Many thanks for publishing Mr Robb’s letter  (‘Researcher refutes council’s criticism’, January 29). I wonder if this is the same Denis Robb of the 2010 East Barnet ward candidacy with John Dix? I would have been delighted if any of the officers involved in the consultation process had been contacted prior to publishing this ‘report’ in an effort to suggest he had considered balance or right of reply.

I would raise a number of questions about the ‘report’, now published in his name, as it provokes some observations and challenges in a relatively unorthodox fashion. I would hope that his sample size was rather greater than a handful, although, as worded, this could be an interpretation so I would welcome his response on what the actual sample size, composition, age, geographical location and ethnic break down was as this would inform more accurately the range of opinions other than his own that contributed to his publication.

You will no doubt agree that the integrity of a ‘report’ can be open to challenge when too great a set of generalisations is extrapolated from too narrow a sample base. I appreciate the consistency of approach in ignoring the 1,200-plus completed consultation questionnaires in his focus on qualitative rather than quantitative analysis, although then choosing to actively ignore the workshops, drop-in sessions and other facets of the consultation process may be inferred as being selective in which data is chosen to be included, which would open the accusation of bias and undermines the credibility this ‘report’ would otherwise seek.

A consultancy of such longevity and geographic coverage as this exposes itself to unnecessary criticism through this methodology and I would welcome his comments on how he sees this being avoided in the way the report, originally without his name as author, was published.

The comments attributed to interviewees are provocative and do beg the question of why the questions asked in interviews are hidden from the report. Again, his comments in this would be welcomed.

I was surprised at the time for completing the questionnaire as referred in this report as, being a regular library user, when I completed the survey it took ten minutes, although I would concede that I did not offer comments in the comment sections as it would seem appropriate to leave this to others less central to the decision-making process.

I understand that reading all of the papers associated with the library service is time consuming, which is why the consultation offers summaries, with further detail only where wanted, and other consultation methods for those who prefer a more human interface.

I would close by commenting that I always welcome a contribution to such an important process as a review on a borough’s entire library service, so I do not wish to suggest that this contribution is in any way unwanted. This said, I think it is important to look at all the responses garnered as part of this process, which this report certainly is a part of.

If Mr Robb does wish to speak belatedly with council representatives in respect to his observations and opinions then I am happy to arrange this.

Cllr Reuben Thompstone

Con/Golders Green

Barnet Borough Council