# Lambeth Council considering moving Lambeth Archives from Minet Library to Brixton Library



## editor (Jan 26, 2015)

Thanks to Tricky Skills  for breaking this exclusive. I have to say that this troubles me.









> Lambeth Council is considering moving the Lambeth Archives from the Minet Library to Brixton Library. Brixton Buzz understands that a consultation for this process will start on 30 January. It is uncertain what this would mean for the long-term future of the Minet, should the Lambeth Archives head over to Brixton.


Previous thread: Minet Library in Knatchbull Road, Brixton cited for closure

Read the latest story here: http://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2015/01/...chives-from-minet-library-to-brixton-library/


----------



## Belushi (Jan 26, 2015)

Its a lovely library, and a deeply suspicious move..


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 26, 2015)

Link to BBuzz piece.


----------



## Greebo (Jan 26, 2015)

Quite apart from anything else, I fail to see where the space will be found to shoehorn the contents into Brixton library.


----------



## editor (Jan 26, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Link to BBuzz piece.


That's the bit I meant to put in! Will edit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

the lambeth archives, as the council's archives, would not be the unofficial records office of the borough but its official records office.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

Greebo said:


> Quite apart from anything else, I fail to see where the space will be found to shoehorn the contents into Brixton library.


not to mention archives have to be kept under strict environmental conditions to ensure their preservation.


----------



## ricbake (Jan 26, 2015)

The Minet Archive is proper historical documents mostly well cataloged and well kept

The Council's office documents archive that they store themselves is a disaster.


----------



## toggle (Jan 26, 2015)

ricbake said:


> The Minet Archive is proper historical documents mostly well cataloged and well kept
> 
> The Council's office documents archive that they store themselves is a disaster.



IIRC,  it is only certain portions of the council's documents that they have a statuary provision to archive. any other provision by them is voluntary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

ricbake said:


> The Minet Archive is proper historical documents mostly well cataloged and well kept
> 
> The Council's office documents archive that they store themselves is a disaster.


i don't think you've quite got to grips with the notion of a local authority archive.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

toggle said:


> IIRC,  it is only certain portions of the council's documents that they have a statuary provision to archive. any other provision by them is voluntary.


the non-incriminating parts usually


----------



## toggle (Jan 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> the non-incriminating parts usually



sounds about right. 

but if they are moving the statuatory provision out of the building, it's definately looking like they are planning to withdraw support for the voluntary archive provision there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

toggle said:


> sounds about right.
> 
> but if they are moving the statuatory provision out of the building, it's definately looking like they are planning to withdraw support for the voluntary archive provision there.


not at all as there will be conditions of deposit on non-council collections which may have been loaned or donated.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

any fucking about with collections will attract reputational damage plus frowns from the national archives but i would be very surprised if they were going to get rid of any collections.


----------



## toggle (Jan 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> not at all as there will be conditions of deposit on non-council collections which may have been loaned or donated.



you know the hurdles to this, but i wonder if the council's bean counters need a lesson.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2015)

toggle said:


> you know the hurdles to this, I'm not sure how much the council's bean counters do


no one likes lambeth but they've no need to make new enemies by pissing about with archival collections. i'll have a look at the consultation material tomorrow but afaics major problem likely to be crap accommodation.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 26, 2015)

Cheers for the heads up tricky skills and ed. This worries me a lot. A great public library in an unique and unusual building. It has all the whiff of a property sell-off to me  

A couple of years ago the council were *adamant* there would be no library closures/sell-offs. Several people including myself even FOI'ed them about it. Now after the resounding election victory for Labour, the plans resurface. Funny that...


----------



## leanderman (Jan 26, 2015)

A positive might be easier access to the collection.


----------



## se5 (Jan 26, 2015)

Hmm before condemning it outright I would like to have an idea of the wider thinking behind the move - what is the benefit for the council of centralising archives in Brixton? will it make the archives more available to members of the public to browse? Potentially moving them to Brixton library with its longer opening hours and greater space will benefit everyone. Brixton library is also far more accessible in terms of public transport etc (I know the Minet is only a 15 minutes walk from central Brixton but it may be hard for somone coming from outside the borough to find/ travel to). It is probably better location-wise for archives staff too.

Moving them out of the Minet too may benefit local people in the Myatt's Fields area as it could add more library space and/or a space in the library available for community groups. They seem to have been doing up the Minet in recent months, installing public toilets etc so I would be very surprised if they have plans to close it. Maybe even adding a new room where the archives currently are located will make the library more 'sustainable' as it will ensure more people visit and might bring in income from hire fees. Thats a possible positive spin on the move anyway...


----------



## leanderman (Jan 26, 2015)

Everything must be condemned outright. Get with the programme!


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 26, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> no one likes lambeth ...



The Lambeth walk has been popular for years though.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 26, 2015)

No condemnation here. Just a slight concern over what the long term future of the Minet might be. The sources for this story suggest that it might not be good news.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

Reducing cost to the taxpayer by centralising records whilst increasing the number of residential/commercial properties (assuming it goes that way) is a good thing. Although the contents are of no particular interest to me, I would have thought preserving the records - full stop - is the main thing.


----------



## kittyP (Jan 27, 2015)

I love the Minet Library. 
Calm and old fashioned (but not out of touch) just as libraries should be impo.


----------



## editor (Jan 27, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Everything must be condemned outright. Get with the programme!


That really helps the discussion. Thanks.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

editor , Why state leanderman's below post doesn't "add anything"



leanderman said:


> Everything must be condemned outright. Get with the programme!



But not chastise the post immediately below that?



Spymaster said:


> The Lambeth walk has been popular for years though.



Both are humorous posts which don't technically "add anything". Or is this an example of:



editor said:


> feel free to back it up by furnishing the forum with some examples of any Brixton-related posts ..... by anyone else in this forum that have been closed down by me because "I don't like it". URLs please.


----------



## boohoo (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> Reducing cost to the taxpayer by centralising records whilst increasing the number of residential/commercial properties (assuming it goes that way) is a good thing. Although the contents are of no particular interest to me, I would have thought preserving the records - full stop - is the main thing.



For someone who like Victorian buildings, I'm surprised you believe there is nothing of interest in the archives for you!!

It would be crap for the library to become housing. These islands of free space used by the community -rich and poor - such as parks and libraries need to be retained as people need more in their lives than just houses and retail units.  Other community spaces such as pubs and churches, although not used by everyone, have been changed to residential uses for years. Removing places where community can get together is not a good thing. Most of us have times when we need those spaces and an online community does not suffice.


----------



## boohoo (Jan 27, 2015)

se5 said:


> Hmm before condemning it outright I would like to have an idea of the wider thinking behind the move - what is the benefit for the council of centralising archives in Brixton? will it make the archives more available to members of the public to browse? Potentially moving them to Brixton library with its longer opening hours and greater space will benefit everyone. Brixton library is also far more accessible in terms of public transport etc (I know the Minet is only a 15 minutes walk from central Brixton but it may be hard for somone coming from outside the borough to find/ travel to). It is probably better location-wise for archives staff too.
> 
> Moving them out of the Minet too may benefit local people in the Myatt's Fields area as it could add more library space and/or a space in the library available for community groups. They seem to have been doing up the Minet in recent months, installing public toilets etc so I would be very surprised if they have plans to close it. Maybe even adding a new room where the archives currently are located will make the library more 'sustainable' as it will ensure more people visit and might bring in income from hire fees. Thats a possible positive spin on the move anyway...



I would be interesting to know exactly what space Brixton library will be offering and how they see this working. Also how it affects the staff. Is it possible that part of the archive stays at the Minet? Is it possible it will be less available to the public?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

ricbake said:


> The Minet Archive is proper historical documents mostly well cataloged and well kept
> 
> The Council's office documents archive that they store themselves is a disaster.


what is the minet archive? how does it differ from the lb lambeth archive?


