Many thanks to Tim Forcer, who's written this detailed report for the Friends of Cobbett Road Library, on last night's Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, which was called to question the council's decision to withdraw funding to five city libraries including Cobbett Road. 

 

It was almost Groundhog Day at the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee (OSMC) on Thursday September 10, with at least some of the proceedings having a depressingly familiar tone as all-too-resistible argument met the immovable object of Cabinet determination.

The Cabinet had apparently spent two hours considering OSMC’s decision to “call in” the Cabinet vote on August 18 to go ahead with the “preferred option” to close the Mobile Library and withdraw Council staffing and management from five libraries across the City.  They had read the statement of OSMC’s concerns and reviewed the points raised, but were baffled that anyone could regard Cabinet’s actions as anything other than the best possible solution to the twin needs to cut Council spending (in line with imposed government cuts and statutes) and to achieve long-term viability for the City’s Library Service.

OSMC chairman, Councillor Fitzhenry, pointed out at the start of the meeting that OSMC cannot (and must not) overturn or block Cabinet and Council decisions arrived at through the democratic process.  OSMC’s role is to consider whether that process was properly informed, whether those making the decisions had taken full account of all relevant facts and opinions, whether, on reflection, a debate or decision should have taken a different path.  Cabinet had been given several recommendations in regard to the proposals for the Library Service before its August 18 meeting, and had reported its response to those recommendations.  Nevertheless, he, as chair of OSMC, felt that there were still valid concerns about the background to the Cabinet decision, which was why it had been “called in” for further review ahead of the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday September 15 (and the full Council meeting on Wednesday September 16).

As has become normal for Council meetings where the future of Library Service is considered, there were a substantial number of people wanting to hear the debate – including several Councillors who do not sit on OSMC, with many of these wanting to offer observations and ask questions.  Councillor Fitzhenry reminded everyone that these contributions should address the specifics of the agenda item (Cabinet’s response to August OSMC and the subsequent call-in), and not simply go over old ground.

Councillor Kaur saw no reason to extend the debate unduly.  When specific details were requested, she was prepared to offer them – including offering to spend two hours reading out the complete Cabinet report if that would help – but her position was that Cabinet’s decision to implement the “preferred option” was absolutely right, the only way to achieve a “sustainable” future for all libraries (Council-managed and otherwise), and that the consultation exercise had demonstrated clear public support for that approach.

Those opposing the decision tried to put new life into their case.  It was suggested that figures in the report were missing, misleading or erroneous (particularly in regard to Millbrook, where the library had moved between publication of the original report and the Cabinet decision, with numbers using the library increasing dramatically in that time).  The Cabinet’s assertion that Housing Revenue Account money could not be used to support libraries was challenged – the response was that HRA could only fund relevant “projects”, and could not be used to support “core services”.  This area became complicated when it turned out that the Library Service pays HRA a rental for the current Millbrook Library premises.

Objectors asked for detail on how the projected third-party community hubs would operate (the seven bodies which have between them expressed interest in taking over all five premises and the Mobile Library cannot be named, nor any detail of the expression of interest disclosed, since that information is commercially confidential and, anyway, disclosing it would constitute illegal “pre-determination” of Cabinet’s decision – once the Cabinet has cleared OSMC reservations, the Council will advertise formally and all submissions will be in the public domain).  Councillor Kaur promised that information would be made available in due course, and that there were many successful examples around the country.  Apparently leases will be for five years, but the conditions won’t be released until the adverts are placed.  (Pre-determination again.)

The validity of the consultation questionnaire results were queried – particularly after Councillor Kaur revealed that it would not have been possible to go ahead with the preferred option had the consultation indicated significant majority opposition to it.  She rejected any suggestion that questions in the document had been “leading”, or that it (or use made of its results) had been “misleading” in any way, pointing out that after every set of tick-box answer options there was a box for free-text entry of any relevant view or opinion.  This did not satisfy most of the general public, with murmurs of assent turning into applause for a challenge on this issue.

Vocal assent and applause were also given when concerns were put about the way that the proposals are likely to have a significant impact on the elderly, children, the deprived and disadvantaged.  Councillor Kaur responded that all this had already been dealt with, that impact assessments showed problems would be limited, that vibrant community hubs would continue to serve these sections of the community.  A novel point raised was fear that volunteers would not be properly trained, suitable or vetted for working with the vulnerable.  Burgess Road had had several enquiries from people wanting to volunteer their services, who, despite assurances by the enquirer, turned out to have had no prior connection with the library or its various groups.  Councillor Kaur stated that this issue had been foreseen, and the arrangements to be imposed on the community-led hubs would require rigorous checks and training.

One possible future for Southampton Library Service is amalgamation with one or more of Hampshire, Portsmouth and Isle of Wight services.  This could give economies of scale, offer savings in terms of senior administrator posts and salaries.  There appeared uncertainty over whether conversations with other administrations over such joint working had been with political or administrative bodies, since some Councillors said that their conversations had indicated very different views to those reported by Cabinet.

At the end, OSMC voted to recommend that Cabinet:

·         accept flexibility in the transfer timetable to maximise the likelihood of successfully transferring libraries to community-led hubs

·         ensure the timetable for transfer includes sufficient time for thorough scrutiny of bids

·         looks yet again at HRA funding matters

·         details “shared service” conversations with other administrations

·         reviews data on Millbrook use and users

With apologies for such an aggressive summary of views put so eloquently by so many, and if there has been any inadvertent error in reporting procedural matters or specific statements.

At the start of the meeting, when Councillors must declare any interests, and political groups any “whip”, the Conservative group stated that, while they did not operate a “whip”, they, as a group, were unanimously in favour of retaining all current libraries under Council management.  One of the questions put by Councillor Hannides might indicate that the Conservatives are considering whether it would be possible to bring back any of the transferred libraries into Council management should there be a future change in the political make-up of the City Council.  In this context, note that the full Council meeting on Wednesday September 16 will consider a Conservative motion, signed by 16 councillors, stating:

“This Council recognises the important role libraries play in the social fabric of our city and calls on the Executive to commit to keeping Southampton's library buildings open.  The contribution libraries make cannot simply be measured in the number of books borrowed. Many of our libraries have also developed into vibrant community centres, without any additional cost to the Council. These centres have become vital community hubs that have enriched and helped bond local communities. A safe and secure place for children, an enriching and motivating environment, a place for getting back on your feet or simply  somewhere to reflect quietly - our libraries provide all of these and our residents need and deserve them.”

Will anything change?  Who knows?

Tim Forcer

This report also appears on the Friends of Cobbett Road Library's website; reproduced with permission.

Links
Campaigners stage protest at Southampton Civic Centre - Daily Echo
Seven organisations have stepped forward eager to run six under-threat Southampton libraries - Daily Echo