Agenda item - Library Plan

Extract from the proceedings of the Economic Development & Culture Committee meeting held on the 10^th March 2016, together with a report of the Assistant Chief Executive (copy attached).

104.1.     Councillor Morgan introduced, and formally moved, the report recommending that Council adopt the Libraries Plan 2016-2020. He stated that in the last year 106 libraries had closed across the country and more were under threat or had been moved to operation by the private sector, as well as operating with reduced hours. Furthermore the growth in the internet and eBooks threatened their future; however, libraries still had a key role in society and the city benefitted from an above average number of library users. They had the potential to provide a base for a wide range of services; which was the position put forward by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport, and the Council had been ahead of many in pushing this agenda. The Jubilee Library was one of the top five most used libraries nationally and the position of the administration was to oppose the closure of branch libraries. The administration would ensure that libraries continued to be operated by the Council and open for the use of all residents.

104.2.     Councillor Peltzer Dunn stated his principle concern was the level of library service for the residents of the city; he noted that the report that had been considered by the Economic Development & Culture Committee, and highlighted there was much in the report that he was able to support. However, he was concerned that both the Committee and Council were being asked to take a decision without the full business plan for the future of the Carnegie Hove Library. He stated that he had decided to support the report on the basis that the Special Policy & Resources Committee on 28 April 2016 would consider a full business plan, and went on to request that, were the plan found to not be viable, the decision on the future of the Carnegie Hove Library be put on hold until an appropriate plan could come forward.

104.3.     Councillor Wealls noted the difficulty of the decision in relation to the future of the library provision in Hove, and he extended his appreciation of the genuine concern expressed by the local community, particularly in relation to future of the purpose built Carnegie building. He clarified that he was uncomfortable with some of the rhetoric that to keep the Carnegie building open it would be necessary to close seven branch libraries, and he would support the report, not on that basis, but because he approved of the proposed move and new facilities at the co-located site with Hove Museum. The Carnegie building was no longer fit for purpose and the new site at Hove Museum would provide a more usable space with the added advantage of outside space – he also added that the walk between the two buildings was approximately four minutes. There needed to be proper planning for disabled parking around the new site, and he noted his agreement with Councillor Peltzer Dunn that the viability plan was key to the project, especially given the listed nature of the Carnegie building.

104.4.     Councillor Robins stated it was important to consider the full proposals for the future of library provision across the whole city that were outlined in the report, and he commended the work of Officers to bring forward proposals that both saved money and improved the service. The Carnegie building needed significant investment to stay open, and to do this would be at the detriment of seven branch libraries in the city. He highlighted that libraries were a statutory service that had to be provided free of charge; alternative options could potentially leave the Council open to challenge. 

104.5.     Councillor Nemeth noted his concern in relation to the distribution of space in the co-located facility at Hove Museum, and he felt this was not clear in the report. He went on to query the proposed repair figures on the basis that these costs could be staggered and more could be done with the existing Carnegie building. There was no business case currently for Members to consider in relation to the Carnegie building, and he was concerned that the proposed conversion might not be appropriate for the Hove Museum building. He stated his view that the service in Hove should remain a dedicated library service.

104.6.     Councillor Morris stated that he appreciated the strength of feeling in relation to retaining the service at the Carnegie building, and that there could potentially be a case for the building to become an asset of community value. The plan before the Council would protect library service in the city for a generation against the increased tide of library closures nationally. He noted that the majority of libraries no longer run by local authorities were operated by volunteers, but in the context of increased hours this would not be appropriate for the service in the city. To protect the service at the Carnegie building it would be necessary to invest in the building year on year and this would affect five to seven other branch libraries in the city.

104.7.     Councillor C. Theobald noted she was pleased that the report did not propose the closure of any libraries in the city, and she welcomed the increased service at Hollingbury Library with access to a café and comfortable space. The report also proposed increased opening hours at Patcham Library. Whilst the Carnegie building was  well-loved it needed significant investment, but she stated she would have preferred to see a full business plan when the report was considered by the Economic Development & Culture Committee – despite this she felt much of the plan was sound.

104.8.     Councillor Cobb noted her concern that, were the plan to co-locate the Hove Library Service implemented, this would lead to a loss of a significant amount of the green space around Hove Museum – which was currently the only green space in Westbourne Ward. She did not believe that the Carnegie building should be sold; instead it should be retained or another appropriate use found if the service was moved. If this were to go ahead she would prefer to see a reduced extension to better protect some of the green space and that it in-keeping with the surrounding area. As it stood, Councillor Cobb stated she would not support the plan.

104.9.     Councillor Sykes stated that he had visited Hove Library that day and testified that the service was very well used; in contrast he noted that Hove Museum was not a purpose built facility. Whilst some of the plan had merit, he felt that the closure of the Carnegie building was unacceptable, and he felt the administration should own the decision as a political one. He expressed concern that the wording of questions in the consultation was ambiguous as it had not specifically referenced the closure of the purpose built building – he also noted he agreed with the concerns raised by Councillor Cobb in relation to the loss of the open space. He noted the receipt from the sale of the building would not be significant, and he reiterated that the building was of local importance both in and outside.