----------



## leanderman (Jan 27, 2015)

editor said:


> That really helps the discussion. Thanks.


Thanks. It's good to know that different opinions are not discouraged by the powers that be.


----------



## CH1 (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> Reducing cost to the taxpayer by centralising records whilst increasing the number of residential/commercial properties (assuming it goes that way) is a good thing. Although the contents are of no particular interest to me, I would have thought preserving the records - full stop - is the main thing.


How are you on morality? Should the Minet family trust get their donation back? Also why would you want to put commercial properties in the middle of Minet conservation area? To counterbalance the offices in Brixtron Town centre being converted into flats perhaps?
You seem to be advocating the Eric Pickles brand of town planning.
I think we should be told.


----------



## snowy_again (Jan 27, 2015)

The Trust deed from the Minet family will probably state what the building can and cannot be used for - unless it's passed entirely into the hands of Lambeth?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

i know it's really really fun to speculate but as there's nothing on the lambeth website about this at the moment there's no chance of reaching a conclusion on what's going to happen to the archives or the minet library. although that shouldn't stop idle speculation it may be better to wait till more is known before more serious consideration given to the issue.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

CH1 said:


> I think we should be told.



I think you're missing my point. I don't give a monkeys what the building becomes; turn it into a museum celebrating the Minet family's achievements for all I care. The important thing is that the records are saved and taxpayer costs are reduced - you can't possibly complain about that can you? Or have I misread your post


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> I think you're missing my point. I don't give a monkeys what the building becomes; turn it into a museum celebrating the Minet family's achievements for all I care. The important thing is that the records are saved and taxpayer costs are reduced - you can't possibly complain about that can you? Or have I misread your post


before you continue, perhaps you could outline what you know of archives.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

You'll have to elaborate


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> You'll have to elaborate


you're big on this reducing taxpayer costs. do you know what sorts of material the lambeth archives holds, whether they're held in  appropriate conditions, whether they have a conservator on the staff or whether one is contracted only as required? is your notion of lower taxpayer costs in the long or short term - that is, if costs went up in the short term due to the construction of a new purpose-built repository, would you object?


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> that is, if costs went up in the short term due to the construction of a new purpose-built repository, would you object?



No, I wouldn't object (assuming the costs in the long term where reduced)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> No, I wouldn't object


right. but have you any notion of the issues affecting day-to-day running of the archives, of the costs of maintaining material? do you in fact know what an archive is for?


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

I don't understand the relevance of understanding the day-to-day running of an archive. I dont have any notion of the issues affecting day-to-day running of a petroleum processing plant, but I wouldn't object to them upgrading the system to produce cheaper fuel at the pumps


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> I don't understand the relevance of understanding the day-to-day running of an archive. I dont have any notion of the issues affecting day-to-day running of a petroleum processing plant, but I wouldn't object to them upgrading the system to produce cheaper fuel at the pumps


i'll try and make this simple for you. the archive is not only the institutional memory of lambeth council but also the major resource for local history and genealogy research in lambeth. while its resources will be supplemented by the material available at the london metropolitan archives and the national archives, it is an irreplaceable body of documents. it's unique. it's where a wide range of people need to go for information about site history, about drainage information, about decisions previously made by the council. only someone who knew the price of everything but the value of nothing would be so fussed by the rate of funding it receives - i would not be surprised if the archives and the libraries were the most popular parts of the council. i don't know what you do, but i am sure it is not as socially valuable as the work done by librarians and archivists in lambeth.


----------



## SpamMisery (Jan 27, 2015)

I'll ignore your sweeping ad hominem statements and explain that if asked the question "Would I rather pay '£x' for service 'a' or '£x - £y' for service 'a'?", the answer is very easy.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it's a valued archive which people have an emotional attachment to, but the physical location of the archive isn't important to me.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> I'll ignore your sweeping ad hominem statements and explain that if asked the question "Would I rather pay '£x' for service 'a' or '£x - £y' for service 'a'?", the answer is very easy.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it's a valued archive which people have an emotional attachment to, but the physical location of the archive isn't important to me.



It may be important to the material archived, though. IIRC Minet's archive is fitted out with temperature and humidity control. I'm not aware of any part of Brixton Tate being so.Stick previously-protected material in an unprotected environment, and the material will degrade.


----------



## toggle (Jan 27, 2015)

and the cost of providing a new fit for purpose facility can be significant. last estimate I saw of the costs of the new cornwall archive and local history library is £15million. IIRC, that's after the deals to let developers loose on the rest of the site


----------



## editor (Jan 27, 2015)

toggle said:


> and the cost of providing a new fit for purpose facility can be significant. last estimate I saw of the costs of the new cornwall archive and local history library is £15million. IIRC, that's after the deals to let developers loose on the rest of the site


You only have to look next door to the BCA see how such plans can swiftly go awry.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2015)

SpamMisery said:


> I'll ignore your sweeping ad hominem statements and explain that if asked the question "Would I rather pay '£x' for service 'a' or '£x - £y' for service 'a'?", the answer is very easy.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it's a valued archive which people have an emotional attachment to, but the physical location of the archive isn't important to me.


the thing you don't understand is that the archive underpins a range of services for which you appear happy to pay, that this is done pretty much on a shoestring anyway, and that there's not much in the way of cuts which can be done without undermining the future security of the maps, photos, papers, books etc etc which comprise the archival collection.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 27, 2015)

As was pointed out, all of this is speculation. Have the people who run the archives commented publicly on the quality of the proposed new arrangements? Are the existing facilities up to archival scratch, as it were, or could they be improved upon? Location wise, Brixton is certainly more accessible. 

I don't subscribe to the "at whatever cost" idea. But that must not be used to excuse a reckless approach to the historical value of the material. It's impossible to comment fully without knowing what items would be threatened by a move, if any, and what the cost of keeping those items is, what the historical value of those items is and whether alternative recording arrangements might be suitable on some cases. Or even moving exceptional items to another archive facility nearby. Hopefully some more info will come from those at the Minet.

As fun as it is to try to prove that he was, I don't think SpamMisery was suggesting a reckless approach.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

As we predicted at the start of the week - Lambeth Council is proposing to move the Lambeth Archives over to Brixton.

But it's worse.

MUCH worse...

The Council wants to sell the Minet and Waterloo. Funding will also be stopped for three other libraries in the borough.

Elsewhere and there is the need to pimp out parks more for private events.

MASSIVE consultation to wade through.

BBuzz piece.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 30, 2015)

FFS!


----------



## editor (Jan 30, 2015)

Depressing stuff.


----------



## snowy_again (Jan 30, 2015)

Christ, that entire 'sell it, and put it into an endowment to pay for future community use' concept is technically fucked. 

No endowment is ever going to generate sufficient funds to cover the long term, sustainable support needs.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

Just think of the level of capital that the sale of Waterloo alone will bring in. Plus Myatt's Fields 'aint exactly going to bring in pennies.

Yes - CUTS. They have been shat on from up above. But the response is to pass the problem on to residents with community management.

Meanwhile the MP for Croydon North is making headlines about the marvels that he managed to achieve before he fucked off to indulge in his Westminster ambitions. It's fucking painful that folk living outside the area actually swallow up all of the Co-op Council bullshit.


----------



## ricbake (Jan 30, 2015)

_"Calling Festival came to Clapham Common for the first time in 2014. 50,000 people danced in front of performers such as Stevie Wonder and Aerosmith and it generated £142,350 income for Lambeth Council. It will be returning in 2015."_

How on earth do they manage to get less than £3 a head "income" from an event like this where tickets cost £69.50

Ticket Master probably made more


----------



## ricbake (Jan 30, 2015)

_" ....  Lambeth Library Challenge Fund during 2016 and 2017 specifically for Bishops and Vassall Wards. This fund will be open for charitable trusts and social enterprises to bid for funding to establish a community library offer ..."_
or 
" You can put some books in Longfield Hall"


----------



## leanderman (Jan 30, 2015)

It's selling of the silver. Short termism. At the very least, the sites should be used for social housing.


