---

Dorset Library Service

I wrote to the Minister on 6 June and 12 June 2006 about Dorset county council’s proposal to close 13 of its public libraries. He said that he was disturbed by the potential scale of the closures, that he would be checking the situation with the county council, that he would continue to monitor the situation, and that he would in particular assess how the views and wishes of local people were being considered. I thank him for the responses that he gave at that early stage. Following an enormous outcry from local people, the libraries were given a reprieve for a two-year, rather than a six-week, consultation period. One year on, and following yesterday’s meeting of the council’s community overview committee, there might be some light at the end of the tunnel. However, any recommendations of that meeting still need acceptance by the council’s cabinet and by the full council, and much detail remains to be clarified. The devil may yet lie in that detail, and today’s debate is therefore of great relevance to the future of the Dorset library service. I declare a minor interest in the future of the service, in that I regularly hold surgeries in libraries in my constituency, two of which are among the 13 candidates for closure. I praise the staff of the libraries for the services that they provide, which I witness on a regular basis. The whole service has received high ratings. For example, it received the top rating for excellence from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the Department’s last formal measurement of performance against the public library service standard. Dorset county council is ranked as excellent in the Audit Commission’s comprehensive performance assessment, and library scores played their full part in that. Furthermore, the service has high and increasing satisfaction ratings from users. A 2006 MORI survey found that 77 per cent. of respondents were satisfied with the libraries, compared with 73 per cent. in 2003. Clearly, therefore, there is much to celebrate, and praise should be given to all the library staff. There are also many exciting initiatives, for example in work with children and young people to help them to enjoy and achieve. What, therefore, is the problem? Dorset currently has 34 libraries and 4 mobile libraries that cover what is essentially a rural county. There have been contentions to the effect that it has a relatively large number of libraries per head of population, but I feel that it is important to appreciate the local context, including the nature of the rural area and the very poor public transport and road network. Bournemouth and Poole are now separate unitary authorities, and as far as I know they have not been proposing library closures. Indeed, our local library where I live in North Poole has recently had its hours extended. The uncertainty for the Dorset library service stems from an efficiency review. The county council is the lowest funded of all England’s county councils, with £80 of formula grant per head, compared with what I am told is an average of £160 per head. It was forecasting a gap between spending and income of £20 million by 2009-10, which prompted a review of all services, to consider efficiency savings. Savings were found, and the projected funding gap has been reduced by half, but there appear to be fears that the gap could widen again depending on the outcome of this year’s comprehensive spending review and on possible requirements for further efficiencies in the future. Clearly, the outcome of the comprehensive spending review is therefore of critical importance to Dorset county council, and I must emphasise to the Minister that Dorset residents feel badly let down by settlements that are so much lower than those for other county councils. The library service was for its part asked to find efficiency savings of £850,000. Some savings have been identified, but at the end of the day the recommendation from the review was to close 13 predominantly rural community libraries. The efficiency review identified the need to modernise the library network and the need for investment to achieve a high-quality network, which in turn was to be supported by closing those libraries that were assessed as not viable on measures of performance, cost-effectiveness and size, or that were clustered in such a way that arguably there was over-provision. A number of issues have emerged during the consultation period. One of my constituents has undertaken a statistical analysis to show that some of the larger libraries are in fact less cost-effective in terms of cost per book-issue than many of the smaller ones. At the very least, that indicates that all libraries should be included in the detailed review and consultation. A year ago, councillors from opposition parties were asking why all libraries were not being put under the same spotlight as the 13. It seems that yesterday’s decision at the county council has at long last taken on board the need to evaluate all the libraries in terms of efficiency and community involvement. I believe that the original library proximity criteria used for assessing closure were seriously flawed. At the same time that the proposed closure of Corfe Mullen library was announced, bus services to Wimborne, whose library it was suggested my constituents could use instead, were slashed. They have been further cut back this year, to such an extent that it cannot be said that the alternative library is accessible to those without their own transport. Corfe Mullen has a population of about 10,000, the latest figures published by the county rank it 15th in total book issues, and in addition the county council is supporting an extra 700 local homes in the regional spatial strategy—although that proposal is not one that I supported. I feel that there is a distinct lack of joined-up thinking by the county council. Potential growth and accessibility ought surely to be considered, and I see no evidence of the county council having a greater commitment to improve the bus services in that part of my constituency. Similarly, the other library proposed for closure in my constituency, Lytchett Matravers, should also be assessed in terms of accessibility to an alternative library, because public transport to the suggested alternatives is dire. Potential growth should be considered too, because usage at that library has steadily been increasing over the last few years. It is relevant that representations from that part of my constituency were made to the public examination stage of the regional spatial strategy that proposed the high growth in housing. The last year has seen extensive consultation with each of the 13 libraries and with their communities. Each community has been asked to come up with its own plan for the future