104.10.  Councillor Druitt stated that the report contained a number of very good and positive proposals for the future of library services in the city such as use as community hubs and increased opening hours; however, there was concern with issues such reduced staffing, lone working and reduced space. He was of the view that the consultation had taken place before all the information was known and the Economic Development & Culture Committee had been asked to take the decision without the full business case. He noted that the proposed amendment to the petition debate recommendations discussed earlier in the agenda (Item 98) would have allowed more information as had been requested by some Members in the debate, but this had not been supported. He noted that as the Libraries Plan stood it could not be supported by the Green Group.

104.11.  Councillor Littman welcomed the comments from the Conservative Members that sought to protect and retain the service in Hove at its existing location. He noted he had grown up in Church Road and even now used the facility with his grandchildren. He added that both the previous Green and Conservative Administration had ensured that the budget protected the future of the facility; there was also the will in the community to retain dedicated use of the Carnegie building.

104.12.  Councillor Moonan noted that she had initially had concerns in relation to proposals to move Hove Library; whilst the ideal solution would be to retain the Carnegie building, she was much assured by the service offer at the proposed co-located site. Hove would retain a full library service, open to residents with a full range of services expected from a modern library. She noted that the consultation had showed a majority of respondents in favour of the proposals, and this was further evidenced by some of the feedback she had received in her own Ward speaking to residents. Councillor Moonan acknowledged that the new space would not be as large as the existing, but the vast majority of the service could be fully provided at the co-located site; she added that she was confident the business would further evidence that this was sensible option. Finally it was reiterated that Hove would be retaining a library service and she would support the report in full.

104.13.  Councillor Mac Cafferty noted that it was difficult to imagine another use for the Carnegie building; he also added that notion of the costs of retaining the building being equivalent to five to seven branch libraries was not to say that branch libraries would have to close if the Carnegie building was retained; this was simply a comparison in terms of running costs. He went on to highlight the political choice being made by the administration, and raised concern that the building now needed significant investment having only been updated 10 years. He referenced the survey of the building which stated that both the external and internal fabric of the building was either fair or in good serviceable condition which questioned the argument that the building needed significant investment to retain the service in that location.

104.14.  Councillor Miller noted that he welcomed many aspects of the report, but his concerns related to Council making a decision when the full business case for the future of the Carnegie building had not been agreed. He highlighted that that the choice was not between the service in its existing location or the closure of five to seven branch libraries as it was within the gift of the Council to retain the service in full if it was so minded. He highlighted the ‘costly’ PFI contract that had been agreed for the Jubilee Library the last time the Labour & Co-Operative Group had formed the Administration in the city and stated his view that the a co-located service would not be sufficient.

104.15.  Councillor Bell noted that the changes could make it more difficult for some residents to access the internet through libraries, and asked that Administration be sure this was thought through.

104.16.  Councillor Penn referenced the results of the consultation, stating that residents had expressed how much they valued the library service in their local area, but wanted increased opening hours – the proposals around Library Plus would achieve just this. Residents had also expressed a desire for libraries to become community hubs as they were already used in a variety of different ways. Only 9% of Hove residents regularly used Hove Library and the current location made access more difficult; it was important that the Council listen to residents and provide a modern, fit for purpose library service.

104.17.  Councillor Janio stated that his concern related to the future of the Carnegie building, and he could not support the report until he had details of the full business case.

104.18.  Councillor G. Theobald noted that the Conservative Group had a free vote on the matter before Council and highlighted the necessity of providing the full business case for the future of the Carnegie building. He queried the status of the Libraries Plan were it to be agreed at the meeting, but the business case not be agreed by the Policy & Resources Committee in April. He had not received a significant number of emails from residents in relation to the matter; nor, was there a large public presence in the Chamber opposing the approval of the report. He also added that he was pleased with the proposed resolution of the service at Hollingbury and Westdene Library.

104.19.  Councillor Taylor noted the proposed changes to the service at Westdene Library, and noted he had received assurances that people would be benefitted through extended opening hours; as well as the local school benefitting from the additional classroom space that would be provided. He noted that in absence of the full business case in relation to the Carnegie building he would have to abstain from the vote.

104.20.  Councillor Daniel stated that co-locating the service would maximise the potential and allow residents to use their local library in a new and modern way. She stated the proposals were exciting and would help to increase the use of the space; the proposals also included digital upgrades for all libraries ensuring that internet access was increased for those that did not have access to it at home. The Libraries Plan was a means to expand and reenergise the role of libraries in a modern city; it was important that Members consider what was best for the city as a whole and this was a means to take the service forward in a digital age.

104.21.  Councillor Morgan replied to the debate and thanked the Head of Library Services for the thorough and considered report before Council. The report sought to keep libraries services open in the face of reductions to Council budgets. He recognised the points that Members had raised in relation to the business plan, but provided assurance that the necessary detail was in place. It was explained that volunteers would not be replacing paid staff, and there was concern that much of criticism of the consultation was due to a dislike of the outcome. He asked that Council be bold and support the Libraries Plan as means to provide a service to meet the modern needs of the city.

104.22.  The Mayor noted that the report and the recommendations had been moved and put them to the Council; which were carried by 23 votes to 17 with 10 abstentions, as detailed below:

104.23.  RESOLVED – That Council adopts the Libraries Plan 2016-2020, and the changes to Library Services proposed as part of this Plan, as contained in the appendix to this report, and outlined in brief in section 3 with amendments in section 6.