We asked you what you thought about the use of library fines and you didn’t disappoint. 460 of you took part and the result was less black and white than you might have expected

There were a number of recurrent themes. Those for the retention of fines thought that this was a means of maintaining fairness to other users by keeping books in circulation and retrieving books that might otherwise be lost to the library. Another view, and probably the most repeated opinion, was that fines serve as a barrier to access, especially for those on a low income. There were questions about the loss of fines for income generation and the use of fines to offset running costs, some respondents offered solutions such as fine amnesties or methods that didn’t involve a financial transaction such as freezing an individual’s account until the book was returned.

Here is a representative selection of your thoughts and concerns.

“All fines do is scare people, especially those on low-incomes from accessing the library. There should be no barriers to accessing books and other resources but a replacement cost for books when lost or damaged.”

“Adding to library funds is not the key issue, and fines should not be counted upon to top up budgets. Their role is to encourage considerate behaviour: if borrowers can be influenced to return library materials punctually, other users benefit from them.”

“I've never liked the idea of charging fines and then relying on them as an income stream. It affects the disadvantaged in society the most. It’s outrageous that the government has not invested in libraries as it should, but fines penalise the poorest the most.”

“Fines should never exceed the cost of the book.”

“Fine amnesties used to be a great way to regather lost books.”

“If no fines some people wouldn't bother to return books.”

“Better to automatically renew items unless they are required by another user.”

“Many public library services rely on fines income to offset running costs. Abolishing fines would require councils to increase funding for libraries which may be difficult to achieve. In one authority that I worked in the total fines income each year was more than the running costs of a small branch library.”

“Children have little control over the return of their library books and can be unfairly penalised. Equally low income and chaotic households can also be penalised.”

“I think also that the use of the term 'fine' should be discouraged and 'late return charge' used instead.”

“Children have little control over the return of their library books and can be unfairly penalised. Equally low income and chaotic households can also be penalised.”

The majority of those polled disagree with the concept of fining borrowers. There are some compelling arguments from other voters. There is no black and white answer to this question, the resulting discussion points are nuanced and multifarious. While most participants acknowledged some of the principles of having a fines system, ultimately the dominant opinion was that free access to libraries should be the norm.