“tomspam,
I agree that this fight should have been unnecessary, but it was started by GCC, and only taken up by various campaigners from different walks of life and different political parties or no political allegiances (despite what some commentators try to claim) after it became clear that the county council was determined to bulldoze through their plans, irrespective of the results of the "consultation". The only substantial change during the consultation was that GCC dropped their plan to close Cinderford Library when they saw the massed ranks of angry local people who turned up to a meeting there. It seems that the only thing that GCC respects is a show of force of some kind, which is very sad.

If the community groups who expressed interest in running community libraries are unable to keep an interest in the subject for a few months, then they couldn't really have been that interested. Many of them only put in a bid to run a community facility after being offered huge financial incentives. Matson, Tuffley and Hester's Way were EACH offered money to make a business case, then a £5,000 grant, then a further grant of £20,000 per annum for four years. The other applicants were each offered an initial grant to work out a business case, a grant of £5,000, and a further £10,000 per annum for four years. In addition, all applicants were offered officer support to train them how to run a library. All in all, that adds up to about £600,000. Hardly chicken feed at a time when GCC is pleading poverty. Their aim seems to be to close libraries and make the community take up the slack, even if it doesn't save money in the short term. In the longer term, these community libraries may well fail after the grant money runs out, but that doesn't bother GCC, as they can say: "Look at those useless community groups. They clearly didn't want to have a library."”

“Tomspan,

I don't want to speak for LU, but I believe some of the issues that have been raised with the home delivery alternative are the costs to service users for posting often heavy large print books back to the council as well as the mobility issues of service users, the assumption that everyone who would wish to use the service has the internet, and the loss of social contact through interacting with staff and other library users on the library bus/housebound club.

It's not fair for me to comment on the situation of the claimant, but your point that "some people (including some of the most vulnerable) are less capable of doing so and may not have the eloquence and wherewithal to put their case forward or garner support for their cause" is absolutely relevant to the library campaign. I got involved in this campaign not out of self-interest, but becasue I knew many people in my community who are vulnerable and, as you say, less able to speak out or organise opposition, and whose quality of life will be greatly diminished by the loss of our local public library service. I have met many more people across the county in the same boat since getting involved in the campaign. Here, as always and with any issue/service, it is up to those of us who are able to speak out to do so on behalf of others in our communities whose voices are otherwise too easily ignored, as they would have been by GCC's consultation.

I'm afraid I have to go offline now, but can I thank you for your respectful tone and willingness to engage in a proper discussion without resorting to rudeness and unsubstantiated accusation - it makes a refreshing change on here! Demelza”

“Kay, again, my point is who will win? By the time the case is "resolved" (as I said no side will really "win" I believe) many of the community groups interested in assisting Libraries may not be interested in helping anymore or have other commitments. The case has not only frozen closures but frozen every aspect of moving the service forward so that when it comes time to make cuts they will have to be deeper.

LU How is ordering books online and having them delivered less practical than a series of buses or vans traveling the county?

Demelza thanks for commenting, I find it interesting that we still don't know who has brought the action. Can you tell me why the person wants anonymity? It's fair and well saying that others should bring action on behalf of themselves where they are affected by the cuts but surely some people (including some of the most vulnerable) are less capable of doing so and may not have the eloquence and wherewithal to put their case forward or garner support for their cause?”

“Sorry - I meant for that comment to appear under my real name (Demelza Jones). I have no issue with putting my real name to this comment.”

“Tomspan, there's been a great deal of thought behind the campaign. Despite the council's QC's claims in court last week, people opposing the council's plans for the libraries have never said there should not be cuts to the library service at all, or that libraries should be specially protected, nor that we don't agree with any changes at all to the service. Rather it has been argued that if cuts are to be made, they should be made in a fair, equitable and considered way which takes proper account of the needs of service users and ensures the council is complying with it's statutory duties. As Kay says, there is clearly uncertainty over whether this has happened, as otherwise a judge would not have granted permission for judicial review to go ahead, and the judge would not have retired to consider his delayed judgement for several weeks.

From the start, library campaigners have called, not for no cuts at all as the council's QC and posters like abllokehere claim, but for a review of the council's plans to ensure these important issues had been considered properly (see the statement to full council following the submission of the petition http://tinyurl.com/5rlycgl) If the council had accepted this suggestion nine months ago it would have saved all involved a great deal of time and money. Yes, there are hard choices to be made, butif you make them propoerly there is a better chance you will make the right choice. As you rightly say, central government are also to blame. That is why library campaigners have been lobbying the central government ministers with responsibility for libraries nationally, Ed Vaizey and Jeremy Hunt MPs, and travelled to London in April to present these concerns to Department of Culture, Media and Sport officials. We now have the laughable situation of the council's QC claiming in court last week that it is the duty of central govenment not the courts to judge if GCC's strategy is legal, whilst Jeremy Hunt, Ed Vaizey and DCMS simultaneously state that they can't get involved until the outcome of the court case is known.

It's also a bit unfair to suggest that library campaigners are drawing attention away from other cuts and not fighting for other services. Everybody can do something but nobody can do everything - it has to be up to others to take these fights to GCC, and there have been other effective groups such as the Dursley Training Unit campaigners, who I believe won a reprieve for their centre and a re-consultation by GCC.”

“GCC is legally obliged to provide a "comprehensive library service" according to the 1964 Act. Whether the alternatives to the mobile library service proposed by GCC can be considered to constitute a comprehensive service is one of the things the High Court is considering now. The proposals I have seen seem to me vague, unsatisfactory and impractical - eg ordering books online and having them posted by the library service to the user.
I strongly agree that the cuts are politically motivated. For example, if the government would abandon the planned NHS reforms they could save an estimated £2bn and many of the proposed cuts would be unnecessary.”

“tomspam,
Your claim that there is no thought behind this legal case is puzzling. A judge ruled that it had merit, and then it was fought out in court. How can there be no thought behind it? We won't know the outcome for a month or two, but you seem to be trying to fight the case all over again before we even know who's won.”

“tomspam,
I'm fairly certain that the answer to your question is yes. This matter would have been fully considered and argued over during the three-day hearing. As far as I remember, the council intended replacing the mobile library service and the homelink service with another service that would also have cost a lot but not have been as useful. I don't know the details, but maybe Library User does.”

“LU would you rather that the mobile service (approx £9-15 per book leant) and homelink (£40 per book leant) were kept and the necessary cuts were distributed across the service, or sacrifice the mobile libraries to reduce the impact on static libraries and book stock? Would you rather the a few static libraries were sacrificed and the revenue costs incurred there were put back into improving the state of the remaining libraries, or keep them all and let the buildings deteriorate.

My point about all of this is that there doesnt seem to be any thought by FOGL behind this, no recognition that due to the economic situation and central government cuts will mean that the people on the ground will have to make hard decisions. If this is about the cuts in general then why not make it about that and protest it to Central government directly - local authorities can't magic up the money if the guys in Westminster close the tap and protesting just about libraries is focussing peoples attention away from deeper cuts in other important services.

Don't get me wrong I don't agree with cuts in public services at the moment either. I happen to think that many of them that are being made are for political rather than practical reasons. Personally I'm not sure why public spending is low OR the need to make cuts at the moment. Interest rates are low, low, low - so why isnt the government borrowing money to put back into investing in national projects (thus getting people employed again)? After all we will have a few thousand going from the armed services to the dole office in a few months time.”

“LU,
Is GCC obligated to provide a mobile service?”