Simon Draper v Lincolnshire County Council

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeMrs Justice McGowan
Judgment Date22 October 2015
Neutral Citation[2015] EWHC 2964 (Admin)
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
Docket NumberCase No: CO/2058/2015
Date22 October 2015

[2015] EWHC 2964 (Admin)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Before:

Mrs Justice McGowan

Case No: CO/2058/2015

Between:
Simon Draper
Claimant
and
Lincolnshire County Council
Defendant

Fionnuala McCredie QC and David Lawson (instructed by Public Interest Lawyers) for the Claimant

Nigel Giffin QC (instructed by Lincolnshire County Council) for the Defendant

Hearing dates: 21/07/2015

Mrs Justice McGowan

INTRODUCTION

1

The Claimant lives in Lincolnshire and uses the library facilities provided by the Defendant. In recent years the Defendant has sought to meet increasing budgetary constraints by re-designing the library service it provides under a statutory duty. This is the second challenge the Claimant has brought to the proposed changes and the process by which those changes have been brought into effect. The first challenge was heard by Collins J, R (Draper) v Lincolnshire County Council [2014] EWHC 2388 (Admin). It succeeded, in part, and a second consultation process was commenced. This challenge deals with that process and was heard at a rolled up hearing held on July 21 and 22 2015. The uncertainty of the situation, in particular for the Defendant's staff, to whom redundancy notices had already been issued, meant that the decision was given soon after the hearing and the judgment has followed after the vacation. The challenge failed.

2

The Defendant has a statutory duty under s.7 Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 as follows,

"7. (1)It shall be the duty of every library authority to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all persons desiring to make use thereof, …

Provided that although a library authority shall have power to make facilities for the borrowing of books and other materials available to any persons it shall not by virtue of this subsection be under a duty to make such facilities available to persons other than those whose residence or place of work is within the library area of the authority or who are undergoing full-time education within that area .

(2)In fulfilling its duty under the preceding subsection, a library authority shall in particular have regard to the desirability —

(a)of securing, by the keeping of adequate stocks, by arrangements with other library authorities, and by any other appropriate means, that facilities are available for the borrowing of, or reference to, books and other printed matter, and pictures, gramophone records, films and other materials, sufficient in number, range and quality to meet the general requirements and any special requirements both of adults and children; and

(b)of encouraging both adults and children to make full use of the library service, and of providing advice as to its use and of making available such bibliographical and other information as may be required by persons using it; and

(c)of securing, in relation to any matter concerning the functions both of the library authority as such and any other authority whose functions are exercisable within the library area, that there is full co-operation between the persons engaged in carrying out those functions."

3

It is necessary to consider what is required to provide a comprehensive and efficient service within the meaning of section 7 of the 1964 Act. The term is well defined in the following observations of Ouseley, J in Bailey v London Borough of Brent [2011] EWHC 2572 (Admin): —

"A comprehensive service cannot mean that every resident lives close to a library. This has never been the case. Comprehensive has therefore been taken to mean delivering a service that is accessible to all residents using reasonable means, including digital technologies. An efficient service must make the best use of the assets available in order to meet its core objectives and vision, recognising the constraints on Council resources. Decisions about the Service must be embedded within a clear strategic framework which draws upon evidence about needs and aspirations across the diverse communities of the borough."

HISTORY OF EARLIER CHALLENGE

4

The background to the original challenge is clearly set out in the judgment of Collins J,

"5. The Defendant has for some time recognised the need to review its library provision since it considered that it was not efficient. In 2007 it commenced this exercise by carrying out what is described as a Fundamental Library Review. It recommended a number of improvements but did not suggest a reduction in the number of static libraries which were available. Essentially it provided for changes to opening hours, improvements to the ambience of libraries together with the introduction of self-service technology and a review of the shape and size of the library network. A report in 2009 again did not indicate that there would be a reduction in the static libraries of which there were then 48.