of its library, with a push towards a community-led model. One positive outcome that has emerged has been the general willingness for some degree of community involvement and volunteering. That needs to be applied to all 34 libraries, however. Clearly, different arrangements will need to be worked out for each of the different communities, and I have heard from discussions with my local communities that they do not believe a community-led model to be sustainable. The input of a professional librarian is seen to be essential, because not all communities will be able to identify sufficient volunteers to run a service, and even those that might have that expertise available at the moment might not be able to sustain it over time. An insistence on a community-led model may deprive disadvantaged areas of a library service, which surely goes against any principle of equity. There are issues about training volunteers, use of the information technology system, maintenance of book stocks, and responsibility for and cost of the property. If property is passed to community groups, will it be offered at a peppercorn rent? We do not really have answers to any of those questions yet. In principle, many of the issues were mentioned in yesterday’s council recommendation, but what exactly will they mean in practice? Along the line, suggestions were made that parish councils, for example, could set a precept to raise money for the running of libraries. That would be totally unacceptable to my constituents. Why should they pay twice to borrow books, in comparison with library users in other Dorset communities whose libraries are not under threat of closure? The Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 states that it shall be a duty of every library authority to"““provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all persons desiring to make use thereof””." Recent guidance on the Department’s website said that the closure of one or even a small number of library branches does not necessarily signify a breach of the Act. A library may be closed to ensure better overall provision. However, I am talking about a proposal to close 13 libraries that stems almost wholly from financial considerations. I would be grateful if the Minister would clarify exactly how the guidance would apply in such circumstances. Finance is a key driving force for Dorset county council because of the continuous financial pressures to balance the books. It has been said to me, ““Keep your library, but we will make more cuts in social services.”” I understand that there are pressures, but we must think about the overall quality of life. Charging for the loan of books was raised with me when I attended a council meeting recently. The cabinet member responsible for libraries challenged me to introduce a private Member’s Bill—I wish it were so easy—to amend the 1964 Act. I shall not be taking up the suggestion. Nevertheless, on behalf of that cabinet member, I would like to ask the Minister for his views on charging for the loan of books. Concerned residents have wondered whether the whole book stock could be put in a trust, and whether there could then be charging for books to make it possible to maintain the book stock. I would find charging unacceptable, but some communities are very concerned about the potential loss of their libraries. Of course, there is the worry that the book fund will be cut and cut again. It has been cut to fund the retention of libraries during the consultation period. Obviously, it is vital that there are funds to maintain the stock of books, including those for children and the visually impaired. There must be a core stock of books available for all libraries. Next year is the national year of reading, as I keep reminding Dorset county council. I have pointed out that it is not a terribly good idea to close 13 libraries during the national year of reading. Seriously, we are at a crossroads, are we not, in this country. We want to improve children’s and young people’s literacy standards. We know that we have to engage boys, in particular, in more reading. This cannot be the time to be cutting back. It must be a time of finding innovative ways to engage children and young people with library services. There are excellent schemes—Bookstart and the summer reading challenge, for example—but there must be many more things that we could do. Dorset library service has considered moving some libraries into schools, which may be a solution for some communities. It would not work for my two libraries, but I can see that it could be a solution. For my communities, I am interested in using the extended school money for extended school provision in the library. That would work so well in the two villages. Young people from all sorts of backgrounds could have sessions in the library as part of the programme. Joined-up thinking is needed to bring things together. The library service cannot be static. Changes must be made, and innovative activities must take place in the buildings. It is important that this country retains its proud tradition of a free public library service, as it meets so many people’s needs. I reflect on my own time as a young person. Using the library every night was an important part of my eventually becoming the first person in my family to go to university. I am passionate about the need for access to books, and indeed the internet, in the library, for young people from all backgrounds. It is not always possible for them to find at home the peace and quiet that they need for studying, and obviously not all families have resources in the home. We talk a great deal about lifelong learning. Surely libraries have a crucial role to play in it. Not so long ago, people were predicting that cinemas would be a thing of the past, but that has not happened. Some people might feel that libraries are a thing of the past in a digital age, but I do not think that that is the case. I think that they are really important. I am pleased that the Sustainable Communities Bill is making progress. I would like to emphasise the contribution of a library to village life. Part of a sustainable community is having resources that are easily accessible to all people, and the many activities that can be carried out in a library add to the life of a village. I support the case for community involvement—for example, communities can best decide the hours so that there is a balance—but I do not think that community-led libraries are the solution for all communities. I hope that the Minister will continuously monitor the situation, and I ask him to give his view of the library service for the country, and how Dorset county fits in with it. Most of all, I hope that Dorset county council will firm up a satisfactory offer for all the libraries in Dorset.