I am writing on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP) formally to raise a complaint concerning the management by Northamptonshire County Council (hereafter ‘NCC’) of their statutory public library service

1. 7 Ridgmount Street, London, WC1E 7AE
T +44 (0)20 7255 0500
E karen.mcfarlane@cilip.org.uk
W www.cilip.org.uk
Patron HM The QueenIncorporated by Royal Charter 1898Chief Executive Nick PooleRegistered Charity 313014
The Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP
Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)
100 Parliament Street
Westminster
London SW1A 2BQ
02.03.2018
Dear Secretary of State,
Formal complaint: Decision by Northamptonshire County Council in respect of statutory
library service
I am writing on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP)
formally to raise a complaint concerning the management by Northamptonshire County Council
(hereafter ‘NCC’) of their statutory public library service.
Our complaint is in 4 parts:
i) Failure to consult
That at a duly-constituted public meeting of the Council which took place on Wednesday
28th February 2018 and despite the advice received from KPMG and the representations of
Local Councillors and interested parties (and the representations already received during
the 12-week consultation period), we understand that the Council voted to adopt a budget
which de facto mandates the implementation of a reduced library service which was not
included in the Options made available for public consultation.
Specifically, having supported ‘Option 1’ in the original consultation documentation, we
understand that the Council changed to support ‘Option 2’, but the ‘Option 2’ put to vote
was not the same as that which was included in the consultation documentation.
In this case, the Council would, in our view, be materially failing in its responsibility to
implement meaningful consultation prior to agreeing changes to a statutory service.
ii) Inaccurate Equalities Impact Assessment
That we understand that the Equalities Impact Assessments (EIA) undertaken as part of
the Council’s statutory duty were based on the modelling set out in the Options presented

2. Patron HM The QueenIncorporated by Royal Charter 1898Chief Executive Nick PooleRegistered Charity 313014
for consultation and not in fact the model set in force through the Council’s budget
decision. Specifically, it is our understanding that the EIA do not account for the fact that
the ‘retained libraries’ decided summarily at the Council meeting are solely based in large
or medium-sized urban areas, significantly disadvantaging rural populations.
We further note that the EIA were completed in respect of individual sites, and that these
focus on the distance from libraries situated in other counties. We are not aware that an
Equalities Impact Assessment was completed to cover the overall impact on residents in
the county.
The EIA could not, therefore, be taken to present a balanced assessment of the Equalities
implications of the model which is in the process of being implemented, and the Council is
therefore at risk of being held to be in breach of its statutory duty under the Equalities Act
2010.
iii) Failure to act appropriately on financial advice received
That we are given to understand that the Council has been advised that financial modelling
which was used to inform their decision about changes to the service, which include
significant cuts to staffing and library opening hours, was flawed and that the proposed
service reductions will not meet the financial targets used to justify them. The Council in
this matter appear to have failed to take into account the costs of closing libraries and that
they have therefore failed in their primary duty of fiscal responsibility in respect of their
statutory service.
iv) Failure to meet statutory duty to provide a comprehensive and efficient service
That in our consideration the resulting service, which will result initially in a reduced
provision of just 1 day (4 hours) per week in 21 of the libraries for which NCC is
responsible and subsequently to the closure of a significant number library service points
and mobile services, cannot in any sense be construed as consistent with a reasonable
definition of a ‘comprehensive and efficient’ service (please see note below).
We further note that the Council has presented a binary option – that libraries should be
either retained in toto in the statutory service or ‘spun out’ entirely to independent
services. It does not appear that the option of a community-managed service supported by
professional staff within the statutory service has been considered.
Notwithstanding statements made on social media by NCC subsequent to the decision, the
fact remains that (by their own admission) alterations to the proposed staffing levels for
the service do not materially change the overall decision ultimately to close or transfer out
of statutory provision a large part of their public library service points.
Note concerning definition of ‘comprehensive and efficient service’