----------



## grosun (Jan 30, 2015)

leanderman said:


> It's selling of the silver. Short termism. At the very least, the sites should be used for social housing.


Or surely rather than selling outright, they could issue medium/long leases on the buildings/land, that way should they need it back in the future, they can get it without having to shell out insane amounts. It feels like the idiotic selling off of primary schools they indulged in a while back which, with increased numbers of kids now, has resulted in insane expansions of most schools around me, & there's no hope in hell the council can buy any new land to build a new school on.

Just wait til the West Norwood cinema/library deal falls through & they flog that off to developers too (a cynical part of me suspects the entire deal was set up to fail, as an easy way to be "forced" to sell it, but I hope I'm mistaken).


----------



## boohoo (Jan 30, 2015)

Tricky Skills where's west norwood library fit in?


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

boohoo said:


> Tricky Skills where's west norwood library fit in?



Strangely no mention in the headline points that I've only had a chance to read so far. The Upper Norwood joint library will get no further direct funding from Lambeth Council.

Digging...


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

boohoo said:


> Tricky Skills where's west norwood library fit in?



Actually, here we go:


----------



## boohoo (Jan 30, 2015)

That's a hit for the Upper Norwood Library -- I hope it manages to survive in some form but it is only currently open two days a week.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

boohoo said:


> That's a hit for the Upper Norwood Library -- I hope it manages to survive in some form but it is only currently open two days a week.



Especially so given all the political posturing that has been made using the library to score points. The Lambeth Labour argument that it would fund the library, whereas the Tories across the border wouldn't, seems a little shallow now.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 30, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> As we predicted at the start of the week - Lambeth Council is proposing to move the Lambeth Archives over to Brixton.
> 
> But it's worse.
> 
> ...



The consultation is also about the Rec and sports centres as well. Just been notified about this. Not clear at this time exactly what this will mean re the Rec and the other sports centres. Looks like the Rec is safe. 

As you say its massive about of info to get through.


----------



## brixtonblade (Jan 30, 2015)

Have only gone through the leaflet and havent read all the supporting info but a couple of things leap out:
- The park budget cut is huge in both absolute and percentage terms.  The leaflet only seems to talk about "locally managing" the parks and having more events in them though - I dont really see how that could make aenough of an impact to stop the funding reductin being very bad news. 
- The size of the budget cut seems to be a given - is that really the case?  Couldnt they increase council tax?  Or make cuts somewhere else (although I guess that that wouldnt neccessarily be "better")


----------



## leanderman (Jan 30, 2015)

brixtonblade said:


> Have only gone through the leaflet and havent read all the supporting info but a couple of things leap out:
> - The park budget cut is huge in both absolute and percentage terms.  The leaflet only seems to talk about "locally managing" the parks and having more events in them though - I dont really see how that could make aenough of an impact to stop the funding reductin being very bad news.
> - The size of the budget cut seems to be a given - is that really the case?  Couldnt they increase council tax?  Or make cuts somewhere else (although I guess that that wouldnt neccessarily be "better")



This Government will not allow them to raise council tax by more 1.99 per cent.

It's an impossible situation.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 30, 2015)

Council Tax is rising 1.99% over the next three years. We've got a BBuzz piece on that tomorrow 

This alone though will only bring in £5.7m over a three year period.

The size of the budget cuts can only really be confirmed for the forthcoming year - an £18m cut from Westminster.


----------



## se5 (Jan 30, 2015)

leanderman said:


> This Government will not allow them to raise council tax by more 1.99 per cent.
> 
> It's an impossible situation.



The Tory/Lib Dem government have imposed the cap across England - councils can increase it by 2% or more if they have a local referendum to approve the increase but most politicians in Lambeth (or anywhere else for that matter) dont have the guts to make the case for increases and would fear losing any referendum (plus the cost of the referendum is hard to justify when making cuts and central govt would probably find some other way to restrict the increase).

And of course our glorious Labour council made a pledge in its manifesto that it would minimise council tax increases regardless of the need for services


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 31, 2015)

Here's the BBuzz piece on the 1.99% Council Tax rise - the first in six years for the borough.

Gosh. I sound like a Labour PR bod


----------



## brixtonblade (Jan 31, 2015)

Thats pretty miserable reading - those overruns are pretty big.  How big is the defecit that they are running?  £25m reserves doesnt sound big.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 31, 2015)

The collection rate was interesting. I have always thought the council was hot on collection. But a woman who was renting from me for six years recently moved out with about 4 years of council tax arrears. It appears that she had sub let a room for a short while, put the council tax in that person's name, didn't change it after he moved out and never paid. He had a whole load of threatening mail and most likely a couple of ccjs against him as a result but no one actually investigated until recently. It seems a bit toothless. It seems that she did the same with electric and gas. Gas only turned up on the day after she moved out to shut off the supply.


----------



## boohoo (Jan 31, 2015)

Rushy Doing a bit of maths, it seems to be 6 million quid of unclaimed council tax - that's a lot!


----------



## Rushy (Jan 31, 2015)

boohoo said:


> Rushy Doing a bit of maths, it seems to be 6 million quid of unclaimed council tax - that's a lot!


She owed quite a bit but it wasn't quite that much.


----------



## boohoo (Jan 31, 2015)

Rushy said:


> She owed quite a bit but it wasn't quite that much.



Sorry I meant overall - looking at the Bbuzz article.


----------



## Rushy (Jan 31, 2015)

boohoo said:


> Sorry I meant overall - looking at the Bbuzz article.


It certainly looks like she wasn't the only one at it.


----------



## CH1 (Jan 31, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Here's the BBuzz piece on the 1.99% Council Tax rise - the first in six years for the borough.


Seems to be a mistake in the BBuzz piece.
Current rates are:
*Council tax 2014/15
A*  £816.19
*B*  £952.23
*C*  £1,088.26
*D*  £1,224.29
*E*  £1,496.35
*F*  £1,768.42
*G*  £2,040.48
*H*  £2,448.58

BBuzz says: "The Cabinet will consider the first Council Tax rise in six years when it meets at the Town Hall on 9 February. The increase will lead to a Band D property rising from £925.29 per year to £943.70."

Shome mishtake here surely?


----------



## Tricky Skills (Jan 31, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Seems to be a mistake in the BBuzz piece.
> Current rates are:
> *Council tax 2014/15
> A*  £816.19
> ...



The figures quoted are the Lambeth Council level of Council Tax. The extra amount comes from various precept add ons.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jan 31, 2015)

I don't have a problem with moving the Lambeth Archives from Minet Library if it's in the best interest of the archive itself and the staff which run it (and the library.)

For me the problem is the continual sale of public assets. They are ours. They belong to all of us, for the benefit of all of us. You can only sell them once, then they're gone forever.


----------



## boohoo (Jan 31, 2015)

Brixton Hatter said:


> I don't have a problem with moving the Lambeth Archives from Minet Library if it's in the best interest of the archive itself and the staff which run it (and the library.)
> 
> For me the problem is the continual sale of public assets. They are ours. They belong to all of us, for the benefit of all of us. You can only sell them once, then they're gone forever.



My concern for moving the archives is if it is an excuse to reduce staff and service. The staff at Croydon archives seem to spend a lot of time managing volunteers. The archives collection of books to look at are great - there is nothing like it at Croydon. They also seem to have mislaid a Victorian photo album.  Their services were reduced and it's noticeable.

Selling community assets is crap - I've seen it happen in Hackney. It's happening out in the suburbs too. (Anerley Town Hall under threat - Bromley Council want to sell it for residential use)


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 3, 2015)

Saw this in Brixton Blog


----------



## VickyP (Feb 3, 2015)

In the glossy brochure http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/cultural-services-by-2020.pdf the archive doesn't get a mention until page 25, and then the move to Brixton library is not a done deal, there's still a feasibility study to do...

