Decision details

i)              That the Executive agreed for implementation of the recommendations emanating from the Transformation Review of the Library Service as detailed in the annexe 1 and noted the anticipated saving detailed in paragraph 5.4 of the report;

ii)             That the Procurement Plan for the introduction of new technology in all Bracknell Forest Libraries to provide Self-service and Technology Assisted Opening (TAO) as detailed in annexe 2 be approved; and

iii)            That, subject to the successful tender falling within the approved capital budget, the Director of Environment, Culture and Communities be given delegated authority to award the contract;

The Library review forms part of the Council’s Transformation Programme and over the last nine months it has been exploring ways in which the savings target of £400k could be achieved. It has been identified that the outcome of the review could achieve a saving in the region of £390k.

The Plan Phase Gateway review held on 30 January 2017 saw members support the direction of travel to retain the current network of libraries by finding service efficiencies, refining internal processes, (including reduction of staffing levels), implementing new self-serve technology, and investing in a volunteering programme.

In line with the Contract Standing Orders it is required that contracts over the value of £400k require sign off by the Director and Executive Member. However, in light of the significant nature of this procurement the approval of the Executive is sought in respect of this procurement plan.

In order to realise savings as early as possible, it is recommended that authority to award the contract, if within budget, be given to the Director of Environment, Culture and Communities

The option of ‘No change’ was considered. This would mean continuing with the library service in its current form with no major changes. This option was not selected as no savings could be achieved, the same inflexible hours at libraries would remain and it would result in libraries being unable to modernise to a competitive level.

The option for ‘Closures’ was considered.  Whilst these could achieve capital and revenue savings, public consultation demonstrated the level of concern from residents had this been pursued. While due process could minimise the risk of legal challenge and a comprehensive service could probably be demonstrated following some closures, Members preferred to follow the “volunteering and technology” model in the first instance in preference to closures.

And finally, the option of ‘Revolution’ which would involve developing an entirely new service, including merging with other services, e.g. further education. Whilst there is an opportunity for shared services possibly creating savings, there would be a loss of library culture and environment and there is evidence that these types of partnerships have been unsuccessful for other library services. 

None.