Meeting Minutes

Minutes of the Meeting held on Tuesday 28 October 2003 at the University of London Library

Present:Mary Davies (Chair), Christine Wise (Secretary), Adam Edwards, Christine Muller, Brian Murphy, Fiona O'Brien, David Ward.

By invitation: Andrew Stevens, Senior Policy Adviser, Resource

1. Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were received from David Pearson.

2. Minutes of the meeting held 17 September 2003

These were accepted as a true record.

3. Matters arising

There were no matters arising.

4. Resource: presentation by Andrew Stevens, Senior Policy Adviser, Resource)

MD welcomed Andrew Stevens (AS), Senior Policy Adviser, Resource, to the meeting. AS gave a presentation on WILIP, the Wider Information and Library Issues project.

WILIP had commenced as an internal exercise in Resource, to assist with determining future agendas and to identify a role for Resource beyond public libraries. The project had been undertaken in partnership with the British Library and CILIP, as "an attempt to map the library and information domain and to explore how it can make the maximum contribution to economic, educational, social and cultural life in the UK".

A Steering Group was set up with wide representation, including Toby Bainton, Chris Batt, Lynne Brindley, Sue Howley, Bob McKee and, latterly, Andrew Stevens, to assist with the identification of issues and findings. Stuart Ede was engaged as consultant, and, with Sue Howley, spent some 18 months undertaking a consultation exercise which identified some 77 different groups and sectors.

Two key questions were posed in the consultation exercise.

1. What is your vision for the future of libraries?
2. What barriers or challenges do you face in getting there?

In response to these questions, over 200 separate issues were raised, of differing scale, and many relating to recognition. It was generally agreed that a national information strategy is required, with high level national advocacy; and that museums, archives and arts services have the same common agendas, although working in different contexts.

As a result of this exercise, four key messages were identified:

• We need a strong framework, as we are not connecting effectively
• We need strong advocacy, to demonstrate our impact
• We need an effective workforce and leadership development strategies
• We are caught in a cycle of short-term funding, with serious long-term funding issues.

In general, respondents identified a great deal of potential, if only there could be better co-ordination. Fragmentation within the domain is a major handicap.

As a consequence of this exercise, 4 key elements of a vision for library services are envisaged:

• Seamless, user-centred, unfettered access to information resources
• Access is changing because of electronic resources, so seize opportunity to do things differently
• Libraries should be a focus for access to a wide range of resources
• The library's role needs to be positioned much more closely in relation to customer needs, as, for example, there is potentially a big market in developing self-navigation tools

AS reported that the WILIP report would be published at the end of October 2003. The report would record but not develop the consultation, and identify conclusions. The British Library, CILIP and Resource would re-affirm their roles in leadership and strategy.

A third report would then be published in November-December 2003. Now in its first draft, this report would provide more detail on the vision and next steps. This report will be called Routes to Knowledge, and will focus on access to information and resources, and planning for the user's point of view. Routes to Knowledge will facilitate the user's journey through the infrastructure to reach the information they need, eg, via Inspire or Learning City Initiatives.

There will be three building blocks in advocacy and positioning libraries:

1. The need to identify influential people who make decisions at national level in culture, health, social policy, the economy and the modernising agenda, and to identify with them how libraries can be positioned. This work will be open-ended and will take time. Lynne Brindley will be speaking on this issue at the SCONUL conference in November 2003.
2. How to make library services fit for this vision. The WILIP report will suggest that libraries are not ready for success in point 1 above. A Steering Group will need to be established to find ways to engage with the key decision-makers in the library and information world. Some of this work will feed into spending reviews and in identification of funding for growth. There is a need to build on existing work and to present it as a co-ordinated concern and effort.
3. The circa 200 actions identified in the WILIP report will be reduced to approximately 30 headings. Most of these can be achieved through existing British Library, CILIP and Resource plans.

Discussion

In discussion, the following points were made:

• Although the focus of the WILIP report was on libraries, the issues are cross-domain. There are areas where joint work would make sense, eg, in leadership training. While the issues may be common, the libraries domain has been tackled first.
• The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Department for Education and Skills (DFES) are aware of the findings and were involved with the Steering Group.
• DCMS, DFES, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Resource are working together to apply for funding, although there are no guarantees of success. If funding becomes available, it is likely to be a mixture, eg, for existing programmes, for the regions, ICT infrastructure.

MD thanked AS on behalf of the Working Group for his presentation.

5. Report on M25 Consortium of Academic Libraries Steering Group meeting, 2 October 2003

MD reported on matters arising from the M25 Consortium Steering Group meeting held on 2 October 2003.