"We will continue to work closely with the Black Cultural Archives and, following a feasibility study, may propose moving the borough archives from Minet Library to Brixton Library. Brixton would be the destination for anyone interested in archives or information on heritage in the borough."

Unsurprisingly the Archive relocation is on the risk summary http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/lambeth-future-of-cultural-services-risk-summary.pdf

"What is the Risk and when could it happen?:  Lambeth archives relocation Funding (capital and revenue) plus feasible site for relocation fails to be found.
What will we do if this happens? :  Community challenge to relocation Options appraisal will be completed which investigates the feasibility of multiple sites. Feasibility will also review investment required and where this could come from.
What could be the result if we fail to rectify the risk?:  Out of borough storage and front of house provision will be explored in a fit for purpose facility as required."

So Minet is going to be sold off but they haven't got a solid plan on what exactly is going to happen to the archive, where it's going to go, and who's going to pay for it.


----------



## Greebo (Feb 3, 2015)

VickyP said:


> <snip> Minet is going to be sold off but they haven't got a solid plan on what exactly is going to happen to the archive, where it's going to go, and who's going to pay for it.


How utterly typical of what I'd expect of Lambeth.


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 3, 2015)

VickyP said:


> In the glossy brochure http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/cultural-services-by-2020.pdf the archive doesn't get a mention until page 25, and then the move to Brixton library is not a done deal, there's still a feasibility study to do...
> 
> "We will continue to work closely with the Black Cultural Archives and, following a feasibility study, may propose moving the borough archives from Minet Library to Brixton Library. Brixton would be the destination for anyone interested in archives or information on heritage in the borough."
> 
> ...



Is the second link correct? Its the same as the first one and I do not know where the quotes about risk come from.


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2015)

Two pieces publicising the threat to libraries: 
Minet Library under threat: show your support on National Libraries Day, 7th February
Save Lambeth Libraries – online petition launched on change.org


----------



## VickyP (Feb 4, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> Is the second link correct? Its the same as the first one and I do not know where the quotes about risk come from.



Apologies, it's this one (and post has been corrected) http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/lambeth-future-of-cultural-services-risk-summary.pdf


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2015)

VickyP said:


> Apologies, it's this one (and post has been corrected) http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/lambeth-future-of-cultural-services-risk-summary.pdf


WTF? 


> Soft market testing of leisure operators to be carried out to ensure that the service specification delivers value for money


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 4, 2015)

VickyP said:


> Apologies, it's this one (and post has been corrected) http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/lambeth-future-of-cultural-services-risk-summary.pdf



Thanks for this and your informative posts.


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 4, 2015)

I've always feared that Lambeth's commitment to fund a new home for the BCA was not affordable along with ongoing funding for the Minet Archives in their backwater site - hence my post of 2006 on one of the BCA threads:



lang rabbie said:


> Personally, I'd like to see a much more ambitious development on the site, integrating the BCA (and/or the archive collections of the Anti-Slavery Society held just up the road) with a new museum and archives for the borough to replace the Minet Archives.


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 4, 2015)

I do recall someone who worked at the Minet archives saying that a lot of people who visited to do family history research used to drive there from all over the Home Counties and it was the only good archives in central London not in a CPZ. 

[Am I right in thinking that streets around the Minet are still outside Brixton and Camberwell Controlled Parking Zones?]

Another former member of Lambeth libraries staff noted that the archives users were painfully white and many drove in because they were scared of using public transport via Brixton.   I think this may be a bit of a simplification by someone rehearsing their prejudices - most family history researchers are retired people and it IS a heck of a walk from Brixton or Loughborough Junction stations to the Minet.


----------



## CH1 (Feb 4, 2015)

lang rabbie said:


> Another former member of Lambeth libraries staff noted that the archives users were painfully white and many drove in because they were scared of using public transport via Brixton.   I think this may be a bit of a simplification by someone rehearsing their prejudices - most family history researchers are retired people and it IS a heck of a walk from Brixton or Loughborough Junction stations to the Minet.


This sounds a bit extreme - are we talking 2014 or 1984?


----------



## grosun (Feb 5, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Actually, here we go:




Hmm, sadly it doesn't seem as fully sorted as that tweet makes out, according to Friends of West Norwood Library:

http://us5.campaign-archive2.com/?u=bf4a0a7ae35c9cac2949cc683&id=3625f121ac&e=dda4efc51d

The fallback option of Picturehouse running the library themselves seems like a very odd idea indeed.

To be fair to the council, they do say that they rejected the notion of a supermarket taking over the building in 2012, so hopefully that thinking will carry forwards.


----------



## CH1 (Feb 5, 2015)

grosun said:


> The fallback option of Picturehouse running the library themselves seems like a very odd idea indeed.


It would become another Lambeth first - the only library to actively encourage noisy eating and drinking.


----------



## lang rabbie (Feb 5, 2015)

CH1 said:


> This sounds a bit extreme - are we talking 2014 or 1984?


Pretty sure conversation was post-Millennial


----------



## editor (Feb 6, 2015)

Upcoming: The Save Lambeth Libraries Campaign Invites You to Their National Libraries Day Event This Saturday


----------



## High Definition (Feb 11, 2015)

Been ploughing through "Cultural Services by 2020" and really don't think the figures for the "Lambeth Community Library Fund" stack up.  

First off, where will Lambeth find the £10 million to set it up?  Selling off the Minet and Waterloo Library sites won't raise anything like £10 million.  The Waterloo site is the more valuable but can't see Lambeth getting more than a couple of million for that.  Did a search on commercial property websites just now to check out how much retail units in Lower Marsh are going for - most recent sale is a shop unit with two floors above at 17 Lower Marsh on offer for £1.2 million.  Waterloo Library is just a one storey portacabin, no flats above, so can't see it fetching much more.  

Second question - how is an endowment fund of £10 million going to generate income sufficient to "provide between £350,000 and £450,000 per year in perpetuity"?   To get that the fund would have to generate a return of 3.5% to 4.5% - way above the paltry interest rate I get on my savings.   And don't see how the income can be provided "in perpetuity" - if the interest is spent providing revenue grants, then the value of the fund will decline over time in line with inflation.

Really think we need to resist the idea that selling off the family silver (the Minet and Waterloo sites) is a necessary sacrifice because the money raised will allow the other libraries on the hit list to stay open.  Totally opposed to selling these sites - we'll never get them back when they've gone - and the money raised will be nothing like £10 million.


----------



## High Definition (Feb 11, 2015)

High Definition said:


> Been ploughing through "Cultural Services by 2020" and really don't think the figures for the "Lambeth Community Library Fund" stack up.
> 
> First off, where will Lambeth find the £10 million to set it up?  Selling off the Minet and Waterloo Library sites won't raise anything like £10 million.  The Waterloo site is the more valuable but can't see Lambeth getting more than a couple of million for that.  Did a search on commercial property websites just now to check out how much retail units in Lower Marsh are going for - most recent sale is a shop unit with two floors above at 17 Lower Marsh on offer for £1.2 million.  Waterloo Library is just a one storey portacabin, no flats above, so can't see it fetching much more.
> 
> ...


 

Postscript to earlier post

I was at a meeting this evening organised by Waterloo Community Development Group.  Very well-attended meeting (50 to 60 people present) which I think reflects the concern locally about the threat to the Waterloo Library.  The three local (Labour) councillors were all present, as was John Kerridge, LB Lambeth's Associate Director for Communities, and one of the authors of "Cultural Services for 2020".

Tom Kerridge, when pressed, came up with an estimate for the money that might be raised in the Waterloo and Minet sites were sold - £3 million - which pretty much fits with my guesstimate.   We asked where the rest of the £10 million would come from and were told this would be from other Lambeth=owned assets earmarked for sale.

There were hints at the meeting that Lambeth aren't committed to selling the Waterloo and Minet sites - this is just an option up for consideration.  

