The Overview and Scrutiny Committee met on Monday 6 January 2025 to review a Cabinet decision regarding library operating hours. After hearing from deputations, considering arguments for and against the decision, and reviewing legal and financial advice, the Committee resolved that the Cabinet's decision was within the Council's budget and policy framework and that no further action would be taken.

Review of Libraries Operating Hours Cabinet Decision

The primary focus of the meeting was a call-in of the Cabinet's decision on the review of library operating hours. Representatives from the public, Bob Harris and Annette Pennington, presented their deputation, expressing appreciation for the opportunity to speak and acknowledging the Council's financial challenges. They urged the Council to continue advocating for government funding and to explore income generation and savings for libraries, referencing past suggestions for cost reductions. While acknowledging the reprieve for Muswell Hill and Hornsey libraries and a reduction in overall cuts, they voiced significant concern over reduced hours at libraries such as Stroud Green, Alexandra Park, and Highgate, with opening hours nearly halved, and the closure of Wood Green's Sunday service. They criticised the lack of meaningful consultation and the limited time to review new proposals, suggesting that extended library hours would better serve the borough during the 2027 Year of Culture. They requested the proposal be referred back to the Cabinet for further consultation.

In response to questions, the public representatives stated that the initial consultation had not been meaningful, with a lack of engagement and promised meetings not materialising. They felt the third option, now proposed, had not been adequately consulted on and that the Council perceived consultation as complete when they disagreed. They expressed a preference for no cuts but acknowledged the need to balance the budget, proposing income generation strategies and noting that many suggestions from Friends groups had not received feedback. They stressed the value of libraries as free, accessible spaces contributing to community well-being.

Councillor Emily Arkell, Cabinet Member for Culture, Communities & Leisure, responded to the deputation, disagreeing with points regarding the consultation process. She outlined an extensive consultation on library opening hours held between August 29th and October 10th, which received 1,362 responses and incorporated feedback on preferred opening times. She stated the consultation was inclusive, transparent, and responsive, with hard copies available and materials translated where necessary. Councillor Arkell emphasised that the consultation followed Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport guidelines and that no complaints were received regarding insufficient time or requests for extensions.

Councillor Rosetti presented the call-in, arguing that a comprehensive strategy should be in place before changes to library opening hours. She stated that referencing the library service in broader documents was not a substitute for a dedicated library strategy, warning against setting a dangerous precedent. A detailed strategy, she argued, was necessary to guide decision-making and address aspects like the service's purpose and audience. Concerns were raised that reducing hours without a clear strategy suggested a lack of planning for future outcomes and potential revenue streams, such as community recycling stations or charges for library space use. The absence of a coherent strategy was seen as detrimental, impacting vulnerable users without proper consideration. The absence of co-production, as mentioned in Cabinet minutes, contradicted the Council's approved arts and culture strategy, and the premature release of a press statement suggested a predetermined decision. Councillor Rosetti urged that a strategic view was essential for understanding how best to utilise libraries for community and taxpayer benefit, and that such decisions should not be made without a library services strategy, as mandated by the Council's Constitution.

Responding to questions, Councillor Rosetti reiterated that a library strategy should have been in place before decisions on service reductions, as outlined in the Council's Constitution. She noted that a library strategy had been recommended in a 2019 peer review and that there had been sufficient time to develop one. She argued that a strategy could have identified revenue streams not considered and that the consultation could have informed a different outcome. Councillor Rosetti also believed the announcement made a week before the Cabinet meeting likely influenced the decision-making process. She pointed out that the strategy had been in the Constitution for years, and its absence meant a lack of a clear policy framework. Concerns were also raised about misleading consultation metrics and how reduced hours affected high-use libraries. On co-production, she argued the process resembled a statutory consultation rather than genuine codesign.

Councillor Arkell responded to the call-in, expressing pride in the Council's nine libraries and highlighting that they had avoided closures, unlike many other local authorities. She noted significant financial pressures but stated the Council had invested nearly £5 million in library upgrades. She explained that the Cabinet approved proposals to adjust library services on December 10th, based on a needs assessment and public consultation, with the chosen option (Option 3) having longer opening hours than alternatives. Councillor Arkell reassured that proper consultation processes were followed, considering individual library footfall, equity, and legal advice, and that the requirement for an annual library plan had been removed in 2003. She stressed the Council's commitment to modernising the service, exploring income generation, and adapting to changing needs, with a new library strategy being developed.

In response to further questions, Bob Harris noted a lack of meaningful consultation with council officers for months and that no consultation had taken place regarding Option 3. Annette Pennington added that consultation periods often clashed with holidays and clarified the service area of Stroud Green library. The public representatives felt the process could have been improved and welcomed the idea of further consultation on Option 3 and a longer-term codesign process. An officer confirmed the library strategy would begin after the current consultation and was scheduled for completion in six months. The discussion also touched on the financial implications of delays and the commitment to working with residents. Concerns were raised about ensuring all relevant groups, including disability groups and others with special needs, were included in the co-production and co-design process.

Haydee Nunes De Souza, Head of Legal Services, explained the legal framework for consultations, outlining four key elements for lawfulness: proposals at an early stage, detailed presentation, appropriate time frame, and careful consideration of results. She stated that the Council's adoption of Option 3 reflected feedback, making the decision lawful. She further explained that predetermination was not present, as there was no evidence of the decision being influenced by prior external factors. Councillor Connor noted that the language in consultation documents may not have clearly indicated that Option 3 could emerge, but the Council maintained that proposals were subject to change based on feedback. Jess Crowe clarified that a press release was inadvertently released prematurely and that its wording was not updated, leading to the perception of predetermination, but the mistake was acknowledged and the press release amended.

Haydee Nunes De Souza also explained that the report was in line with the Constitution, requiring the 151 officer and Chief Financial Officer to advise the Committee on whether the decision was within the budget and policy framework. The report confirmed this, and she highlighted that the Committee was expected to make its own determination. She reiterated that the legal requirement for an annual library plan had been removed years ago and that the decision did not contradict any documents within the policy framework. Francis Palopoli, representing the Chief Finance Officer, supported this, stating the decision was in line with the budget framework and policy procedures.

At 8:23 pm, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee agreed to exclude the press and public to consider exempt background information and further deliberate. Following this, the Committee resolved, by unanimous vote of all 5 members, that the Cabinet's decision on the Review of Library Operating Hours was inside the Budget and Policy Framework, and that no further action would be taken, allowing the decision to be implemented immediately. This decision was made after considering the deputation, attached reports, and information shared at the meeting, responding to the eight main points of the call-in.