1. The Library Association welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed work of MLAC. We are pleased that, in a number of instances, note has been taken of some of our earlier comments and amendments made to either text or proposals that featured in earlier documents. However we are concerned that with only a few weeks to go to vesting day so little of the new organisation has been set in place. There is no organisational structure, budget, or structured work programme and the majority of the Board remain to be appointed. In such circumstances it is inevitable that disappointment should be the main reaction to the consultation document. This lack of planning makes the vision outlined in Section 2 - in most ways admirable - appear entirely separate from the rest of the document which is seeking to come to terms with what currently exists rather than deal with what is needed to deliver the vision.

2. It is clear that the main task of the new MLAC in its first year must be to develop the structures and programmes necessary to meet the vision and objectives as outlined in section 2. The document needs to be more explicit in acknowledging that the first year will be mainly one of transition. We welcome the acknowledgement given to the hard work of staff in the LIC and MGC and the assurances that they will be fully consulted on future arrangements. All stakeholders will need similar reassurance that the future development of MLAC will involve an inclusive programme of consultation - this, we are pleased to note, is suggested in the section outlining the workstyle of the new organisation (paragraph 4.1). Naturally The Library Association wishes to be closely involved in the development of MLAC as we want MLAC to be a success and to help realise the vision it has set itself.

3. The rest of this response explores a few key points. We have not provided a paragraph by paragraph response, but will refer to the relevant paragraphs in our response.

Scope of the Library & Information Sector

4. The Association welcomes the acknowledgement that MLAC must encompass the interests of all parts of each of the MLAC sectors (paragraph 2.8) and the commitment to work across all Government Departments (paragraph 2.11). However more needs to be done to ensure that this hospitality is demonstrated throughout MLAC's activities. Much of the document continues to have a narrow "cultural" focus which would exclude rather than include. Therefore, from a library and information perspective, we would expect to see:

1. As part of the vision (paragraph 2.1 - 2.4) - There needs to be something within the overall vision which can be owned by those who work in specialist information services within the private sector. A new penultimate sentence in 2.2, for instance, might read: "We will recognise and develop the skills of knowledge management within the sector and promote their importance to the competitiveness and economic success of the UK."
2. In ICT there should at least be a reference in paragraph 3.13 to the Modernising Government Agenda and the Information Age - establishing the necessary linkages between the People's Network and the Government's intranet, NHSnet, JANET, the National Learning Network (Further Education) and other networks - many information specialists will work with one of the latter and have no direct interest in the People's Network (or the networks for museums or archives).
3. In the Training and Skills section (paragraph 3.14) many public library and voluntary sector information workers will see a closer affinity with NTOs covering aspects of community work than the Cultural Heritage NTO. Similarly the Information Technology NTO or the sector NTO in Further Education, for instance, will be of greater interest to other library and information staff. It is important that the Information Services NTO continues to see its linkages in all these areas and is not limited to only that which it has in common with the Cultural Heritage NTO. This too is a reflection of the breadth of the LIS profession which MLAC must encompass.
4. Helping Government (paragraphs 3.17 - 3.18) - In reality this section only shows awareness of DCMS initiatives and the education agenda. If all sectors of the library and information community are to be involved with the work of MLAC then it will have actively to engage in the programmes of other Government Departments as well.
5. MLAC Board - This should also include people with expertise in the information industries and those with interests in the knowledge economy. Experience of the voluntary sector should be included also as many such organisations run information services and they contribute greatly to education and lifelong learning, health, social inclusion and citizenry.

Training and Skills Development

5. We have commented earlier on the breadth of the LIS profession. It is important that the IS NTO is able to continue to cater for the needs of the whole profession in its work. However if MLAC is concerned to tackle the skills agenda effectively across all its constituencies then it must engage with further and higher education and the professional bodies as well as the NTOs. A key responsibility of The Library Association under the terms of its Royal Charter is "To promote the improvement of the knowledge, skills, position and qualifications of librarians and information personnel". As part of this responsibility the Association accredits university courses, awards professional qualifications and supports the continuous professional development of its members. It has also taken an active part in developing and sustaining the National Training Organisation and can take the credit for its continued existence. We agree that enhancing the skills of those working across the MLAC sectors is vital (paragraph 3.14), and also believe that we will play a key role in achieving this within the LIS sector. We would wish to work closely with MLAC in taking this agenda forward.

