensive review of the council’s plans, with particular attention paid to the impact on our community.
So what can we do?
Please see the ‘petition’ section of the site and complete the petition. We are thrilled to have smashed our original target of 5,000 signatures, and have so far collected almost 12,000! This has secured a Council debate of our demands, which will take place on Wednesday 19th January. We are still collecting signatures, both on paper petitions and online. Please also write to your local county councillor, your MP and to Antonia Noble, cabinet member with responsibility for libraries, and Mark Hawthorne, the County Council Leader.
Continue making good use of your library service and encourage any other library users you know to join the campaign.
Tell the council what you think of their plans and how they will affect you by filling in the “consultation“
Join us – the Friends of Gloucestershire Libraries
The only way we can change the plans is by making our voices heard! The council have claimed their plans are what the people of Gloucestershire want – we need to let them know that this is not true!
Friends of Gloucestershire Libraries 
I am a Gloucestershire writer and I am entirely opposed to these library cuts. Libraries are an essential service and are vitally important to local communities. At present, social mobility in this country is at an all time low. Cutting funds for libraries is only going to make that situation worse. I congratulate the Friends’ of Gloucestershire Libraries on their campaign and offer them my full support.
These changes will made no difference to me, in fact they might even be better! I am housebound because of my disabled son, and I already order all our books from the internet to be picked up at the local library. Now that there are computers in libraries they are more like cybercafes and less like libraries anyway. I think these changes are good. There will never be a library with all the books I need other than the British Library in London, so ordering books on the internet from all over Gloucestershire is a much better option and if it saves money so that there is still something in the pot for the life saving services for the disabled, then I am glad. The government, local and national, are having to make some hard decisions and I applaud Glos for doing so and in the process creating a service for the future!
This is good for you Jennifer but it is not for the many people who do not have the internet or who cannot get to a library to collect the books they order if they are lucky enough to have the internet. Even if people DO have access to the internet, with libraries threatened with closure and with reduced opening hours it will be less easy for people to get to the library to collect books. Spare a thought to for these people. You may be ok but many others will be cut off by these plans – like the elderly lady who told me she will have to get two buses to get to a library if these plans go ahead – and this is before cuts are made to local public transport.
“These changes will made no difference to me, in fact they might even be better! I am housebound because of my disabled son, and I already order all our books from the internet to be picked up at the local library… There will never be a library with all the books I need other than the British Library in London, so ordering books on the internet from all over Gloucestershire is a much better option and if it saves money so that there is still something in the pot for the life saving services for the disabled, then I am glad. ”
With at least 11, and possibly 18 libraries closing, you won’t be able to order from all over Gloucestershire anymore. 18 libraries worth of books equates to a sizeable percentage of the County’s stock and not only takes these books out of the hands of the communities who currently use them, but disadvantage those who might want to order them. In addition, with the book buying budget cut sizeably in the last two years, there won’t be the funds to replace them either. Ordering books on the internet doesn’t save money either. Staff at the library which own the book you requested still have to get the books off the shelf, and pack them up; the van driver still has to courier them around between branches, and staff at your local library still have to unpack them, and possibly arrange for them to be delivered to you. All for substantially less than the reservation fee you pay to order them. In addition, this money saved isn’t going back into the general pot. It isn’t going to fund services for the disabled, however vital those are. It’s mostly going towards the £45 million payoff of the Council’s debt.
“Now that there are computers in libraries they are more like cybercafes and less like libraries anyway.”
The point of a library is that it exists to provide a wealth of resources in one place for those who cannot access them in other ways. It started with books in an age where school wasn’t obligatory for children, and a good chunk of the population didn’t own a book. In today’s age, those resources are routinely electronic and therefore computers are necessary to access them. It doesn’t devalue the Library service – arguably, it adds to the value to the community, particularly in a rural and sometimes deprived county.
“The government, local and national, are having to make some hard decisions and I applaud Glos for doing so and in the process creating a service for the future!”
Except, by cutting half the service, there is barely a service for the future, let alone the creation of a “service for the future.” You may be glad, but no one benefits from this decision, not even you. Which you probably won’t notice until the cuts you support have gone through. And I wonder who’ll be the first to complain that the service isn’t what it used to be?
Pingback: General information up to 7th Feb | Friends of Minchinhampton Library
Pingback: Libraries, raised tempers and Gloucestershire County Council « We Love Local Government
Your link titled consultation does not work at the moment http://ww5.gloucestershire.gov.uk/surveys/Library_Service_Consultation/
Pingback: FoI failing at KCC and more on the Tory PCC candidate’s data protection breach | Infoism