The ground-breaking Public Libraries Act of 1850 was passed by the government of Queen Victoria’s third Prime Minister, Lord John Russell, after significant controversy and an 1849 Select Committee Report. It aimed to enhance the capacity for educational improvement of all classes in society by empowering local boroughs to provide free-access libraries. Books would no longer be the preserve of the wealthier classes.
I must confess a particular affinity with the public library. My grandmother, daughter of a Welsh valleys miner who spent the best part of 53 years underground in Big Pit, Blaenavon, used her local library extensively to self-educate and improve. And I was troubled by the reported comments of Roy Clare, the Head of the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council has suggested that public libraries are mostly used by white middle classes. For, as has been pointed out by Gloria De Piero, the Shadow Minister for Media and Culture, children’s borrowing of books is increasing, and almost 80 per cent of 11-to-15-year olds visit a library. This must surely go beyond use by merely a select group.
Library closures are a far cry from the position set out by the Conservative Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, Ed Vaizey, on 1 July 2010, when he declared himself “a champion for libraries”, which apparently had “a home at the heart of the ‘big society’ where communities have more of a role in determining the shape of the public service and what it delivers”. No-one denies that the public should have a say in improving services at their local library. It is entirely sensible that libraries modernise, and are responsive to particular local needs. Books are of course readily available to buy both in bookshops and online, but that does not serve to eliminate the crucial role of the free-access library in providing access to books and information for all.
It is not as if there is a shortage of ideas on developing our public libraries for the twenty-first century. The Public Library Modernization Review, published by the outgoing Labour government on 22 March 2010, contained some excellent ideas for developing public libraries, including a “national offer” of membership from birth, free internet access, a right to order any book, including those out of print, variable opening hours and an opportunity for membership of all libraries in England, not just the local library. There was even a suggestion of free access to e-books. Alongside this would be local variation. “Local offers” could include events or, for example, CD or DVD lending. A further, very useful suggestion, particularly in terms of guaranteeing a core national standard, was for a strategic body to be established to provide leadership in the area. This has great potential, particularly in terms of literary events, which more and libraries could look to attract.
We are also entering a period of deep cuts in public spending. There is going to be great pressure on family budgets. Put simply, this is the worst possible time to be contemplating a situation where hundreds of local public libraries close. Even Vaizey conceded in his speech last year that “library users will be right to challenge where frontline services are closed if library services haven’t thought about some radical efficiency options – shared services, merging functions or staffing across authorities or public services, use of volunteers or of other community buildings.” Yet any such challenge from library users will be ineffective if there is simply no money as a result of the government’s cuts programme.
Books are not luxury items. As the Public Library Modernization Review concluded: the “library workforce knows that libraries change lives, help learning and improve community cohesion”. They most certainly do. If hundreds of libraries are closed under this government, it will be reversing over a century-and-a-half’s work in bringing reading to all people, regardless of age and incomes.
Nick Thomas-Symonds is the author of Attlee: A Life in Politics published by IB Tauris (2010)
This is a fine article, but why are we not getting this message loud and clear from Labour ? Just timid dribs and drabs, not enough to inspire or help the thousands of people struggling to save their community libraries throughout the country. And don’t forget that Margaret Hodge’s reign was not much to shout about, putting it mildly. Mr Miliband, we expect some fighting talk in the chamber, like that expressed here. He must call for a national inquiry and all closures to be put on hold until it has published its conclusions. Most importantly, what is the point of all this rhetoric when Labour councils are dismantling their local library service with as much alacrity as the Tories. Tell your Labour councillors to cease, forthwith!
For the full list of library closures and map see http://publiclibrariesnews.blogspot.com/ For reasons to defend libraries, please see http://www.voicesforthelibrary.org.uk/wordpress/
Yep the memory must be playing up, because under labour my school fields closed sold off to make money, we had our local youth center closed, we fought for funding by nope we had to spend millions for a picture for the country. My area was hit hard by labour closing the tax office, the benefits office, the youth center, and the swimming pool. I think a bit less moaning about the Tories and bit more looking at where labour would be now.
This is an excellent, heartfelt article. The Con Dems will do incredible damage with closures on this scale.
In my local area, it is the Labour-run council that is pushing for the closure of libraries. As a party member, seeing such behaviour makes me sick. Labour must not be complicit in this – we should be standing against library closures, not implementing them. Why has the shadow cabinet still not made clear that Labour-run councils closing libraries is totally unacceptable? These councillors should be kicked out of the party so that they can join a party which better reflects their support for cuts to education. I realise that Progress is pretty much Labour-supporting but I wish you’d sometimes highlight some of the hypocrisy within the party too.
It’s New labour not really Labour it’s more of a right wing group within the Labour party closer to the Tories then socialism.