Government

6. MLAC will need to be even more bullish and pro-active in its engagement with Government than suggested in this paper. Although the commitment (paragraph 2.11) to work across all Government Departments is welcome, the narrowness of the Helping Government section (section 3.17 - 3.18) sits uneasily with this commitment. If the new MLAC is to be inclusive then, at the very least, it must engage with the programmes of DTI (Foresight, small businesses, innovation etc); DoH (Healthy Britain; National Electronic Library of Health etc); DfEE (excellence in schools, lifelong learning, further and higher education etc); DETR (regeneration, regionalism, and funding of local authorities); and the Cabinet Office, which includes important policy units such as the Social Exclusion Unit and the Performance and Innovation Unit. In many areas initiatives in these Departments will be important to the MLAC sector as a whole but, as mentioned above, these Departments also lead on matters of most direct concern to wide sections of the library and information community.

Research & Statistics

7. The Association has commented before on the future of the Research Fund. Although welcoming the undertaking to give further consideration to certain of the recommendations of the Shepherd Report - whether "blue sky" research should be funded and the relationship between "policy" and "practice" research (paragraph 3.24) - we continue to have serious concerns about the general proposals for the research fund. It is important to reiterate the most important of those reservations:

1. The proposed radical change in the nature of the research fund from a general LIS research fund to an institutional research fund linked only to the policy objectives of MLAC
2. The problem of MLAC having an English focus for most purposes and utilising a research fund that previously had a UK remit
3. The lack of any additional funding going to other Research Councils which will be expected to take on the funding of LIS research
4. The adverse impact this is likely to have on large parts of the LIS community from consultants to practitioners to departments of information and library studies.

8. This area will need much more thought and discussion before an acceptable way forward is found. In regard to the future of UKOLN and LISU (paragraphs 38 - 41) we accept that the future of such bodies should be reviewed in the light of the wider remit of MLAC. However we would attest to the value of the work of UKOLN and LISU to the library and information sector in the past. We would wish to see the quality and coverage of their work within the LIS sector increased rather than diminished in the future.

International Issues

9. The consultation paper recognises that this is a weak area. The international role should not only be concerned with maximising funding opportunities for the MLAC sectors but also with advancing the cause and needs of the sector in such areas as intellectual property rights, human rights (freedom of expression and information), the global economy as it impacts on information creation, provision and dissemination and the concerns of the other MLAC sectors. MLAC might also have a role in supporting the development of cultural infrastructures in developing nations and in establishing fruitful relations with UNESCO. At the moment the Library and Information Commission also acts as an EU focal point in the UK for research activities. The Library Association is an active member of numerous international library and information bodies and would be pleased to work in partnership with MLAC in developing a robust international role. We hope that the focus of international activity of the new MLAC will broaden from an EU emphasis to a more truly international approach.

Geographical Remit

10. We share the frustration at the unclear geographical remit for MLAC (paragraphs 4.8 - 4.9) but accept that for the time being MLAC will have to reflect the same disposition of responsibilities as existing bodies. When the Library and Information Commission was formed in 1995 we argued strongly for a UK remit. However our viewpoint has changed following the devolution agenda of the Government. We now expect Wales and Scotland to determine their own cultural agenda and believe that it is right that they should do so. In Wales, the library and information community is keen to explore with the Welsh Assembly and the other sectors possible structures that will help realise the potential synergies that exist across the cultural sector as a whole. In Scotland, the Scottish Library and Information Council continues to attract widespread support and act as a focal point for the development of library and information network in that country. Therefore we believe that MLAC should work towards an English focus but incorporating the needs of other Home Countries as appropriate. We continue to believe that there are some responsibilities which need to be exercised at a UK level. These are international matters and research. In the first instance MLAC may well lead on these but eventually responsibility for UK wide responsibilities could be jointly managed through an agreed structure.

