• Home /
  • Blog / What Carnegie says about our approach to Tory cuts

What Carnegie says about our approach to Tory cuts

By Cllr Jim Dickson

As Herne Hill residents met in a major engagement event to discuss a fresh approach to the delivery of their neighbourhood library service in their local Carnegie library with local councillors and Lambeth council staff, it is worth reflecting that in every area of the country, local politicians are struggling with the fundamental issue of what they can afford to deliver under huge cuts to local authority budgets. This is a time when every aspect of council spending is under scrutiny and under pressure. 

Carnegie.png

In Lambeth, in common with many local authorities, the bulk of our spending goes on looking after vulnerable adults and children, and that will remain an absolute priority. For the rest of our residents the key services are keeping the streets clean, collecting the rubbish, running schools, maintaining parks and providing the cultural and leisure services that keep minds and bodies healthy.

This may seem to be a simple task, but with an ever growing population and a dramatically shrinking budget, delivering them is a complex challenge.

In Lambeth, one of the toughest challenges has come around libraries – seen by many as a sacred and fundamental right. They are undoubtedly an integral part of public life, providing universal opportunities to learn, study and explore the vast history and culture the world has to offer from the safety of a public building. 

Nobody in public service wants to diminish these opportunities, but we must look at libraries in the same way as every other service; that is to think hard about how we can deliver the most efficient and effective service possible with a tightening budget.

In many areas of the country, we have seen libraries close. The buildings that housed them were perhaps underused and could generate more money – and savings – by simply being sold off.  We looked at that option in Lambeth with our two least used libraries. 

We undertook a huge public consultation, which examined all our cultural and leisure services and asked residents what they thought.  Our residents rejected library closures, so proposals were developed to ensure all ten of our libraries remained open.

Where library buildings were underused or overly expensive, we have looked to work with partners to help expand the range of activities on offer and provide a more sustainable future.  In Upper Norwood, that partnership is in the form of a community trust who have some really exciting plans – they will take over running the building, in which we will provide a library service. 

In Waterloo, we are delivering a library in partnership with an already established community group in the area, saving us money in running a building while expanding the range of activities on offer in a new ‘community hub’. In West Norwood we are opening a new library alongside a cinema.

In Herne Hill, we have the magnificent Carnegie Library which gained fame recently when protesters occupied the building who perceived planned changes as the end of a library service. In reality, in a similar way as other areas of the borough, we have found a way to keep a library in the building when it reopens next year. 

Partnering with our leisure provider to deliver a library may sound unusual on the face of it, but it makes sense. Their presence, in the currently unused basement of the building, will enable us to reopen next year with a library service that is both open longer and delivering savings in the council budget. Residents who have been opposed to the plans or sceptical they will provide the library they want are now turning their thoughts to ensuring that the new arrangements deliver the financial security into the future for the service which Carnegie users seek. It's vital the council builds on this new atmosphere of engagement and joint ownership of the Carnegie building's future.

In the long term, we propose transferring the building to a community group who will be able to generate income, access grants and deliver a strong community service - including a library - for many years to come. Complex challenges often require innovative thinking and we firmly believe Lambeth council has developed imaginative solutions that can deliver for everybody.

 

 

Do you like this post?

Reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
commented 2016-07-04 17:42:35 +0100
The plans put forward consisted of 4 A2 posters and are completely vague as to the future library. In times of “tough choices” how does Lambeth manage to find a million or two to build a gym in the basement that no one wants, and subsidise it for two years? Indeed how does it afford to give £3.5 million to multi national cineworld to build a cinema in Norwood? Is this really good use of council tax payers money in times of cuts?
commented 2016-06-30 01:51:32 +0100
What you don’t say is how you expect to run a library service without librarians. All of the reports I have seen following up on volunteer library services show that usage falls away dramatically. There is nothing innovative and imaginative about offering a library service without librarians. I don’t think there is any opposition to extending the library offer by introducing ancillary activities and services which generate revenue, but if you put in a cinema or a gymnasium, you may make money, but you will not have a library. You might as well put in a Tesco Express.
commented 2016-06-29 12:11:56 +0100
1. Carnegie Library was not one of the “least used libraries”. It was thriving, membership, visits & borrowing up every month by huge percentages. Usually 4th busiest of 10, it was second only to Streatham for children’s book borrowing.
2. It provided preventative care and wellbeing for vulnerable adults and children, saving money on other services. Now shut out, these people are suffering.
3. The building was not underused; so many groups, clubs and activities (some income-generating) filled the public spaces throughout the week, and creative individuals rented desks in two rooms.
4. The basement was not unused; it housed the Home Visit books and staff, plus storage space, boiler, toilets, etc. Relocating Home Visit Service & vans will be costly & difficult.
5. There is no space in plans set aside for library, no separate children’s library, teen and adult areas. Brief visits by library staff cannot provide adequate or efficient service, & time would be wasted in travel. So building may be open longer, but library space, staff, stock & service shrunk.
6. Gym & library won’t mix; imposed “community hub” would exclude the community. Turning kitchen into toilets means literacy & reading groups can’t even make a cup of tea.
7. The council has not “developed imaginative solutions that can deliver for everybody”; if you want “innovative thinking”, work with the Friends & user groups & bring back our library manager & team. And make sure any asset transfer is to a GENUINE community group, i.e. Carnegie Library Association.
commented 2016-06-27 18:37:46 +0100
I have been to the exhibition twice. The proposals look very good to me. It is very
unfortunate that up to now the public consultation about the future of the library
has been handled very badly. I hope lessons have been learnt and in future
consultations about changes to Council services will be handled in a more
intelligent and sensitive way.

The Labour Party will place cookies on your computer to help us make this website better.

Please read this to review the updates about which cookies we use and what information we collect on our site.

To find out more about these cookies, see our privacy notice. Use of this site confirms your acceptance of these cookies.