6. In 2010 local government funding cuts necessitated identification of savings in the Defendant's budgets. Thus it was that a review of the shape and size of the library network became of more immediate importance. Mr Platt, the Head of Libraries and Heritage, who has been responsible for co-ordinating the response of libraries to the review and who has produced statements on behalf of the Defendant in these proceedings, has as part of the shape and size been impressed with the possibility of community involvement in running some libraries which catered for smaller population numbers. Such community involvement has resulted in the designation of such libraries as 'community hubs', namely centres at which, apart from what can be regarded as ordinary library use, people can attend and have opportunities to meet together and have other facilities available. Volunteers would be involved in the running of these hubs and it was recognised that they would need training.

9. Because of the reduction of available funding for the Defendant, it was decided that the cost of the library service must be reduced by some £2 million. That decision, which cannot be challenged and so must be accepted as a material consideration in what library services should be provided, has clearly been a very important factor in the decision reached. However, in fairness to the Defendant, it must be recognised that the view had been taken as long ago as 2007 that the existing arrangements were not efficient and in particular did not give proper value for money and changes would in any event have been made. Nevertheless, the proposals which were put to consultation and which were implemented in the decision of 3 December 2013 with minor amendments put in place following the consultation exercise were largely driven by the need to achieve the savings which had been imposed.

10. The existing service has four components. The first is now 44 static libraries. Twelve are district libraries open between 40 and 55 hours a week, eleven are neighbourhood libraries open between 25 and 39 hours a week and 21 community libraries open between 20 and 24 hours a week. All provide services to be expected from a library although their size will inevitably dictate how extensive the individual services can be. The second is a mobile service which provides for rural communities and those who are housebound or who live in nursing or residential homes. There is also a service for schools who wish to sign up for it. The third component covers the various online facilities. The fourth is described as targeted services for those unable to access the other services such as the blind or partially sighted, some who are housebound and unable to use the mobile service and a special service to encourage children in particular but including adults to engage with books.

An exercise was carried out in 2012 to obtain information about the numbers of households who were active borrowers and so users of the library services. This showed that of the total of 323,242 users 93% were within 30 minutes of a static library by public transport. 98% were within 15 minutes by car. The active borrowers (which meant no more than anyone who used a library on one occasion) were representative of the county's population as a whole. While there was virtually complete satisfaction with the service given by staff, there was a decline in borrowing against an increase in complaints about the availability of computer services and the quality and choice of books.

12. In the lengthy and detailed report to the Council for the meeting on 3 December 2013, this is said about the existing services at paragraph 2.47: —

"The overall conclusion that can be drawn from an analysis of the existing service is that it is comprehensive, but given the overlapping catchment areas and the consequent over-provision it can be seen to be significantly inefficient. Exploration of co-location with other public services has met with some success, but it not a sustainable model for a county-wide service. At a time of public sector financial constraint this level of over-provision is a luxury that can be ill afforded and it is incumbent on the Council to address ways in which it can make the service more efficient and thereby more affordable."

The point is properly made that the service must not only be comprehensive but must be efficient.

13. In a report to the Executive of 2 July 2013 it was recommended and in due course decided that consultation should be carried out with the public (i) on proposals to implement a new model of statutory library provision in the County and (ii) on proposals to offer certain communities a range of community...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • The King on the application of CU (by his mother and litigation friend, DV) v Secretary of State for Education
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 21 March 2024
    ...upon the particular facts. 71 Penultimately, I was referred to the decision of McGowan J in Draper v Lincolnshire County Council [2015] EWHC 2964 (Admin), made following a two day rolled-up hearing. It involved a challenge in a case where a one month consultation process, beginning on 1 Oc......
  • Caroline Tilley v Vale of Glamorgan Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 5 November 2015
    ...this question. In the note to which I have already referred, Miss Clement drew my attention to the decision of McGowan J in R (Draper) v Lincolnshire County Council [2015] EWHC 2694 (Admin), which was handed down after the hearing. 70 In my judgment the consultation was in this case not of ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT