Cabinet

1.     Considered and noted the results of the Library Strategy consultation;

2.     Approved and has adopted the Library Strategy 2024-29 (as attached to this report);

3.     Agreed the closure of three branch libraries from 1 April 2025 as set out in this report;

4.     Agreed that the three branch libraries are mothballed from 1 April 2025 and delegates to the Strategic Director of Place the authority to use the branch library buildings for any appropriate meanwhile use, provided that any proposals for the disposal or long term use of the branch libraries be brought to a future Cabinet meeting;

5.     Agreed that the mitigating actions in section 5 are progressed;

6.     Agreed that the budget for book stock is continued as set out in this report.

Report: Libraries Consultation

Presented by: Councillor Gillian Ford, Cabinet Member for Adults & Wellbeing

With the agreement of the Chair, item 12, Libraries Consultation was brought forward in order that residents present could observe the discussion

Summary:

Councillor Gillian Ford “Library closures were on the previous Administrations Agenda for budget savings and therefore will not come as a surprise to their Members that we have had to consider the library portfolio within the borough.

The maintenance and upkeep of Libraries were not a priority for the previous Administration and no budget was set aside for their long-term up-keep and sustainability. We have therefore multiple libraries that require substantial repairs, maintenance, even rebuilds in the case of Collier Row. Having seen the conditions surveys for all of the boroughs libraries, I can confirm the three libraries proposed for closure conditions surveys include cracks in external brick work, roofing problems and single glazed units without kite marks which may not be compliant with Part K of the Building Regulations.

Last year’s budget included a £300k cut in library services and MHCLG expects the delivery of the 2024 budget, as a condition of the Capitalisation Directive. Just to reiterate this cut is not part of this year’s budget as it is accounted in last years, and formed part of those budget consultations.”

Summary: (response to Place Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committee comments, at end of this summary)

The Council’s budget setting exercise for 2023-24 included proposals to reduce the revenue budget of the Council’s library service by £300,000 over two years. This prompted the production of a Library Strategy that would set out how the library service would function in the next few years.

This report seeks approval of the Library Strategy.

Amongst other things, the Library Strategy provided for the potential closure of 4 out of 5 branch libraries.

The report considers the outcome of the consultation on the draft Library Strategy that sought views of stakeholders on the Strategy and on the option for the Council to close up to four branch libraries.

Following careful analysis of all the responses received during the consultation including the public survey, stakeholder feedback, petitions and correspondence received, the condition of the libraries, the Council’s ability to invest capital, and the Council funding gap it is considered that Council funding for three branch libraries should cease. This will result in the consequential loss of service of three branch libraries that are recommended to close on 31 March 2025 and achieve an annual saving of £288k.

This report also considers a number of options to mitigate the impact of the decision.

Cabinet

1.     Considered and noted the results of the Library Strategy consultation;

2.     Approved and has adopted the Library Strategy 2024-29 (as attached to this report);

3.     Agreed the closure of three branch libraries from 1 April 2025 as set out in this report;

4.     Agreed that the three branch libraries are mothballed from 1 April 2025 and delegates to the Strategic Director of Place the authority to use the branch library buildings for any appropriate meanwhile use, provided that any proposals for the disposal or long term use of the branch libraries be brought to a future Cabinet meeting;

5.     Agreed that the mitigating actions in section 5 are progressed;

6.      Agreed that the budget for book stock is continued as set out in this report.

Place Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee – Comments And Recommendation To Cabinet On Libraries Consultation

Following its meeting on 3 February 2025, the Place Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee submits the following comments and recommendation to Cabinet and requests that Cabinet responds to these at its meeting on 5 February 2025.

The Sub-Committee sought assurance that the EQHIA is correct. This followed a Member query about discrepancies between the EQHIA and Action plan.

Recommendations

1. That Cabinet delay the decision until a second consultation has been carried out, presenting the proposal to close three libraries to the public, as has taken place in other parts of the country. And that the Officer benchmark what is best practice. 

Response:

Whilst a second phase consultation is mentioned within the draft library strategy, this is not considered to be a requirement. There are examples of a second phase consultation elsewhere, with Dorset Council carrying out a phase one and a phase two consultation. Phase one was from October 2021 to January 2022 and phase two from September to December 2022. However, phase one was to inform the development of the Library Strategy and Phase two was to consult on the strategy once drafted.

In essence, a phase two consultation in the context of Havering library strategy and recommendations in the Cabinet report would be consulting on the same thing – do you agree/disagree with closing libraries. We already have that information from the consultation carried out and included within the Cabinet report.

