Blueprint for excellence
Public libraries 2008 - 2011
A Response prepared by the Public Libraries Group on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Library and information Professionals to the MLA draft document Blueprint for excellence which sets the agenda for the next phase of the Framework for the Future programme
CILIP: the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals is the leading professional body for librarians, information specialists and knowledge managers. It forms a community of around 36,000 people engaged in library and information work, of whom around 21,000 are CILIP members and around 15,000 are regular customers of CILIP Enterprises.
CILIP members work in all sectors, including business and industry, science and technology, further and higher education, schools, local and central government, the health service, the voluntary sector, national and public libraries.
Visit www.cilip.org.uk for more information about CILIP.
The Public Libraries Group (PLG) is a special interest group of CILIP and is concerned with all aspects of public librarianship, including standards, staffing, service delivery and promotion, with membership open to all interested in the work of public libraries.
1) The Public Libraries Group (PLG) and the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) welcome the opportunity to comment on this draft of "Blueprint". We are keen to work closely with MLA in developing the Blueprint as we acknowledge that it is vital for all stakeholders to share a vision of the future of the public library service in England and how that vision can be achieved. As well as this response we are also arranging a meeting with John Dolan and representatives of a number of CILIP's special interest groups to provide a more informal opportunity to discuss and contribute to Blueprint.
2) PLG is aware that the Blueprint is at an early stage in its development and therefore the current document is not as focused or directed as we would hope and there are areas of omission. In particular we feel the purpose and audience for the Blueprint is not sufficiently clear. In responding to Blueprint our understanding is that:
* The Blueprint is meant to set out a shared understanding of the purpose and roles of the public library service in England that can win support from all stakeholders
* The Blueprint is meant to set the agenda for the next phase of the Framework for the Future programme, 2008-2011
3) There are also important omissions or areas where more emphasis needs to be given in the document. In our view the importance and value of the skills and competences required of staff is not sufficiently acknowledged or identified as a key action area for the future if a quality library service is to be provided. Nor is the role of libraries in preserving the national memory or in contributing place-shaping activities and services including local studies given sufficient recognition. The Blueprint is quiet too on the contribution of public libraries to economic regeneration.
4) The phrasing and language used in Blueprint also needs attention. If the document is to gain the necessary credibility amongst opinion shapers then it must use terms to do with learning, or information and knowledge, in a rigorous and consistent fashion that reflects usage in the professional communities concerned. One word in particular needs to be used carefully - universal. This word must not be confused with uniformity as it is important that the different needs of a diverse society are appreciated and catered for. It would also be beneficial to adopt more forthrightly the idea of a "library entitlement" as this would accord with more general thinking on public services. In Scotland the idea of "cultural entitlement" is firmly embedded in the thinking of the Scottish Executive.
5) The rest of this response looks briefly at the detail of the introduction and six propositions set out in the Blueprint.
Section One - Purpose, Context, Process
6) It is unhelpful that the "Core Offer" set out in Section 1 is divorced from the six propositions in Section 2 - the core offer should be seen as a proposition in its own right and should stem from the propositions relating to the purpose and roles of the library service. In a modern context the "core offer" might be better expressed in terms of the "library entitlement".
7) As currently worded the "core offer" is probably unlawful as it seems to single out some groups and, by implication, exclude others. It is certainly less generous than that enshrined in the Public Library and Museums Act (1964). Section 7 of that Act states that "... it shall be the duty of every library authority to provide a comprehensive and efficient service for all persons desiring to make use thereof ....". It later talks about providing stock (in all media) in " ...sufficient number, range and quality to meet the general requirements and any special requirements both of adults and children". Today's terminology may differ but it is important that the library reflects the full diversity of its local community in its provision.
8) In addition we would suggest:
a) The first bullet point should be extended to library services to make it consistent with the other bullet points, but also to recognise that all parts of the service must be accessible not only the location and library building itself
b) The offer should include the role of staff and reflect the expertise of the staffing resource.
c) The Strengths and Weaknesses section needs to be more robust. The second sentence needs to reflect the full range of use which is made of public libraries. Similarly not much is made of community identity, active informed citizens, literacy and numeracy issues etc, etc.
d) There is a need in the Strengths to demonstrate input to key strategies such as E government, Children and Young People, ALN, Older People's Strategy. Within the Weaknesses a plea about the link between investment and performance would be helpful - perhaps with examples eg where there has been investment, performance/uptake has increased.
e) Recent Steps and Achievements- this section needs to be more "punchy". It should reflect the good news from both the People's Network and Framework. Headline statistics should be bulleted for impact. Public Library innovation and success needs to be widened out to reflect the wider context in which libraries operate and strategic agendas which they contribute to ( eg Smartcards technology, RFID, self service, Bookstart etc). Local, Regional and National agendas need to be reflected for example ALN, Older People's strategy, community safety, E- government etc). Also we need to add examples of best practise - eg remote delivery of services, collocation etc. Where public libraries have demonstrated their role, they are able to prove improvement and innovation.
Section 2 : Six propositions for Public Libraries
9) PLG found this section too general. It is important to determine whether these propositions relate to the overall mission and delivery of public library services or whether they are about the national priorities for 2008-11, as the two will be different. In addition it is important to be very clear about the differences between purpose, roles and the paragraph on entitlement that appeared in Section 1. We believe that the section on entitlements really belongs as a proposition in Section 2.
