In agreement with Councillor Reuben Thompstone a fortnight ago (‘Ensuring full and frank participation in libraries consultation’, Your Views, January 8) I too welcome the support from this publication in highlighting the future of our libraries. Indeed every citizen in the borough needs to know how devastating the Conservative group proposals are to our library service.

To brush off criticism of the amount the council pay in consultancy fees misses the point entirely. It is a convenient way to silence the debate. Consultancy fees are inevitable in running the borough; but a firmer negotiation position can cut the £17million a year spent on fees and free up funds for important social and educational institutions. Together with the £1.4m per year lost to the council tax cut gimmick last year, this administration could have prioritised quality community services but didn’t.

The recently published Seighart Report on libraries (commissioned by the Government) recommends a number of ways libraries can remain viable in the 21st Century. They include the provision of a national digital resource in libraries and creating a national taskforce to identify best practise across England to ensure libraries remain viable and relevant.

Indeed, Cllr Thompstone extols the need to adapt libraries to fit the changing ways residents use the service. Why then does the Conservative group insist on making hasty funding and service decisions before the National Taskforce on Libraries has started their investigation on the changing use of libraries? A national conversation on the importance of libraries is occurring but are the Barnet Conservatives listening?

Of course, this assumes libraries are failing to be viable in the first place. Despite the rhetoric library membership is up across Barnet. Indeed a Freedom of Information request revealed a 26 per cent increase in membership across the six libraries facing closure over the last decade; greater than the population increase in the borough. People are loving libraries more than ever.

Speaking to residents, especially those with children, there is grave concern on the use of open libraries. It is not clear whether children can use unstaffed libraries unaccompanied. During the exam season teenagers will fill the desks as they revise for their GCSEs and A-levels; their access cannot be impeded by cuts in staffing levels.

It is right to listen to the public’s needs and desires to provide a library service that is effective. However, without an option to support the current library arrangement this consultation is fatally flawed.

Alasdair Hill

Barnet Liberal Democrats