The Regional Agenda

11. The Library Association has always argued that it is important for the library and information sector to develop a robust regional structure of its own which can feed into regional cultural consortia, regional development agencies and other appropriate bodies at the regional level. This continues to be our view and once again it reflects the importance we attach to ensuring that regional bodies are hospitable to the totality of the library and information world and that the cultural filter does not preclude or alienate a large part of our sector from participating. Regional or mini-MLACS need to prove themselves before being suggested as a national norm. The pilots being suggested in two areas may help in this process.

12. We also have concerns about the proposal to channel funding for the development of cross-sectoral collaboration and work at a regional level through the Area Museum Councils (paragraph 3.6 and 3.40). It must be doubted whether a single sector agency is best placed to lead the cross-sectoral agenda - simple forms of joint arrangements between existing bodies might be more effective. From a library and information perspective it is important to note that many of the LIS regional bodies and structures are being strengthened to reflect the new agenda.

13. Finally we have a few brief points on other sections.

1. Strategic Objectives (paragraph 2.5) - We find bullet point 4 a little opaque and suggest a rewording. Bullet point 7 needs to be more proactive and include advising Government on the contribution, actual and potential, which the sector can make in achieving its objectives.
2. Funding (paragraph 3.2) - We agree that this crucial. This must involve more than simply lobbying DCMS and the Lottery but include discussions with DETR on the Revenue Support Grant (for local authorities), DfEE and the Funding Bodies within the education sector and other Government Departments. The current Spending Review provides a good opportunity to do this and The Association would wish to support this activity in any way it can.
3. ICT (paragraph 3.11) - We agree with the importance attached to the development of networks in the sector. The People's Network should provide a good basis on which to promote networking across all sectors within MLAC. One challenge that needs to be faced is that of sustainability - most Lottery and Government money is for one off projects and MLAC, with the support of The Association and others, will need to ensure that future funding requirements will be met, notably by local authorities.
4. Working with National Institutions (3.20 - 3.21)- We agree with the sentiment behind this section. It is perhaps easier for the museums sector in that most of the national institutions are DCMS sponsored. This is also the case for the British Library, but many of the Library "national institutions" are part of other institutions - the University Library at Cambridge and the Bodleian are obvious examples, but by no means the only ones. It is important that their expertise is utilised as well. In looking at collections of national or regional importance, then the funding and sustainability of these collections will be a key issue for MLAC to address. Work has been undertaken already by the joint Higher Education Funding Councils in regard to research collections, but a number of public library authorities are expected to maintain library collections of regional and national importance from a diminishing local rate base. Access to such collections in whatever sector they happen to be located, and their preservation and development, are issues that need to be addressed cross-sectorally if the learning agenda of the Government is to be realised.
5. Workstyle (paragraphs 4.1 - 4.2) - We appreciate the commitment to accountability and open government. We would urge, that in this spirit of openness, the agendas and papers for MLAC Board and other meetings are published on the website sufficiently in advance of the meetings to allow comment.

14. The Library Association is grateful for the opportunity to comment on the work of MLAC at this stage. Although much of what we have said is critical we do remain committed to making MLAC a success. There are potential synergies between the sectors that are there for the taking, and the wider remit and size of MLAC will give it a more prominent platform and greater clout to work for the benefit of all the sectors involved. We look forward to working closely with MLAC in the future.

The Library Association, February 2000

Note

The Library Association is the professional body for library and information specialists in the UK. It has 26,000 members working in all sectors of economy - in schools, colleges and Higher Education Institutions; in healthcare and Government; in business, commerce, industry and the media; in learned and professional societies; and in public library services, the voluntary sector and cultural organisations. Under the terms of its Royal Charter it has, amongst other obligations, a duty to promote the better management of library and information services, to facilitate the development of the knowledge and skills of its members, to encourage the appropriate provision of library and information services in all sectors, and to scrutinise legislation and other proposals of Government and the policies and actions of other bodies.