Editorial - Cooperation or coordination? the case for a Library and Information Commission.

At present in Britain there is no single public body, or government department, with overall responsibility for publicly funded libraries and information units. Whilst the recent establishment of the Ministry of the National Heritage does bring together responsibility for the Public Library Service and that for the British Library at the national level, there are also a range of other publicly funded libraries and information services which are controlled or administered, directly or indirectly through other government departments. Furthermore the patterns of finance and control of different categories of library also differ significantly in the four countries that go to make up the United Kingdom.

Even within one sector of the library world, there are often wide variations in practice and in the level of the service provided, depending on local, historical, or other factors. Thus neighbouring local councils may provide markedly different levels of public library service, with different priorities, due to the political complexion, or sometimes the personal preferences, of powerful individuals on their governing bodies. Equally universities with equivalent numbers of students will yet have different levels of library provision, for historical reasons, or due to the nature of the subjects taught. Such discrepancies have been made more obvious by the recent assimilation of the former Polytechnics into the University Sector.

This diversity also extends to the way in which libraries, of all types, are financed. All British public and national libraries and the majority of academic and school libraries, ultimately derive the funds necessary to meet their operating costs and acquire new materials from the public purse, but this will be done through a variety of national or local government bodies and agencies. Likewise a substantial proportion of the special library sector is also funded directly or indirectly through the government, yet once again there is little or no coordination or standardization in the pattern of funding.

This diverse and largely uncoordinated picture contrasts with other related areas of public life, such as national and local museums and art galleries, or the public funding of the arts, both of which benefit (or suffer) from some degree of national coordination through bodies such as the Museums and Galleries Commission or the Arts Council.

Hitherto, there have been few formal attempts at coordinating the work of different kinds of library service within Britain. It has rather been left to the librarians to develop informal links among themselves or through their various professional associations. Inter-library cooperation, between different types of libraries in one locality, or else between similar libraries throughout the country, has been an important feature of the British library scene for many years. A network of regional bureaux to coordinate inter-library loans has existed for decades, but this is only one part of the overall pattern of cooperation. Bodies such as SCONUL (the standing Conference of National and University Librarians), FOLACL (the Federation of Local Authority Chief Librarians), and ASLIB (the Association for Information Management) have also provided the opportunity for professionals in particular areas of information work to meet together and devise a strategy for cooperation and the coordination of their services.

For several decades there has been some debate among the library profession in Britain as to whether there should be some equivalent national system for the coordination of libraries, either through persuading government to devolve responsibility for all kinds of library to one single Ministry or Department, or else by the establishment of a quasi autonomous non-governmental organisation (QUANGO). Such a body could make use of the services of distinguished librarians from all branches of the library and information professions, and others sitting on a standing committee or commission. This would seek both to coordinate and integrate the work of different kinds of libraries, and also advise government on policy. However although these ideas generated considerable interest during the 1970s, both among library and information professionals, and also government ministers and civil servants, they came to nothing during the next decade.

Following the election in 1979 there was a marked change in the political climate in Britain both in terms of the curbing of public expenditure on education, arts and libraries, and also a shift away from the establishment and use of QUANGOs. Although the 1990s have not brought a new political complexion to Britain, there is now a somewhat less dogmatic Prime Minister who is willing to listen to advice from those with professional rather than merely party political expertise. There also appears to have been some relaxation in government attitudes.

At the same time there have also been changes in the British Library's policies. Funding constraints, brought about by the rapdily increasing cost of the planned move to its new library building has brought about a re-consideration of its role vis a vis other libraries in the U.K. The BL is no longer able to regard itself as a free-standing comprehensive national library but rather as 'the hub of an interdependent network of libraries, both here and abroad', with 'no formal responsibility for the national system', and having now to 'maximize collaboration with other libraries' (LINC, 1991). As a result of these various changes at the centre, there has been some renewed interest among senior librarians in seeking the establishment of a Libraries Commission, which could take over this responsibility.

Some of the coordinating functions of such a commission are currently undertaken informally through the Library and Information Cooperation Council (LINC), to which interested bodies nay be affiliated. LINC aims to promote 'cooperation and partnership as a means of improving the effectiveness of the library and information sector in the UK and the Republic of Ireland'. It does this by representing the interests of library cooperation to national and local government, and acting as a forum for the exchange of ideas and the collection and dissemination of information on this subject. It was natural therefore that LINC should be in the forefront in re-establishing the debate over the need for a more formal and extensive national system of coordination of libraries in Britain.

In November 1991, at the invitation of the Office of Arts and Libraries (OAL), LINC organised a wide-ranging seminar to discuss this issue. It was attended by a number of representatives of organisations covering different aspects of the library and information scene in Britain, notably FOLACL, SCONUL, the British Library, the Library Association, the Consortium of University Research Libraries, and the Council of Polytechnic Librarians, and a number of papers on the subject were presented. These included a paper presented by FOLACL proposing the establishment of a Library and Information Commission, closely resembling the well-established Museums and Galleries Commission.

