Might it be instructive to look at libraries like the City Council's leisure
services. The headline they were touting the other day was that up until they
hived their facilities off to a social enterprise they were subsidising each
visit to the tune of over ยฃ2 and now it is down to less than 40 pence. Visits
are up, facilities are being improved. My only gripe is that the group now
saying this is such a great thing are the very people who excoriated those of
us who suggested this over a decade ago! But that's politics for you again.
One thing about Leisure Services I distinctly recall from those discussions ten
years ago was that the vast majority of users at least back then were from the
upper socio-economic groups - effectively the less well off tax payers were
helping to subsidise, by force, the leisure activities of the better off. I'd
be interested to know the real "socio-economic" profile of the libraries
service's users too. I'll bet it is actually quite a similar situation.
If that is the case, then I'd suggest that under the "political means" the
libraries service is failing to deliver the very real possible benefits that
Ruth enumerated as her reasons for choosing librarianship as a career. And
perhaps handing it over to a bunch of people who are able to focus solely on
libraries, learning outreach and so on and developing that real mission will
reinvigorate them, instead of them being some second string politically run
service dependent on the crumbs from a stretched taxpayer purse (not public
purse - the state has no money it doesn't take from its subjects!).
So maybe this is an opportunity not to break the service up and end up with
twenty odd facilities run by a continuing political system and twenty odd run
by various very local groups that will necessarily be dependent on the
enthusiasm of a few individuals. Remember not all of the ones up for closure
are in high population areas like the city ones where such enthusiasts might be
easier to recruit and replace when they give up (the death knell for many a
local voluntary type group). Maybe we can find a social enterprise model that
can provide professional management, that can develop the facilities and bring
together different income streams.
Given the government's apparent vision for schools too, perhaps such a social
enterprise could also take over librarianship functions for schools, "free" or
otherwise. Pull in providers of tertiary education, Brookes, Oxford &
Cherwell, Abingdon & Witney, Ruskin, WEA (I tend to exclude OU itself as their
focus is less local than it is playing in the international league, but ContEd
might be interested), and all the rest and in this era of "blended learning"
perhaps local libraries could also become hubs for their outreach, facilities
for group study in local communities and so on. They could be local hubs for
home-schoolers maybe too.
Perhaps *some* physical library facilities are not actually required in places
where they have a largely underused school facility that could be jointly used
- seeing grown ups taking lifelong learning seriously might improve school
outcomes too. Space and facilities could be leased back to local authorities
who, perhaps, have local service offices that struggle to pay their rent. You
could have some commercial offer as well - maybe some kind of distribution
point for delivery services, maybe some deal could be done with the likes of,
say, LoveFilm.com over DVDs/CDs, maybe subscription based IT assistance -
training, computer maintenance etc.
Just some thoughts anyway.
Jock
Rest of post
--
Jock Coats
Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF
m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call
<email obscured> http://jockcoats.me