Agenda item

Local authorities are constantly evaluating the way they deliver services, not only taking account of financial pressures but equally changes in social trends, new technology and the evolving needs of their communities.  However, since BCP Council was formed in 2019, there has not been a comprehensive look at our library service to ensure it remains relevant to the needs of our communities and to the circumstances in which the council now operates.  A review is therefore overdue and this report sets out the review framework.

Exploring interest in alternative models of delivery may allow libraries to sustain and even improve their offer to communities as hubs for a variety of council/community services. A range of models including those that capitalise on the capacity in our communities, and the technology that is now available to support open access, will be explored to inform the final strategy.

The Portfolio Holder for Customer, Communications and Culture and the Libraries and Customer Service Manager presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these minutes in the Minute Book. The Board was advised that local authorities were constantly evaluating the way they deliver services, not only taking account of financial pressures but equally changes in social trends, new technology and the evolving needs of their communities.  However, since BCP Council was formed in 2019, there had not been a comprehensive look at the library service to ensure it remained relevant to the needs of local communities and to the circumstances in which the council now operated.  The Board was informed that a review was therefore overdue and that the Cabinet report set out the review framework.

It was noted that exploring interest in the alternative models of delivery may allow libraries to sustain and even improve their offer to communities as hubs for a variety of council/community services. A range of models including those that capitalised on the capacity in our communities, and the technology that was now available to support open access, would be explored to inform the final strategy. The Board raised a number of issues in the subsequent discussion including:

·     The Private Finance Initiative for Bournemouth Library – It was noted that the £1.6million payable was for each year, for the next 8.5 years. The figure may vary slightly due to utility costs, etc. After investigation it had not been found that it was financially viable to withdraw from the contract as the scheduled payments would still need to be made.

·     Use of Bournemouth Library – It was being used by the Citizen’s Advice Bureau. Whilst there was some office space there wasn’t additional space suited for other commercial uses.

·     Support from the Arts Council – It was noted that it had no statutory responsibility for Libraries but were through the Department of Culture, Media and Sport working to encourage advocacy and collaboration. There were two types of grant funding available for projects and collaborative work. The next round of grants funding was due to take place in 2025.

·     Consultation Process - It was acknowledged that it was good that the consultation would be engaging with non-library users. There was a need to understand why people were coming to libraries and also the reasons people were not using libraries.

·     Building Survey - It was noted that the building survey seemed to be out of date for a number of locations, for example Christchurch and was not particularly relevant for the consultation.

·     Volunteers – It was highlighted that this wasn’t always an effective means to deliver a service and it was something which officers and the Portfolio Holder would need to take into account.

·     Stock Budget – It had reduced marginally over the years but there was a healthy budget which was shared. Consultation should be included on how the stock budget was utilised and it needed to be spent in a way which provided an efficient service.

·     Data collection – it was noted that libraries collected figures on number of people entering the library and also the stock borrowed.

·     Asset Management – In response to an issue raised on wording in the report the Portfolio Holder advised that they had not had any discussion with officers on closures of libraries. The paragraph in question was about how the Council could be more efficient with building use. The Board advised that if any libraries were in jeopardy this should be made very clear in the consultation.

·     Social Value Assessment – It was important that this was included in the consultation and included the vulnerability of users, isolation and socioeconomic factors.

The Chair thanked the Officers and Portfolio Holder for attending and bringing the Cabinet report to the meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 7.03pm and resumed at 7.11pm.