A phase two consultation is highly unlikely to provide a substantially different response to the one already received so is perceived to be of little value. If a phase two consultation were to be carried out, this would delay the implementation of library closures and therefore not achieve the required savings that were part of the budget agreed in 2024 February Cabinet.

Even if the Dorset approach had been considered to be an approach Havering chose to follow, time would not have allowed as further delays to a decision being taken would result in the savings required not being achieved. It is worth noting that already the saving identified for 2024/25 of £150k has not been achieved due to the preparation of the draft strategy and subsequent consultation.

DCMS has advised that they do not have any best practice guidance around a single/two phase consultation regarding possible library closures. It is suggested that a two-stage consultation approach should be made clear at the start of the consultation process, together with providing a clear indication of the aims and objectives of each stage. This was not mentioned or made clear at the commencement of the consultation on possible library closures so provides further rationale for not introducing a second consultation at this stage.

There is no expectation from DCMS about carrying out a second consultation. The consultation process is a matter for the Council and the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 does not impose any specific requirements with regard to consultation on proposed changes to library services. However, the Libraries as a Statutory Service guidance document sets out the role of Council and the need for public consultation on proposed service changes, and provides guidance on how to conduct a consultation.

Should DCMS receive representations of alleged deficiencies in the consultation by a Council carried out in relation to proposed library changes they do not merit an investigation under section 10 of the Act, unless the changes are likely to have a material impact on the level of service provided, and it can be shown that any deficiencies in the consultation may have resulted in the Council proceeding without a sufficient understanding of local needs.

Therefore, the recommendation is not accepted.

2. That, following the formation of the Friends Group of Harold Wood library, who are seeking funding, the Cabinet delay the decision to close Harold Wood library in order that the group might have time to secure funding

Response:

Whilst it is recognised and appreciated that the Friends of Harold Wood Library have now been formally constituted, the request to allow a period of time for the Friends to raise funding has been stated would be at least 6-9 months. If this were agreed, it would delay the saving attributed to the closure of Harold Wood library and also a decision on the future of the site. Whilst funding might be available if applications are successful, it is questionable as to whether funding could be realised on an ongoing basis to meet the costs of running the library.

The Friends can still have a role to play in providing library related activities within the Harold Wood neighbourhood through supporting a book swap facility, community activities and fundraising to contribute to new provision subject to that being agreed at a future Cabinet meeting and being financially viable.

Therefore, the recommendation is not accepted.

3. That the Cabinet seek the opinion of the 151 Officer on whether savings made elsewhere could be used to offset the overspend generated by keeping the libraries open, and whether that would satisfy the CIPFA report and MHCLG with regards to the Capitalisation Directive

Response:

The conditions attached to the Council being in receipt of 24/25 Exceptional Financial Support required the Council to comply with two things. 1. To publish an Improvement and Transformation Plan and 2. To undergo a CIPFA Financial Management review. As part of the CIPFA Review process, the Council must demonstrate the delivery of savings as one of many requirements of the overall process.

The Review also considered the Council’s governance and decision-making arrangements.

At present, the Council has not yet received details of what the process will entail as part of the 25/26 Capitalisation Direction request. The requirements will be set out when the exceptional financial support is agreed by MHCLG. Officers are working with MHCLG to ensure confirmation of both the EFS and the conditions attached will be available in advance of the Budget Setting Full Council meeting.

4. That the Cabinet explore and outline what work needs to be undertaken to ensure that the remaining libraries do not fall into disrepair and be threatened with closure

Response:

Subject to the recommendations of the Cabinet report being agreed, the remaining seven libraries have condition surveys that identify investment required of at least £786k. The condition surveys were visual only to get indicative minimum capital costs and further intrusive surveys would likely identify more costs. The surveys also did not include mechanical and electrical so additional costs should also be expected once these have been included through a further condition survey.

The administration is committed to delivering a quality library service in the remaining seven libraries and will be seeking ways in which to fund the required improvements which will be considered alongside other capital investment requests to ensure the overall capital programme remains affordable.

Therefore, the recommendation is accepted and a timetable for this will be considered by officers in due course.

5. Cost Breakdown – that Cabinet defer decision until further information is provided on both revenue and capital costs.

Response:

The revenue and capital costs are identified within the Cabinet report. The breakdown of these costs have been circulated ahead of this evenings Cabinet meeting.  There is nothing in the revenue cost breakdown information that is considered to materially affect the decision, and the response to the previous recommendation regarding condition surveys sets out the position clearly.

Reviewing the cost breakdowns further will delay a decision being made on the recommendations of the Cabinet report and result in not achieving the identified savings.

Therefore, the recommendation is not accepted.