Proposition 1
10) There have, of course, over the years been a number of statements seeking to encapsulate the purpose the public library. The underlying values expressed by most of these remain but the context and delivery of public library services have changed dramatically. However when thinking about purpose it is important to consider what the unique selling points of the service are - we would suggest unbiased facilitated access to information, local studies provision, an unrivalled provision and access to the "backfile" of literature and access to the expertise and knowledge of library staff. It is also important to set the purpose of the public library in the context of current political thinking and consider the contribution of the library to place-shaping and identity and the national (and for that matter local) memory.
Proposition 2
11) As with proposition 1 the approach is very general. If the thematic headings are to be used then we would prefer the ideas of "Community Space" and a "Learning Agency" rather than "Community Place" or "Development Agency". In our view the "Digital Library" is already happening and this should be at least recognised in the rubric.
12) Again these formulations may be more about establishing priorities for action than a full description of the roles of public libraries. It is instructive to view these headings against the roles posited for public libraries recently by the Scottish Executive. They define it as follows:
"Public library services:-
* Provide universal access to resources, which is free, consistent and
customer focused
* Enable access to resources for reading, information and learning
* Help to build vibrant communities by encouraging community
involvement and community-based activity and assisting in the creation
of social capital
* Promote social justice, civic engagement and democracy
* Help minimise exclusion, be it social or digital
* Support learning in the information society
* Support the information needs for the knowledge economy
* Promote access to Scotland's cultural heritage
* Support and promote cultural/creative activities through the provision of
information and venues.
* Encourage the public to pursue individual interests
* Work in partnership with others to offer value added services"
Proposition 3
13) The national entitlement requires to be fleshed out, building on the paragraphs in Section 1. One of the key challenges of the future will be raising the level of provision and performance of the lowest achieving public library services. If there are to be "national offers" then it is important that all parts of the public library network in England actually deliver on these commitments. Extra emphasis needs to be given in this proposition to understanding the needs of users and sharing best practice as to how these needs can best be met. Also the development of the library workforce will be critical to the delivery of the service - there is the potential impact of the demographic timebomb with a large percentage of the workforce known to be retiring in the next few years; the importance of having a diverse workforce capable of reaching all the communities public libraries should serve; the provision of the necessary skills and expertise in the right places and levels of the service; and the need for leadership and empowerment for staff at all levels of the service, especially at the front end.
14) More specifically on the following bullet points PLG feel:
a) Funding - This needs to be more specific and an idea given of the levels and sources of funding that will be necessary to underpin the delivery of effective and responsive services.
b) Improved buildings and access - this needs to include something about reflecting 21st Century style and taste. We are pleased that CILIP is working in partnership with the CILIP and the University of Wales Aberystwyth to provide the Designing Libraries portal. It is also an area that the Public Libraries Group is active in through the Public Library Buildings Awards bringing best practice to the attention of the whole sector.
c) The Challenge for the Digital Library - This is as much about universal access to these resources as entitlement.
d) Innovation - it has also to be about evaluating the impact of these service changes and ensuring, if appropriate, that they become part of the baseline or core service in future.
e) Awareness raising - This has to include the evidence base that can be used to advocate the effectiveness of the public library service to a variety of stakeholders
Proposition 4
15) This proposition closes mirrors the previous proposition - the challenges are inevitably the things that must be got right to achieve success. Therefore there is a case for looking at these two propositions together. The needs of the user, funding and skills of staff are all vital and should be close to the top of the list.
Proposition 5
16) It is difficult to address this proposition as different audiences and stakeholders may have different success criteria. The list is more designed (as to a large extent the Blueprint consultation document as a whole is) to be a checklist against which individuals can indicate priorities. The reality is that all the statements reflect important points that will need addressing at some stage. Each area, however, will need to be underpinned by research and the development of an evidence base; all will need to be adequately resourced; and the added value that such activities provide will have to be demonstrated to funding agencies and other opinion shaping organisations. One key difference, as the first bullet point in the next section indicates, is that the features of success will need to emerge from the active engagement of users and other local community interests in the development and shape of the local library service.
Proposition 6
17) The action plan emerging from this exercise is and will be formidable. Although the results of this consultation will feed into a new Framework for the Future Action Plan, and hopefully there will be some funding available for this, it can only be delivered through partnership. PLG and CILIP have an interest in a number of areas and will be prepared to explore how we could contribute to this process. We are already doing much around buildings and space and have a strong commitment to workforce development through the development of the Framework of Qualifications, the CPD opportunities offered by CILIP's Training and Development programme and the CPD activities of the Public Libraries Group and other CILIP special interest groups. Other areas where PLG and CILIP could usefully cooperate are in establishing the evidence base to support the work of public libraries and advocacy activities with government and other opinion shapers.
Conclusion
18) Both PLG and CILIP more generally are keen to engage in the development of the Blueprint process and look forward to working with MLA and others in working towards the vision of a public library service that truly adds value to the nation and enriches the individuals and communities that use it.
If you wish to follow up any of the points made in this submission then please contact either:
Guy Daines
Director, Policy & Advocacy
CILIP
Tel: 020 7255 0632
Mailto:guy.daines@cilip.org.uk
or
Pamela Tulloch
Chair
Public Libraries Group
C/o Cultural & Leisure Services
Information & Learning
The Mitchell Library
North Street
Glasgow
G3 7DN
Tel: 0141 287 2949
Mailto:Pamela.tulloch@cls.glasgow.gov.uk
CILIP
June 2007
Charity Number: 313014
BLUEPRINT - CILIP RESPONSE prepared by the PUBLIC LIBRARIES GROUP
Updated: 03 October 2007