The British Museum and the Natural History Museum have now become members of the M25 Consortium of Academic Libraries. Discussions regarding membership continue with the University of Sussex and the Royal Society of Chemistry. The Steering Group recommended that the M25 Collaboration & Partnership Group take on the responsibility for identifying and approaching potential future members. A number of suggestions for approaches were made, including the Royal Geographical Society, the Law Society, the Royal Colleges, the Institute of Cancer Research and the Institute of Logistics and Transport.

BM reported that he and Suzanne Enright (SE) would shortly be meeting with representatives of the Royal College of Nursing Institute, another potential member. He further reported that he had discussed membership issues with Graham Fisher, Director of the London Libraries Development Agency (LLDA). The LLDA was happy for the M25 Consortium to approach individual libraries regarding membership, while groups or consortia might be referred to the LLDA. FOB reported that the LLDA was also currently approaching individual and specialist libraries regarding membership.

Working Group members agreed that criteria would need to be drawn up for use when approaching potential members, clearly stating the membership costs and benefits of joining the M25 Consortium. MD and BM would meet to draw up draft criteria for discussion at the next meeting. ACTION MD, BM

MD reported that the Steering Group had agreed to set up a joint M25 Consortium/London Health Libraries working group. BM had prepared a draft remit for the working group for consultation, and reported considerable enthusiasm about the formation of this working group. M25 representation on the working group would need to be determined, as would the definition of allied health professionals. A meeting of the working group, also including John Wolstenholme of Thames Valley University, was expected soon. BM would report back to the Steering Group and the Working Group in due course.

MD reported that the Steering Group had discussed the future of the M25 Systems Team. It had been agreed to guarantee funding for a two year period in order to stabilise the Systems Team for the foreseeable future.

MD reported that the Working Group was experiencing difficulty in having its web pages updated; she would approach SE on this matter.

6. Action plan - reports from members

MD reported that the Working Group Action Plan for 2003-2004 had now been formally agreed and was being implemented.

In furtherance of the aim to "continue to develop links and partnerships with appropriate regional agencies", reports were received as follows from Working Group members.

Links with Further Education

MD had approached William Marsterson of Middlesex University to invite a representative with responsibility for FE links to join the Working Group. He would confirm representation shortly to MD.

BM had yet to meet with FE representatives on the LLDA Board but would pursue this. ACTION BM

Links with Government libraries and consortia

MD reported on a response just received from Peter Griffiths, Chair of the Committee of Departmental Librarians (CDL) providing a list of areas of potential collaboration with the M25 Consortium. The Working Group agreed that a key area of mutual interest was the development of access to a joint catalogue of the holdings of CLD member libraries. One way forward might be for the M25 Systems Team to undertake a feasibility study. MD would pursue this. ACTION MD

Another area of CDL interest was collaboration on disaster management and staff training. MD would pursue this with chairs of the relevant M25 Groups.ACTION MD

Business links

MD had raised the question of business links at the Steering Group. She had obtained a copy of the London Higher Education Consortium (LHEC) business plan and would make this available to Working Group members on a confidential basis. ACTION MD

Links with the British Library

DW reported that he continued to liaise with Geoff Smith at the British Library.

Links with LLDA, LMAL, ALM London and ALCL

MD and BM recently met with Graham Fisher, Director of the LLDA. FOB has now formally joined the Working Group.

BM reported on current LLDA and London Museums Archives and Libraries (LMAL) matters. LLDA is formalising its constitution by way of a local authorities joint venture agreements. Wider representation from other library sectors on the LLDA Board had been agreed. Work would commence on the LLDA operational plan in November 2003. Single trustees for each domain have been appointed for Archives Libraries Museums London (ALM London), which would replace LMAL. A new company was being created and a development consultant was being appointed. It is intended that the new board will be in place by Christmas 2003, prior to its formal start-up on 1 April 2004.

The Association of London Chief Librarians (ALCL) is interested in collaborative work in promoting access to special collections and to language collections.

Training links

A joint LLDA/ALCL/M25 seminar with FE had been proposed. It was hoped that a date would be confirmed soon. FOB would supply a list of FE librarians to assist with promotion.ACTION FOB

DW continues to liaise with CPD25. He noted that the University Libraries Committee Special Collections Forum (ULC SCF) was planning to invite British Library input into a forthcoming training event on the management of special collections.

7. Any other business

CM suggested that on the basis of her current work responsibilities, the Working Group might consider that she should be a co-opted member of the Working Group. The Working Group considered this and agreed to proceed on the current basis.

The Working Group agreed to invite Graham Fisher, Director the LLDA, to address the next meeting.ACTION MD

FOB reported that LLDA planned to promote Libraries and Learners in London (LLiL) through a management consultancy.

8. Date of Next Meeting

Tuesday 9 December 2003, 10.00 a.m., Durning-Lawrence Library, University of London Library.

Christine Wise - November 2003