Thinking about this after, occurred to me that the suggestion that the Waterloo and Minet sites could be sold isn't really a serious proposal and was only included to deflect us all from the real issue, the withdrawal of revenue funding to keep our libraries going.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Feb 12, 2015)

The situation with West Norwood Library now appears to not be so clear cut. It did seem that the Nettlefold Hall project had come off relatively well in the consultation.

The Friends group has now discovered that if Lambeth Council can't find £2m to complete the project, then there is the possibility of asking the private Picturehouse group to manage a 'community library.'

'cos we all know that Picturehouse has a great track record in dealing with staff relationships 

Plus why would you volunteer to work in a community library that is being run by a private business?

BBuzz piece.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Feb 25, 2015)

I've had a little more time now to look at all 22 docs that make up the cultural consultation. It's really difficult to understand precisely the implications for so many services - libraries, indoor sport, outdoor sport, events - everything is jumbled with different services being referenced across various documents.

We've had an attempt at Brixton Buzz to look at each service in particular. We're starting off with libraries.

There is the headline point that the Minet and Waterloo will be sold, and that funding for the Durning, Carnegie and Upper Norwood Libraries will stop.

We also found that a reduced service for Brixton, Streatham and Clapham was considered - this was ruled out as the Council needs to provide this as part of the statutory requirements.

Residents are going to be expected to play a role in staffing the libraries. This is mentioned in terms of 'extended opening hours whilst making savings.'

Another library review is planned for 2018. Tate South (South Lambeth Road) will be the 'hub and spoke' for the north of the borough until then. The 2018 review will look at the future for Tate South. My reading is that it will be the last light shining for libraries in the north of Lambeth whilst the Waterloo is sold. And then?

Buried deep away is the possibility of a library at Brixton Rec:

“An integrated library offer focussing on digitised services will be designed into the refurbishment plans for Brixton Recreation Centre.”

Which does raise questions about the future of Brixton Library at Windrush Square.

'Books in pubs' are suggested as an alternative for Vassall and Tulse Hill.

The Risk Summary documents explains that if all else fails, then turning towards the private sector is a possibility.

Or complete closure.


----------



## cuppa tee (Feb 25, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> 'Books in pubs' are suggested as an alternative for Vassall and Tulse Hill.



The only pub I can think of left in Vassal is the Crown and Anchor
Maybe the council can ask Golfrate drop the ridicuous £60k pa rent being asked for the Grosvenor so it can be a pub/library


----------



## CH1 (Feb 25, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> We've had an attempt at Brixton Buzz to look at each service in particular. We're starting off with libraries.


Like your article.
The point I wanted to raise was this:
The Minet is to be sold off for development - then why are the council also sponsoring an "action group" whose nucleus is Labour ex-councillors to redevelop Carnegie Library as a semi-commercial hub?

I've heard stories about saunas and health centres going in the Carnegie basement. Surely if anything does go into the Carnegie it should be the Lambeth borough archives - it is the only library with enough space.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Feb 26, 2015)

Here's the BBuzz analysis of indoor leisure as part of the Lambeth Council Cultural Consultation.

Brixton Rec appears safe, although there is still the possibility of a private developer propping up any future improvements.

The Rec is identified as the 'key driver in investment' when it comes to indoor leisure in Lambeth.

The GLL contract is up in 2018. 'Soft testing' will start soon to look at other providers.

Sadly the Lambeth Labour election pledge of 'Free Swimming for Every Resident' is absent.


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 26, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Here's the BBuzz analysis of indoor leisure as part of the Lambeth Council Cultural Consultation.
> 
> Brixton Rec appears safe, although there is still the possibility of a private developer propping up any future improvements.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this its very informative. Want to plough through the consultation docs this weekend.

The Rec is , as u say in article, structurally sound. Its the plant that near to ending its life. This will need replacing soon. The Rec has a lot of potential. There is also a lot of unused space. 

I am not at all happy with the idea of library services in Rec if they are a replacement for study space lost by selling off libraries. 

Unlike libraries so far I do not see Council going down the route of expecting residents to staff leisure centre. Anyway there is already a lot of voluntary or near voluntary work going on in Rec at the moment.


----------



## Gramsci (Feb 26, 2015)

Info on upcoming meetings where questions can be asked to officers and Cllrs.




> I’d like to update you on the events planned as part of the Future of Cultural Services consultation. This is the council’s wide ranging consultation on how we make the most of the borough’s parks, libraries, archives, arts and sports facilities to encourage more people to get more active.
> 
> The events will be taking place across the borough throughout March and will be an opportunity to discuss the proposals outlined, as well as your own ideas or concerns with council officers and councillors.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tricky Skills (Feb 27, 2015)

Another day, another look at one of the many angles lobbed together as part of the Lambeth Council Cultural Consultation. Today it is outdoor leisure.

This is a weird one. There are some very decent points made in the documents that address how to improve the team sports that are played throughout the Lambeth parks.

It is only when you get towards the end of the documentation that you realise that they are asking you about the whole Co-operative Parks Programme, and not just sport.

And they were doing so well...

£9m needs to be found by Lambeth Council to make the Co-op nonsense happen. £9m needs to also be found by residents.

Good luck with that one.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Feb 28, 2015)

Finally - we've reached the end of the Lambeth Council Cultural Consultation at Brixton Buzz. Today we are looking at events. 

The documents state that the Country Show will remain free. The bloody fireworks look likely to be a ticketed event with a year on year evaluation of the event.

New Lambeth Cultural Shows could be set up. These will be smaller events held around eight different areas in the borough. Each location is expected to hold two of these per year.

Parks will continue to be pimped out.

Pretty much Cultural Consultation-ed out to be honest.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 1, 2015)

I have started reading the Culture2020 docs. There is way to much to get through. Thanks Tricky Skills for the excellent summaries. 

The Equalities Impact Assessment is worth a read. On the Minet Library it says (page 24):



> Minet Library is located in Vassall ward, and very close to Coldharbour ward in an area of relatively high deprivation, *it is very close to Angell Town and Loughborough estates both of which demonstrate very high levels of deprivation,* high levels of crime. Both estates have a high proportion of residents from BME communities,therefore this closure must be assessed
> to ensure any adverse impacts are mitigated. Current proposals are for satellite community library provision in this area to be concentrated in the heart of these two estates, for example to use one of the vacant commercial units or the TMO office on the Angell town estate and to approach Marcus Lipton Youth Club which is opposite the Loughborough estate to seek potential shared spaces for use for this provision. Other community sites in this area will also be investigated to see if there is interest in providing small but accessible provision for those residents affected by the closure.



So in an area of high deprivation a library will be sold off and replaced with small provision. This does not seem to me to be adequate replacement service for loss of library in an area of high deprivation. I would have thought that the EIA would have taken a harder line on this.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 1, 2015)

The EIA

also has useful info on the fate of the arts page 46:



> Some of the regularly funded arts organisations deliver targeted activities in the some of
> the more deprived wards in the borough, including Coldharbour and Loughborough,
> providing training opportunities and apprenticeships for at risk young people and those
> not in education, employment or training. *The decommissioning of the arts programme could have a negative effect* on the numbers of young people from these areas being able to access arts activities and increasing their employability through benefiting from learning new transferable skills.
> The Young Vic also provided 3,128 free and discounted tickets to shows for local residents in the last year. *The decommissioning of the arts grants programme with the increased costs of living, unemployment, benefit changes, regeneration may lead to a perceived lack of benefit to some of these groups and issues relating to social isolation*.



"Decommissioning" is Council speak for ending of the Arts programme. This revealing quote below from EIA of the history of how this was done shows it was controversial decision.

page57:



> The council originally planned to cease the historical ring-fenced arts funding programme
> in March 2012, with the intention of opening this up to tender as part of a wider cultural
> commissioning programme. The arts organisations have been extended on an annual
> basis since this period.
> ...



