Agenda item

Call in of Cabinet Decision - Library Review - Outcome of Third Public Survey on Proposed Options and Recommendations

Following the receipt of a Notice of Call-in within the required deadline, from Councillor Caserta calling in the decision of the Cabinet set out in Minute CA.04 of the meeting held on 28 June 2017, a meeting of the Committee has been convened in order to consider the matter in accordance with the reasons set out on the Notice of Call-In.


In considering the matter, the options available to the Scrutiny Committee are as follows:


1. The Scrutiny Committee decides not to offer any comments on the Notice. In this situation the decision of the Cabinet will stand.
2. The Scrutiny Committee decides to offer comments or objections, which will be referred back to the Cabinet at the meeting arranged for 26 July 2017.
3. The Scrutiny Committee may refer the Notice, without comment, to the Council. The matter will then be considered by the Council on 17 September 2017 (a standard item appears on all Council summons to consider referrals from Scrutiny Committees). Any comments or objections from Council will be referred back to the Cabinet at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet will be required to consider any objections and comments but will not be bound by them unless..."it is contrary to the Policy Framework or contrary to or not wholly consistent with the Budget" (Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules - Paragraph 16(g) of the Council Constitution).”

 

A copy of the original paperwork considered by Cabinet, along with the decision Minute and Call –in notice are attached.

 

Minutes:

The Scrutiny Committee considered a called-in decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 28 June 2017 in accordance with the Council Constitution.

 

The Cabinet had made the following decision:

 

That approval be given to Option 2, as presented in the report submitted, to retain Bury, Ramsbottom, Prestwich and Radcliffe Libraries and a smaller Service Wide Team.

 

A Call – In Notice had been submitted by Councillor Caserta, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, setting out the reasons for the Call In of the decision. The reasons are set out below:

 

Insufficient consideration given to:

 

·         The discrimination against young people many from disadvantaged backgrounds who rely on the libraries as a place to do their homework after school. This especially applies to Tottington Library.

·         It will discriminate against people with mobility problems who are unable to travel long distances.

·         Insufficient notice of closure for applicant community groups to take-over operation of the buildings.

 

Councillor Caserta invited Councillor Briggs, Cabinet Member – Children and Families to respond to the reasons highlighted:

 

In response to the first reason Councillor Briggs explained that a 2011 survey by the National Literacy Trust found that children who use a library are twice as likely to be above average readers and organisations such as the Reading Agency and the Society of Chief Librarians confirm this is still the case.  However use of libraries for school homework has markedly declined in the last 5-10 years; the formal homework clubs that many libraries established in the 90’s have largely disappeared.  There is evidence that children who continue to use libraries for homework would have been coming to the library in any case.   The pattern seen in Bury’s libraries is typical of that experienced by most library authorities.

 

Our libraries continue to provide children and older students with good resources including: study space; reference books; online reference materials; free access to the internet; free and/or low cost print-outs plus staff assistance.   However all Bury’s libraries, including Tottington, report a similar pattern of use:

 

·         Formal homework clubs withdrawn due to lack of use and dedicated staff

·         Typically no more than 3 or 4 children coming in each day in larger libraries, less or none in smaller libraries to do homework

·         The internet is the primary source of information

·         Books are  seldom used other than for mainly history related projects e.g. The Romans

 

Some 10 plus years ago a partnership with Tottington High School established a Homework Centre at Tottington Library; this was well used for a couple of years but was closed 6 years ago due to lack of use.  Similarly an attempt at creating a ‘teen room’ was short lived.

 

In response to the second reason stated for the Call in Councillor Briggs explained that the Mott McDonald report was discussed at some length in the report to cabinet of January 2017 and the full report included as an appendix.  The report showed that for option 7 (which equates to option 2 of the Library Review i.e. Bury, Prestwich, Radcliffe and Ramsbottom libraries) 26% of the population of the borough live within 10 minutes travel time and 95% of the population are within 20 minutes of at least one library.

 

The report considered the impact of library closures and accessibility for the following groups:

 

·         Older people (aged 65 and over)

·         Younger people

·         People with disabilities

·         People from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups

·         People from deprived communities

·         People without access to a car

 

Access by these modes of transport was looked at: car; public transport (bus) and foot. The walking speed used in all models was 3.5kmph;  considerably less than an average walking speed of 4.8kmp to allow for older or disabled people.  

 

The conclusion of the Mott McDonald report indicates that the level of provision given by the Library Review’s option 2 is consistent with the council’s statutory duty under the Public Libraries and Museum Act (1964): It shall be the duty of every library authority to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all persons desiring to make use thereof...

 

Furthermore the Council remains confident that the level of provision and access does not disproportionately affect any vulnerable group (whether or not they are covered by equality legislation). 

 

Plans are being put into place to assist individuals and groups to access libraries in ways which may be new to them including:

 

·         Guided tours for visually impaired service users in partnership with Bury Society for Blind and Partially Sighted People including transport and walking routes

·         Resources and  support for  library and IT use for people with disabilities and/or special needs at all libraries

·         Additional staff training e.g. use of specialist equipment

·         Introductory/trial sessions for groups at different locations

·         Identification of other meeting places for groups who wish to stay in their own locality

·         Continuation of the Home Library Service

 

In response to the third reason stated for the Call-In it was explained that the first public consultation of the Library Review focused on 6 principles for the service and ran from June to September 2016.  During this time the following actions were taken to ensure public awareness of the review:

 

·         10,000 paper surveys distributed to libraries, council departments, community organisations, local businesses, schools and colleges

·         Online survey available via council website

·         Telephone survey to 500 households

·         Publicity campaign including posters, social media and press reports

·         Informal meetings with community groups and other users as requested

 

The second part of the consultation engaged with library users, including community groups, on their priorities for the service provision.  Workshop meetings were held in all libraries aimed at helping service users (and some non-users) develop realistic service provision in terms of need and budget.  