Subsequent discussion centred around the difference between coordination and cooperation, and the central role of government in any national coordination scheme. Whilst there were inevitable differences in emphasis and interpretation of the role of any coordinating body, there was general agreement among those present that such a body was desirable. The November seminar therefore resulted in two proposals. Firstly, FOLACL was asked to develop further their proposals for a Library and Information Commission, and provide more details regarding the role and responsibilities of this body. This should be done in association with LINC. Secondly, the Library Association and the British Library representatives were requested to seek to interest the relevant government departments, and the various funding bodies, to set up an enquiry into a national system for library coordination.

The first concrete outcome of the November 1991 seminar has now appeared in the form a report, written on behalf of FOLACL by Pat Coleman, Director of Birmingham Library Services in March 1992 (Coleman). This paper was debated by the LINC Council in July 1992, and an amended version has been circulated to members for detailed comment. Pat Coleman's proposals were designed to be illustrative only, and are more concerned with the principle of establishing a new body rather than with the exact details of how this should be done. There will be the inevitable further changes in the proposals, but the document is nevertheless likely to represent a blueprint for any future developments in this area.

After summarizing the background to her paper, and discussing the current position on library cooperation, Ms Coleman puts forward the reasons for reconsidering the idea of library coordination. In doing this she emphasizes that she is not proposing coordination imposed from above, rather in the form of voluntary coordination with individual libraries recognising the benefits, and opting in. The reasons why such a reconsideration should be particularly timely include - the need to develop agreed performance measures as part of the Government's plans for a Citizens Charter, the financial constraints on parent institutions which have led to dramatic reductions in some library services, the changing role of the British Library, the various changes in the academic sector as Polytechnics acquire full University status and become independent from the local authorities, and recent changes in the structure of, and personalities in central government.

The next section of the report details the proposals for the Library and Information Commission, which would embrace all types of publicly funded libraries, whether administered at the national or local government level. The principle function of the new commission would be to advise government, principally through the agency of the Secretary of State for the National Heritage. One slight complication is that some aspect of this work is already undertaken by the various Library and Information Services Councils for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, each of which has a slightly different remit. Indeed some members of LINC felt that the Scottish Library and Information Council, currently offered a model for an effective library coordinating body which other parts of the United Kingdom might usefully follow.

There would be up to fifteen members of the new Commission recruited from eminent people with an acknowledged interest or expertise in library and information service, appointed by the Prime Minister. In turn the members of the Commission would be advised by members of four specialist committees covering library cooperation, information technology, research and development, and the quality of service.

The first of these committees would have responsibilities similar to those currently undertaken by LINC, although with a U.K. perspective. The Committee on IT would be responsible for the development of agreed technical standards, and ensuring that libraries make the most of the substantial opportunities for cooperation afforded by computer networking. The third committee would advise the Commission on the research and development needs of the library community and the commissioning of research (using funds currently administered by the British Library Research and Development Department).

One major new function suggested for the Commission would be the maintenance of a register of library services of all kinds which have demonstrated that they have met certain agreed standards of provision. The Committee on Quality would have a key role to play in administration of this register and in the monitoring of standards of library service. It would also be responsible for alerting the Commission to those public library authorities which are failing to meet their statutory duties in the provision of an efficient library service. Finally, the Committee on Quality would also oversee the collection and processing of statistical information; work currently undertaken by the Library and Information Statistics Unit at Loughborough.

Not all librarians will automatically welcome the establishment of yet one more body consisting of 'the great and the good of the library world'. However the new Commission will perhaps replace, or subsume the roles of a number of organisations or committees already in existence, and simplify the pattern of government and control of libraries. Other critics of the scheme will suggest that the current system, although uncoordinated and relying on cooperation, works acceptably. There is also the issue of the sensibilities of the individual nations within the United Kingdom, and the potential loss of control over their libraries to a remote body in London. This is perhaps the most difficult potential problem which needs to be resolved.

At first sight, the establishment of a Library and Information Commission along the lines of Pat Coleman's report appears to have a number of positive features. For the first time the library community as a whole will be able to communicate directly with national government and speak with a single voice which carries a certain amount of political weight. Similarly the Commission will be able to demonstrate both to those who provide the funds for library services and those who use and rely on them, that they are concerned with the standards of service provided, and the efficient use of public money. This will be a most important factor in all future attempts to secure investment to develop services in the future.

It is some way between getting such an idea accepted within the profession, and persuading the government to make the necessary legislative changes to implement that idea. Undoubtedly there will be much further debate and several years of lobbying before such a body could be established. However, as all those concerned seem to agree, this is an opportune time to make the effort.

Notes

LINC, (1991), A report of a seminar on a national system for the coordination of libraries, held on 4th November 1991 at the Royal Commonwealth Society.

Coleman, Pat (1992), A national system for the coordination of libraries.