The answer appears to be that the Council will "help" arts find alternative funding: page 20


> With less money available, we will need to develop a new approach to supporting the
> arts. Our ambition is to secure national recognition for promoting and developing the
> performing arts through a network of independent partners operating across the whole
> borough.We will continue to* provide support to arts organisations in different ways; support and guide them to fund other funding opportunities, broker partnerships* and use our assets
> more effectively to support the delivery of cultural activities.



I do not understand what "network of independent partners" are.

My reading of the EIA is that change in policy on supporting arts will have negative effect on equality issues. Whatever the Council might argue elsewhere.


----------



## critical1 (Mar 2, 2015)

I just received this , maybe of interest to some of you as it appears to tie in with some of the above.
This Monday evening. R u free 7pm at Streatham Library. It's a public consultation about the future of Lambeth Libraries. Does anyone know about this?

The commissioners think that they can gradually shut down Brixton Library by first bringing the archives there which will greatly reduce the resources and space available to the ordinary public and moving the computers to Brixton Rec. then to totally remove the public Library and put black cultural archives there and turning the new black cultural archives building into a conference centre for people with money. 

They think the ordinary people don't know and that it doesn't matter because they think ordinary people don't use the Library anyway. If u can make it it's at Streatham Library at 7pm. The commissioners deliberately are trying to sabotage the public from voicing there opinion by restricting information and notifying the public late about the consultation. They released the date with only 3 days notice. 
If you can't make it tell as many people as u can.


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2015)

critical1 said:


> I just received this , maybe of interest to some of you as it appears to tie in with some of the above.
> This Monday evening. R u free 7pm at Streatham Library. It's a public consultation about the future of Lambeth Libraries. Does anyone know about this?
> 
> The commissioners think that they can gradually shut down Brixton Library by first bringing the archives there which will greatly reduce the resources and space available to the ordinary public and moving the computers to Brixton Rec. then to totally remove the public Library and put black cultural archives there and turning the new black cultural archives building into a conference centre for people with money.
> ...


I was sent something similar, but I'm very dubious about how they'd get away with closing down the BCA and turning it into an upmarket conference centre.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 2, 2015)

critical1 said:


> The commissioners think that they can gradually shut down Brixton Library by first bringing the archives there which will greatly reduce the resources and space available to the ordinary public and moving the computers to Brixton Rec. then to totally remove the public Library and put black cultural archives there and turning the new black cultural archives building into a conference centre for people with money.
> 
> .



I am concerned that this idea of using the Rec as substitute study space. 

I do no want the Rec used as a way of gettting rid of public libraries. 

BCA I notice from the consultation docs will lose its Council funding soon. 

Politically moving BCA archives out of the new building must be a non starter. BCA is purpose designed building for the archives.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Mar 4, 2015)

An update on the Cultural Consultation, via BBuzz.

Friends of Lambeth Libraries have "greeted it with horror."

Brixton Rec Users Group is angry that it wasn't told about the digital library plans for the Rec.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 4, 2015)

I passed by the Minet Library today and I have to say i'm confused
the whole building is under scaffolding and looks like it's getting a renovation
but why if the council is planning on closing it and who is paying


----------



## Tricky Skills (Mar 26, 2015)

This is most odd.

Cllr Jane Edbrooke has suggested that the Archives could be shifted to... Brixton Rec


----------



## CH1 (Mar 26, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> This is most odd.
> 
> Cllr Jane Edbrooke has suggested that the Archives could be shifted to... Brixton Rec


Where did she say that? (In the text you link to)

I think there may be standards for keeping archives - but I believe Minet failed those for years anyway. 
If Lambeth hold a "consultation" to decide where to put the archive I think we will definitely have arrived in a New Labour Co-op dystopia. Such a decision ought to rely on expertise of librarians and archivists.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Mar 26, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Where did she say that? (In the text you link to)
> 
> I think there may be standards for keeping archives - but I believe Minet failed those for years anyway.
> If Lambeth hold a "consultation" to decide where to put the archive I think we will definitely have arrived in a New Labour Co-op dystopia. Such a decision ought to rely on expertise of librarians and archivists.



"The work currently taking place around redevelopment in Brixton, including the Brixton Rec and Your New Town Hall gives us a window to create a new home for the archives."


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 26, 2015)

CH1 said:


> Where did she say that? (In the text you link to)
> 
> I think there may be standards for keeping archives - but I believe Minet failed those for years anyway.
> If Lambeth hold a "consultation" to decide where to put the archive I think we will definitely have arrived in a New Labour Co-op dystopia. Such a decision ought to rely on expertise of librarians and archivists.



Tricky Skills 

Having read the piece twice. I thinks its this:



> The work currently taking place around redevelopment in Brixton, including the Brixton Rec and Your New Town Hall gives us a window to create a new home for the archives.  And these opportunities aren’t just happening in Brixton – Waterloo is changing with new plans around the Southbank.  All of these could create an opportunity for the archives.



So from saying earlier on that Brixton Tate library could be home for archives she is now suggesting that new archives could be part of "regeneration" in 3 possible areas Town Hall, Brixton Rec and Waterloo. 

I am now confused. The Culture2020 consultation said Tate Library as a possibility. Now the sites for new archives has widened.


----------



## Gramsci (Mar 26, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> "The work currently taking place around redevelopment in Brixton, including the Brixton Rec and Your New Town Hall gives us a window to create a new home for the archives."



We posted at same time. I agree that is the implication of what she is saying.

What concerns me is that senior Cllr comes out with these idea which are not in the original consultation. Everyone I know who was looking at Culture2020 thought the Council meant the Tate library.

The Council is making up policy as it goes along.

Maybe they have realised that Tate library is not suitable so are now saying it could be other sites. 

This is all very unsatisfactory.


----------



## Tricky Skills (Mar 26, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> This is all very unsatisfactory.



And it makes me wonder why I bothered to read 22 documents, and then respond to them.

What's the point when something completely different is then thrown into the equation?


----------



## Tricky Skills (Apr 15, 2015)

Independent data from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy makes for grim reading for the Lambeth library service. It ranks lowest across most categories when compared to 15 other London authorities, yet the costs are the highest.

It also shows how Lambeth has the lowest number of volunteers. Cllr's Edbrooke's whole vision for the library service is one built on 'co-operative' volunteer labour.

BBuzz piece.


----------



## lang rabbie (Apr 17, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Independent data from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy makes for grim reading for the Lambeth library service. It ranks lowest across most categories when compared to 15 other London authorities, yet the costs are the highest.
> 
> It also shows how Lambeth has the lowest number of volunteers. Cllr's Edbrooke's whole vision for the library service is one built on 'co-operative' volunteer labour.
> 
> BBuzz piece.



Christ, that is depressing.  I think I've been reading "improvment plans" to get Lambeth off the bottom of those league tables for the best part of twenty years.


----------



## brixtonblade (Apr 17, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> Independent data from the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy makes for grim reading for the Lambeth library service. It ranks lowest across most categories when compared to 15 other London authorities, yet the costs are the highest.
> 
> It also shows how Lambeth has the lowest number of volunteers. Cllr's Edbrooke's whole vision for the library service is one built on 'co-operative' volunteer labour.
> 
> BBuzz piece.



That's a shit scorecard.

On value for money - the cost per member of staff measure doesnt seem very meaningful.  As you note there arent many FT staff and the costs could be skewed by mgmt/supervisor pay.  Is there a measure that looks at budget per 000 population for example?

It's hard to tell from the report what the causes of the low scores are.  The council consultation is presented (from what I remember - read it a while ago) as solving the problem of "managing with less money" - there wasnt a lot of reflection on the quality of the service.

I thought the comparison or Lambeth to Southwark's scores in the assessment was interesting too - at the Herne Hill hustings someone asked about why Lambeth were cutting Library budgets but Southwark were investing.  I'd figure the two boroughs are similar in many respects so find it interesting that they seem to be managing to do so much better on this measure at least.