3. Patron HM The QueenIncorporated by Royal Charter 1898Chief Executive Nick PooleRegistered Charity 313014
We note that as Secretary of State your duty under section 1 of the 1964 Act requires you inter alia
to issue statutory guidance to local authorities in England in respect of their duty to provide a
“comprehensive and efficient library service” under section 7.
Your duty to issue guidance on this issue is reinforced by your obligation to act compatibly with
Convention rights under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Our view is that it is therefore arguable that the current lack of definition of a ‘comprehensive and
efficient’ library service by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport fails to provide sufficient legal
certainty concerning the extent to which local authorities may cease to provide library services
notwithstanding their statutory duty to provide a “comprehensive and efficient” service under section
7, contrary to the rights of library users to respect for their private lives, to receive information and to
non-discrimination under Articles 8, 10 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights
respectively.
We would further argue that your duty to issue guidance must be read in light of the duty under
section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination and
to advance equality of opportunity among protected groups, particularly given that such groups are
likely to be disproportionately affected by any further reduction in library services by local authorities.
In considering the need for appropriate guidance, we would ask you to refer to the following cases in
which the duty of Local Authorities under Section 7 of the 1964 act has been considered:
 R v London Borough of Ealing and others ex parte Times Newspapers Ltd and others (1986)
85 LGR 316;
 Attorney-General v Observer Ltd and another [1988] 1 All ER 385;
 Bailey and others v London Borough of Brent [2011] EWHC 2572 (Admin);
 R(Green) v Gloucestershire County Council [2011] EWHC 2687 (Admin);
 Draper v Lincolnshire County Council (No 1) [2014] EWHC 2388 (Admin), and;
 Draper v Lincolnshire County Council (No 2) [2015] EWHC 2964 (Admin
We further note that several of these decisions make reference to the finding in the 1962 Bourdillon
Report that considers "the basic requirements of an efficient library service" to include the following: -
"There are certain functions which should be within the capacity of any library unit
setting out to provide the basic range of library service to its readers. The scope of a
public library increases in relation to the size or density of the population served but in
some fundamental respects the requirements which can be laid down for the basic
service remain valid all the way up the population scale" (paragraph 13).
"There are areas where the population is too small or too sparse to justify the provision
of a full library service, and where reliance must be placed on mobile units or small
branches" (paragraph 13).
"The provision of books and other printed materials has two aspects: the provision on the
spot of a wide range of books and related material for reading in the home or for

4. Patron HM The QueenIncorporated by Royal Charter 1898Chief Executive Nick PooleRegistered Charity 313014
reference in the library itself, and the ready access which the public library should afford
to the far wider range of material which is not immediately at hand. Unless the public
library performs both of these functions it is not doing its job properly" (paragraph 14).
"In urban areas no person should normally have to travel more than one mile to a
library" (paragraph 103).
We further note the following finding in the Charteris Report which constituted the basis of the
inquiry into public library services in the Wirral:
"The Inquiry has accepted the implicit and explicit interpretation of the 1964 Act that a
comprehensive and efficient service is one that is based on local needs (hence why
there can be no single definition which is true to all library authorities in England) and if
those needs are not fully assessed and taken in to account, it becomes a rational
impossibility for a library authority to provide a service which comprehensively and
efficiently meets those needs in a demonstrable way".
In respect of this report, we note that the NCC decision has not taken into account the impact of the
proposed cuts to services on the population with due regard to population density, accessibility and
the availability of transport infrastructure.
In light of developments with Northamptonshire County Council, and as formal element of this
complaint, we therefore petition you as Secretary of State to take immediate action to provide
satisfactory guidance for Councils on the definition of what constitutes a ‘comprehensive and efficient’
service such that they may comply with the letter and intent of the 1964 Act and their other statutory
duties.
Additional points for consideration
In light of the above complaint, we would ask the Secretary of State to take due consideration of the
following points:
 That the decision of the Council, the manner in which it has been made and the fact that the
financial conduct of NCC is currently under independent review commissioned by The Rt Hon
Sajid Javid MP constitute reasonable grounds for serious doubt or uncertainty over whether
the Local Authority is (or may cease to be) complying with its legal obligation to provide a
comprehensive and efficient library service.
 That the manner in which the Council reached its summary decision despite advice received
from KPMG and others is such that they may be construed as acting in a careless and
unreasonable way in respect of the statutory library service.
 That because the decision was effectively made on a budget which presupposes a delivery
model which had not itself been the basis of consultation, NCC has failed to consult affected
individuals or to carry out significant research into the effects of its proposals.

5. Patron HM The QueenIncorporated by Royal Charter 1898Chief Executive Nick PooleRegistered Charity 313014
 That NCC has failed adequately to respond to concerns raised regarding its financial model
and that it has therefore manifestly failed to explain, analyse or properly justify its proposals.
Conclusion
We are aware of the circumstances in which NCC finds itself, and of the issuing of a Section 114
Notice relating to its ability to bring forward a balanced budget. This does not, however, change the
statutory basis of the services for which they are responsible nor does it excuse them from observing
proper process, particularly in respect of consultation over its proposals and the appropriate
modelling of the Equalities implications thereof.
In our view, the summary action taken by Northamptonshire County Council is clearly equivalent to
the breach of statutory responsibilities which prompted an inquiry by the Department for Culture
Media and Sport (passim) in the Wirral in 2009, and that specifically on the failure to consult this
constitutes clear grounds for an inquiry on your part.
In general, we note that other Councils across the UK may find themselves similarly obligated to issue
a Section 114 Notice and to take summary action in respect of their financial affairs. In our view it is
therefore essential that the outcome of this inquiry is clear and definitive in respect of the duty to
consult and the definition of a ‘comprehensive and efficient’ service provided by you as the Secretary
of State duly mandated under the 1964 Act and the Equalities Act 2010.
We are happy to make ourselves available to your officers to discuss the matter of this complaint and
we look forward to your urgent attention.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Nicholas Poole
Chief Executive, CILIP