Vandalising our libraries

Published: August 4, 2011

SO Camden Council has got its way, three of its libraries are now in imminent danger of closure.

Of course, local communities will struggle to thwart the administration’s expectations of ridding the borough of these. The conditions imposed on the hand-over of the libraries to the communities will have the objective of ensuring the desired ultimate closures. There can be no hope of anything other than the objective being ruthlessly pursued. If/when these libraries do close in the future, it should not be forgotten who is responsible.

At least the three libraries have some hope of life after Labour. Even this has been denied the fourth victim – Regent’s Park Library. This is to be simply dismembered. Somewhere there will be a homework club and somewhere there will be a few computers for the local people. Nowhere will there be a collection of books to aid literacy in a deprived area.

If residents wish to borrow a book, they will have to go to Camden Town, a library which is to be moved further away from Regent’s Park. Even worse, there has been no promise of the continuation of the library’s early-years work. When the area’s literacy level plummets, it should not be forgotten who is responsible.

The justification for this mindless vandalism is that the council has to save money from the library budget. This has been revealed as fiction by the rejection of the Camden Public Libraries Users’ Group proposals.

These easily provided the required £1.6million saving and avoided any risk of closures.

Even better, the reduced opening hours scheme has been proved to work, in 1993.

Why should any administration wish to reject a simple method of meeting its financial objectives and, at the same time, give the public what it clearly said it wants?

The only explanation which fits the facts is that there is a deeply entrenched dislike of public libraries within the local Labour Party. It has again and again attacked these institutions and can be expected to continue to do so. In these circumstances, the rumours of a plan to close nine of the borough’s libraries begin to be understandable and believable.

This administration is almost half-way to its ultimate objective. There are five more libraries to close.

Excuses can always be found, if you look for them. It should not be forgotten who is responsible.
Alan Templeton
Chair, Camden Public Libraries Users Group, NW6

Comments

Petty tactics

It is no coincidence that three of the libraries targeted for closure are in more affluent parts of the borough. The council has argued that these libraries have low rates of book borrowing, yet their own facts show this to be untrue. Labour wants to sell us the line that the cuts are necessary and the Conservative govenment is the real villain. What seems clear is that Labour is more interested in petty political points scoring than supporting the clearly expressed wish of Camden residents to keep libraries open. There is no shortage of constructive solutions, if they are prepared to look for them.

Vandalism?

Alan Templeton’s letter made me brush up on the dictionary meaning of his choice of words last week. Vandalism: The act of wilfully destroying things.
I find myself curiously agreeing with Mr Templeton. It should not be forgotten who is responsible for rejecting plans to close nine libraries, plans handed over to Labour when we took power from the Lib-Con’s in Camden.
Full comment here http://mericapak.wordpress.com/2011/08/06/vandalism/
Cllr Meric Apak

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.