----------



## Tricky Skills (May 16, 2015)

Cllr Edbrooke is due to update Full Council on the consultation this Wednesday. She is expected to say that the process has been "emotive."

BBuzz piece.


----------



## Gramsci (May 16, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> . She is expected to say that the process has been "emotive."
> 
> BBuzz piece.



I have heard that as well. She has had a lot of opposition to the library closures.

I think it was a mistake to put leisure centres, parks and libraries together in one consultation. 

The Brixton Rec Users Group committee response to the consultation is now online


----------



## CH1 (May 16, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> I have heard that as well. She has had a lot of opposition to the library closures.
> I think it was a mistake to put leisure centres, parks and libraries together in one consultation.
> The Brixton Rec Users Group committee response to the consultation is now online


The BRUG response is concise and apt.

Regarding your point about lumping together all the amenity services -surely the point is the council has always considered them as related budget areas - and this consultation seems a bit of an elimination race.

I noticed that at their AGM Friends of Carnegie Library were not staking a claim to the Archives - which might have given them a reprieve - on the grounds they wanted to show solidarity with Minet campaigners.

Interesting moral territory. United we stand, divided we fall. Alternative view: if no-one is prepared to countenance the massive cuts the council seems to have in store, then the council will do it their way anyway.


----------



## Gramsci (May 16, 2015)

CH1 said:


> The BRUG response is concise and apt.
> 
> Regarding your point about lumping together all the amenity services -surely the point is the council has always considered them as related budget areas - and this consultation seems a bit of an elimination race.



Thanks glad u think response is ok.

The way the budget works for leisure services is quite different to libraries and parks. There is income from the leisure centres.

IMO a separate consultation on libraries would have been a better idea as its so controversial.


----------



## editor (Jun 10, 2015)

I've just posted up a little photo piece  bigging up the Carnegie.

















A look around the delightful Carnegie Library, Herne Hill Road, south London


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 11, 2015)

Looks like a lovely library editor


----------



## bimble (Oct 19, 2015)




----------



## editor (Oct 20, 2015)

Private Eye on Lambeth’s decision to turn libraries into privately-run gyms


----------



## pros (Oct 20, 2015)

it would appear the same bunch of language criminals 'operate in the area'. in southwark, an orchard was being 'enhanced' by destruction and transformation into a non-orchard (ironically, the reason this orchard had to go was for a 'state-of-the-art' library, opening any day soon although it's really as far from 'art' as it gets); here you've got 'diversifying the use of library buildings'. ffs (x8759349827)


----------



## editor (Nov 18, 2015)

All of Lambeth's libraries are closed today as a result of a mass walk out by staff ahead of tonight's lobby. 











All of Lambeth’s libraries are closed as staff walk out in protest against proposed closures


----------



## Tropi (Nov 18, 2015)

Tonight!


----------



## snowy_again (Nov 18, 2015)

They were marching up or down South Lambeth Road earlier.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2015)

snowy_again said:


> They were marching up or down South Lambeth Road earlier.


not up and down?


----------



## editor (Nov 26, 2015)

Gym-Trification: Lambeth’s dodgy scheme to turn libraries into books parodied in Private Eye


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2015)

brilliant.


----------



## Gramsci (Nov 30, 2015)

editor said:


> Gym-Trification: Lambeth’s dodgy scheme to turn libraries into books parodied in Private Eye



The Council got around tendering by adding the library/gyms to the existing contract with that GLL has with Lambeth to run the Leisure Centres like Brixton Rec. The Council is diverting some funds from the existing Leisure Centres to start the Library/ Gyms.

Gyms are a big money maker for GLL. The Brixton Rec gym membership is imo quite expensive.The same or more than some private gyms.

Something Brixton Rec Users Group committee have taken up with the Council. The cost of using the gym is something that local people often say to me is reason that puts them off getting more exercise.

In an area that the Minet is in this means that the less well off are less likely to use it.

The area around Minet is already well supplied with private gyms.

Also more concerning is the extension of the GLL contract is a temporary measure whilst the Council work with GLL in setting up a "Cultural Trust" as long term aim. To which assets like the Minet building will be transferred from the Council. All sorts of issues here- accountability etc.


----------



## aka (Dec 1, 2015)

very few people *need* a gym to get some exercise.  just go run/walk/bike round  brockwell/myatts field/ etc. park.  FFS.

that said, hopefully GLL go bust trying to make gymbrarys work and the whole sorry mess reverts back to a council that has some form of checks and balances.


----------



## CH1 (Dec 2, 2015)

aka said:


> very few people *need* a gym to get some exercise.  just go run/walk/bike round  brockwell/myatts field/ etc. park.  FFS.
> 
> that said, hopefully GLL go bust trying to make gymbrarys work and the whole sorry mess reverts back to a council that has some form of checks and balances.


I'm not sure you should hope for that. The default position in Lambeth is the property gets sold to Lexadon for luxury rental flats.


----------



## aka (Dec 2, 2015)

CH1 said:


> I'm not sure you should hope for that. The default position in Lambeth is the property gets sold to Lexadon for luxury rental flats.


in which case let's hope that the voters vote in some better cllrs


----------



## leanderman (Dec 2, 2015)

aka said:


> very few people *need* a gym to get some exercise.  just go run/walk/bike round  brockwell/myatts field/ etc. park.  FFS.
> 
> that said, hopefully GLL go bust trying to make gymbrarys work and the whole sorry mess reverts back to a council that has some form of checks and balances.


 
GLL claims to be non-profit social enterprise owned by its workers: Vision and Culture


----------



## aka (Dec 2, 2015)

leanderman said:


> GLL claims to be non-profit social enterprise owned by its workers: Vision and Culture


good luck to them then.  i suppose gymbrarys are better than simply converting them to flats.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 2, 2015)

aka said:


> very few people *need* a gym to get some exercise.  just go run/walk/bike round  brockwell/myatts field/ etc. park.  FFS.
> 
> that said, *hopefully GLL go bust* trying to make gymbrarys work and the whole sorry mess reverts back to a council that has some form of checks and balances.



Sadly unlikely, if rumours about Lambeth giving GLL some form of financial assistance are true.


----------



## leanderman (Dec 2, 2015)

aka said:


> good luck to them then.  i suppose gymbrarys are better than simply converting them to flats.



Mens sana in corpore sano!


----------



## brixtonscot (Dec 3, 2015)

leanderman said:


> GLL claims to be non-profit social enterprise owned by its workers: Vision and Culture


"claims".....GLL chief exec is on about 200k , while many of its employees are on zero hour contracts below living wage


----------



## CH1 (Dec 4, 2015)

leanderman said:


> Mens sana in corpore sano!


You make me wonder if it's really FKK (get your German dictionary out)


----------



## bimble (Dec 9, 2015)

here's a good story from north of the river  Local Government Lawyer - Campaigners use crowdfunding in bid to challenge library plans


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 10, 2015)

brixtonscot said:


> "claims".....GLL chief exec is on about 200k , while many of its employees are on zero hour contracts below living wage



Not sure about the zero hours contracts but not all the workers at the Brixton Rec get at least the London Living Wage. 

The workers at Rec work for GLL/ Better. GLL/Better have contract to run Rec with the Council. 

The anomaly being that if the workers were directly Council employees they would get the Living Wage. 

Apparently GLL/ Better are working towards paying Living Wage at some unspecified point in the future. 

Really should be that any outsourcing by Council should oblige the employer to pay LLW.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 10, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sadly unlikely, if rumours about Lambeth giving GLL some form of financial assistance are true.



Not a rumour but in the Council docs. Had a rather difficult meeting with Council / Cllr Edbrooke were this was discussed. Quite longwinded discussion to get explanation of where exactly the Council is getting money to put into the new gyms/ libraries. It is coming partly from the "surplus" that the leisure centres ( except for Flaxman) make.

From the newsletter.

