Input into Barnet Council Cabinet discussion about Library Strategy

This was written in response to the Cabinet paper ('Developing a Strategy For Barnet's Libraries') referred to in the previous post.

"I am writing as Chair of the East Finchley Library Users Group, which exists as a vehicle for the local community as a whole to support and contribute positively to the development of our local library at East Finchley.

The five brief points we'd like to introduce to the discussion are:

1) To draw the Cabinet's attention to the fact that a wide ranging consultation (of library users and non-users alike - the consultation was geographically defined) about the future of East Finchley Library was carried out only a couple of years ago at a cost higher than that currently proposed for the cross-borough market research. The results of this substantial, in-depth East Finchley research project should be taken into account at this juncture. 9.3.1. states "At local library level, there have been occasional surveys about opening hours and other changes. However, there has been little attempt at segmented market research etc." - this statement is misleading in ignoring the substantial research around EF Library.

2) It is critical to consider the position of libraries in the context of the community as a whole. In our community, for example, you pay a premium to live near the tube station. That means the people who most need the library services live at the other end of the High Street. It's in this direction where most of the public housing and state schooling is located, the latter a major user of the services.

3) It is vital to take a sophisticated view of the best practice information available on progressive approaches to library provision. This means taking full account of circumstances where a particular solution has been applied. So if, for example, a library has been built into a retail co-location (as per 9.5.4), the full circumstances of previous provision, community layout, reason for new building etc. must be carefully considered rather than any kind of simplistic adoption of such models.

4) There is currently significant lottery money available for development of progressive library services which should be considered at this time. This opportunity is not referred to in the cabinet papers.

5) The logical end of arguments as set out in 4.2, for example, is that all old buildings owned by the Borough should be sold off and replaced. That there is no capital programme to address maintenance of buildings surely is a policy lacuna that needs addressing. We understand the budgetary pressures to which LBB is subject, but selling off old buildings because of the absence of such a programme seems like the cart leading the horse."



from Chairman
East Finchley Library Users Group