HC Deb 07 November 1988 vol 140 cc14-5
50. Ms. Walley

To ask the Minister for the Arts how many representations from (a) library authorities and (b) members of the general public he received on the Green Paper on "Libraries".

Mr. Luce

I have received representations from 103 library authorities and about 7,000 from organisations and individuals.

Ms. Walley

I thank the Minister for his reply. Will he tell us how many in each of those two categories are in favour of, or are against, the proposals in the Green Paper? Judging from the response in my constituency, many members of the public, professional organisations and county councils are against proposals to put those services out to private contractors. In the light of that, is the Minister carrying out proper consultation?

Mr. Luce

I do not think that there could have been a more extensive consultation than the one we have had on the Green Paper on Libraries. For that reason I welcome the large number of representations that have been made to me, which we are presently studying. In due course I shall make a statement on them. Varied views have been expressed and I found that, as time went on, there was a greater understanding of what I was trying to achieve—to help the library services to improve themselves still further and to get better value for money. Sub-contracting is worthwhile only if one gets better value for money or an improved service. I believe that that makes absolute sense.

Mr. Robert B. Jones

Is my right hon. Friend aware of how many of the people who sent in representations on the Green Paper had read that paper rather than having a simple interpretation of it given to them by a union or other vested party? Those of my constituents to whom I sent a copy of the Green Paper and who wrote to the Department had different views about it after they had studied the proposals in context.

Mr. Luce

My hon. Friend makes a fair point. It often happens that when a Government publish a Green Paper it is misinterpreted, sometimes deliberately. I believe that that partly happened in this case, and I believe also that a large number of people—not everyone—have misinterpreted it. Those people have done themselves, as well as the library service, a disservice.

Mr. Fisher

Will the Minister answer the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley) and say how many people who submitted answers to the Green Paper rejected the Government's proposals in that document? Is it not the case that the vast majority of people who replied to that Green Paper said no to the premium book scheme, no to privatising branch libraries, no to privatising the loan of education videos and no to privatising the library services to old people's homes? Does the Minister not understand that such proposals undermine the public service aspect of public libraries and must be rejected?

Mr. Luce

The majority of those who replied were more sensible than that. They did not give a yes or no to the Green Paper, but they saw that it contained a range of sensible suggestions. Those people put forward their constructive ideas about the proposals, some of which they were in favour of and some of which they had doubts about. That is what a Green Paper discussion should be all about.