BTW GLL out of pure generosity are donating to the BCA to make up for the Council withdrawal of subsidy to Black Cultural Archives.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 11, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> Not a rumour but in the Council docs. Had a rather difficult meeting with Council / Cllr Edbrooke were this was discussed. Quite longwinded discussion to get explanation of where exactly the Council is getting money to put into the new gyms/ libraries. It is coming partly from the "surplus" that the leisure centres ( except for Flaxman) make.
> 
> From the newsletter.
> 
> BTW GLL out of pure generosity are donating to the BCA to make up for the Council withdrawal of subsidy to Black Cultural Archives.



AKA "buying the councillors off by stopping them being snowed under by protests about the withdrawal of funding to BCA".


----------



## Tricky Skills (Dec 11, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> Really should be that any outsourcing by Council should oblige the employer to pay LLW.



This was apparently being addressed by the Labour group way back in 2010...


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> AKA "buying the councillors off by stopping them being snowed under by protests about the withdrawal of funding to BCA".



It all smacks to me of a way to cozy relationship between GLL high ups in that "Coop Council" type social enterprise and Lambeth Council. How GLL can donate money to BCA if they cannot apparently afford to pay LLW to there staff is beyond me. I took the donation as a Ill scratch your back if you scratch mine type of donation. Cuddly social enterprise GLL put out feelers a while back to increase the empire in Lambeth- of course because they are socially responsible and want to do there bit to help a Labour Council in these difficult times.

Like the Brixton Green leading lights from the Brixton business "community" who are working so well to produce socially progressive outcomes on Somerleyton road.

All these "social enterprises" give impression that its deepening the relationship between the (local) State and civil society. Giving us citizens a bigger say - if we get up off our behinds and take an active role. An argument that takes a moral imperative in New Labour circles. Ignoring the fact that under Neo Liberalist world of "flexible" Labour markets ( supported by the likes of Mandelson in New Labour circles) most are just struggling to get by having little time to be active citizens beloved of a New Labour Council like Lambeth.

Another argument is that its not much different from Camerons ( now defunct) Big Society. That is its part of the Neo Liberal paradigm.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2015)

Tricky Skills said:


> This was apparently being addressed by the Labour group way back in 2010...



That interesting. May be worth challenging them on this. Make contracts so LLW is paid.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> It all smacks to me of a way to cozy relationship between GLL high ups in that "Coop Council" type social enterprise and Lambeth Council. How GLL can donate money to BCA if they cannot apparently afford to pay LLW to there staff is beyond me. I took the donation as a Ill scratch your back if you scratch mine type of donation. Cuddly social enterprise GLL put out feelers a while back to increase the empire in Lambeth- of course because they are socially responsible and want to do there bit to help a Labour Council in these difficult times.



From what I can make out - although I'm not a tax accountant - GLL donating to BCA can be written off by GLL against tax. Therefore, they not only ease Lambeth Council's self-made problem of cutting funding to BCA, they also get themselves a nice tax break for the donation.
And, as you say, it makes them look cuddly, and some people will actually buy that line.  



> Like the Brixton Green leading lights from the Brixton business "community" who are working so well to produce socially progressive outcomes on Somerleyton road.



That's not what I keep hearing, which is more along the lines (to paraphrase Muttley of "Wacky Races" fame) of "rassn, frassn Dick Dastardly Brad Carroll, rassn frassn Brixton useless rassn frassn Green".
And that's from people who *like* them!  



> All these "social enterprises" give impression that its deepening the relationship between the (local) State and civil society. Giving us citizens a bigger say - if we get up off our behinds and take an active role. An argument that takes a moral imperative in New Labour circles. Ignoring the fact that under Neo Liberalist world of "flexible" Labour markets ( supported by the likes of Mandelson in New Labour circles) most are just struggling to get by having little time to be active citizens beloved of a New Labour Council like Lambeth.
> 
> Another argument is that its not much different from Camerons ( now defunct) Big Society. That is its part of the Neo Liberal paradigm.



As I've said before, they're placed there deliberately as a mediatory layer, to defuse and diffuse anger from reaching those it's directed at, and to place a remove between statutory authorities and their responsibilities.
We both know how little Lambeth Council actually support an active resident base, and you're spot-on about this being part of the neoliberal paradigm. It's the semblance of service-user participation, mediated by people who are in the pocket of power, not working for the people,


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2015)

Gramsci said:


> That interesting. May be worth challenging them on this. Make contracts so LLW is paid.



Could be difficult to impose paying LLW as a condition of contract, in terms of making sure it was actually paid. The council would also plead that it'd also raise costs at a time when they can't afford rising costs (except perhaps in cabinet allowances and senior officer salaries).


----------



## editor (Jul 22, 2016)

Protest today Friends of Lambeth Libraries host pop up event after Waterloo library is closed, 3pm, Fri 22nd July


----------



## CH1 (Sep 2, 2016)

Went to a function at Lambeth Palace Library last night. They are mounting an exhibition, and the senior librarian will be giving a talk at the Lambeth Archives Open Day on Staurday 3rd Sept:

*3 September, 11.45am - 12.30pm, Michael Church, 131 Burton Road, SW9 6TG*

_A Monument of Fame: Lambeth Palace Library's Collections and Work_

A talk by Hugh Cahill, Senior Librarian, giving an overview of the Library's rich and varied holdings and of the Library's work. This talk forms part of a series of talks on local topics as part of Lambeth Archives' Open Day.

*Free entry. No booking necessary.*


----------



## CH1 (Sep 2, 2016)

Just wanted to add that at the Lambeth Palace Library preview Helen Hayes MP turned up (Chuka and Kate were otherwise engaged apparently).

More interesting to me was hearing a carefully prepared address by Cllr Sonia Winifred who it turns out is in charge of a working party regarding the moving of the Lambeth Archives.

She did not deal with this issue, as the function was actually to do with Lambeth Palace, but nevertheless I was impressed that she obviously a person who researches issues, notices nuances and puts things in a considered and constructive way.

Let us hope she has a good influence on the process of finding the right home for the Lambeth archives, and that the powers that be in Cabinet take notice of what she comes up with.


----------



## hash tag (Sep 22, 2016)

Shamefully (because of my connections), I knew nothing of this, which goes to show how important libraries are


----------



## editor (Aug 10, 2017)

When is a consultation not a consultation? When it comes in the shape of an unadvertised 84 page document which gives residents hardly any time to read it, let alone respond to it. 
The future of Lambeth Archives – you have just eight days to comment on the latest report


----------



## editor (Sep 27, 2017)

Update: 



> Lambeth Archives set to move to Kennington as Minet becomes a self-service ‘library’



Lambeth Archives set to move to Kennington as Minet becomes a self-service ‘library’


----------



## editor (Aug 1, 2018)

What a total clusterfuck 



> Lambeth Council is to spend half a million pounds to demolish a building that it bought to house the Lambeth Archives.
> 
> Plans for temporary property guardians at 303 Kennington Road have been abandoned. A Council report [pdf] describes the site as being in a poor state of repair.
> 
> The building along Kennington Road was bought by the Council last year. It was on the market valued at £3M [pdf]. A Brixton Buzz Freedom of Information request asking how much Lambeth paid was refused.



Lambeth Council to spend half a million pounds to demolish a building bought to house the Lambeth Archives


----------



## CH1 (Aug 1, 2018)

editor said:


> What a total clusterfuck
> Lambeth Council to spend half a million pounds to demolish a building bought to house the Lambeth Archives


There's a gym in a basement in Herne Hill Road needs demolishing.
Might make a good home for the archives.


----------



## Gramsci (Aug 1, 2018)

editor said:


> What a total clusterfuck
> 
> 
> 
> Lambeth Council to spend half a million pounds to demolish a building bought to house the Lambeth Archives



I really don't understand this. They bought the building and now have to demolish it. So will have to pay for new building on this site.

So did they pay just the land value? As it now appears the building isn't usable. See they refused FOI request on how much it cost.


----------