 

Two separate sessions were held for staff.

 

As with all public consultations in the review, the result of the first and second survey plus overviews of the consultation meetings were included on the library web pages.

 

In January 2017 the second report to cabinet was made public, section 6.5 covered future use of library buildings and included the following information:

 

In both options we are suggesting a reduced number of buildings to be maintained as public libraries. The review of library buildings gave us some initial options for uses of the potentially redundant buildings. These are starter options and do not factor in all potential uses for the buildings. In line with the Councils commitment to neighbourhood, locality working we would be very keen to see appropriate community use of the buildings and encourage residents to explore this option with us. At this stage of the consultation it is not possible to give a definitive answer but some options may include:

 

·         community management of some buildings to include a library service and community activities/meeting place. Community groups would be expected to provide a business plan including full financial details of how the building would be opened, maintained and developed. This is really important as no financial support for this is likely to be available from the Council.

·         management by other agencies e.g. nurseries and playgroups. Again would require business and financial information

·         establishment of a charitable trust to which some libraries are transferred.

·         sale of buildings likely to be of market value or desirable.

 

Following on from this report a second survey was held between February and April 2017, the publicity and promotional methods for this were the same as listed above for the first consultation.   In this second survey the public was asked to decide between option 1 (retain 3 libraries) and option 2 (retain 4 libraries). 

 

Presentations followed by question and answer sessions were held at all Township Forums during March 2017. Community use of buildings was discussed at several sessions.

 

From February 2017 Community Library Supervisors began to make contact with all community and other groups using libraries, whether that use was library related e.g. book and craft groups or a separate use e.g. community meetings.   Leaders or nominated representative from these groups were then contacted and offered the opportunity to meet with the Head of Libraries to discuss their future use of the library service.  Community groups connected e.g. Tenants and Residents Associations were also offered meetings to discuss the possibility of community management of buildings. 20 community meetings have been held since the end of February 2017 and more are booked. 

 

Discussions regarding community management of library buildings have taken place at 4 libraries:

 

·         Coronation Road – meeting with Abbey Close Tenants and Residents Association and (separately) with ROC (Redeeming our Communities) who manage the linked building (formerly the Y-Zone)

·         Dumers Lane – informal discussion with TRA and over 50s followed by later meeting organised by the Green Party

·         Moorside – 3 meetings with Seedfield TRA and (separately) the church

·         Tottington – meetings with Friends of Tottington Library (FOTL) and local councillors

 

At these meetings the current budget for each building was gone through, liabilities (including repairs and maintenance) and responsibilities were discussed. To date only FOTL has proceeded; finance and ongoing commitments are the limiting factor for the other groups.

 

The Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions; the following points were raised:

 

·         Councillor FitzGerald referred to the possibility of transferring the assets to community groups and asked what work needed to be done around this.

 

It was explained that each building would be looked at individually and a structured framework would need to be developed to ascertain how the assets would be transferred. Work had been carried out to map the community use of each building. It was explained that if a community group take over a building the library and other council services would still be closed.

 

It was explained that the future plans of the buildings could not be worked on until the decision had been made in relation to the library provision.

 

·         Councillor Hankey asked what rents the community groups would have to pay to keep the buildings open.

 

It was explained that each building would have to go through a costing analysis and all figures would need to be worked through with the interested groups to enable business plans to be produced. Each building would be different due to the individual upkeep requirements and needs. The plans would have to be cost neutral to the Council.

 

·         Councillor James asked why downsizing of the existing library offer was not an option.

 

It was explained that keeping the buildings themselves would not be cost effective; they would still require services such as electricity and water and this wouldn’t reduce the costs.

 

·         Councillor Leach asked what work was planned to support families in the future.

 

It was explained that there were 2 assistant librarians that worked with families, children and schools to support literacy. Schools were supported in setting up homework clubs and the library offer within schools was extremely important.

 

·         Councillor Smith stated that the Council had worked hard to maintain the provision up to now and the decisions being made were a last resort. Many local authorities had already made the decisions years ago that Bury Council was now facing.

 

·         Councillor Smith asked what outreach work would be undertaken?

 

It was reported that there was a service wide team that promoted reader development and worked with community groups. The library buildings would be used as much as possible to engage and provide support. There is an online library which is available 24 hours a day. The library service would also be looking to secure as much external funding as possible by applying for grants and other funding streams.

 

·         Councillor FitzGerald asked about transport and vulnerable and smaller groups that may not find it as easy to access public transport as others.

 

It was explained that the Library service worked with over 100 dedicated volunteers to help provide support. The library would be looking at how it worked with different groups and what it can provide on an individual basis. One of the main issues will be to make sure that all resources are used as proactively as possible.

 

·         Councillor Caserta asked how much the Mott McDonald survey had cost.

 

It was reported that the surveys had been done in 3 parts at a cost of £21 thousand pounds overall.

 

·         Councillor Caserta asked for assurances that no obstacles had been put in place regarding Tottington Library.

 

It was explained that Tottington Library had been dealt with in the same way as any other library facility during the consultation periods.

 

Delegated decision:

 

That, having considered the points raised in the Notice of Call-in, this Committee does not offer any comments to the Cabinet in respect of Minute CA.34 Library Review – Outcome of Third Public Survey on Proposed Options and Recommendations.

 

(5 Members voting in favour and 4 against)

 

Supporting documents: