Redbridge News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


REDBRIDGE: Six libraries could face the axe

Woodford Green Library Woodford Green Library

THE future looks bleak for Woodford library as up to six libraries in the borough could face closure or relocation.

Redbridge Council has released the latest options which members are discussing as they look to save the authority at least £25 million over the next three years.

The council has outlined an option to close or relocate up to five libraries which could save the council just over £1 million in the next three years.

The authority is also considering closing Ilford Central Library which would save £1.3 million, although this would not happen until 2013/14 if agreed.

There are 12 libraries in the borough and a Conservative councillor, who would not be named, told the Guardian that Woodford library is being tipped for closure.

Wanstead and South Woodford libraries would appear to be safe as South Woodford is currently closed for a revamp and money will also be spent on improvements at Wanstead over the next month.

Both are having self-service machines fitted, something which was done at Gants Hill library earlier this year and Fullwell Cross library in Barkingside.

Geoff Stimpson, 77, of Beresford Drive, Woodford Green, said: "It always seems to be busy there (Woodford libary).

"It is popular with mums and their children, it's a good library and very convenient.

"There was a proposal some years ago to knock it down and move it nearer to the tax office but that didn't happen.

"I heard it had been saved this time."

Joe Layburn is deputy headteacher at Bancroft's Prep School in Woodford Green and is also an award winning children's writer.

He said: "I don't think people fully realise all the magic that goes on in libraries, particularly for children, with author events and other events that are put on.

"It is such an important part of the community, libraries are important in terms of getting children into reading and setting their imaginations soaring.

"The idea of closing libraries is just wrong and anyone who stands back and thinks about it must realise that."

Ian Bond, deputy leader of the council, said: "We have already made significant savings in administration costs, and are planning for more.

"Nevertheless some of the cuts we will have to make will mean reduction in the level of service and the loss of some. We have to make some very difficult and unpalatable decisions; we will endeavour to protect those front-line services that our residents most need.

"The choices will not be easy and will cause some concern and anxiety to residents and staff. We will do our best to take account of the views people express during the consultation process, but it is already clear that we will not be able to protect all the services that people value."

Comments(3)

Morris Hickey says...
5:16pm Mon 6 Dec 10

Why do they not try axing 21 councillors? Redbridge does not need 63, and could manage just as well with 42. if pressed, I might even be able to identify which 21......

Clear Thinking says...
8:46am Tue 7 Dec 10

I think that councillors are a necessary part of the democratic purpose, however some are hardworking and diligent whilst others are little more than ineffective "make weights".

I seem to remember reading (I'm not that old that I can remember it personally) that the aldermen used to carry out their work purely voluntarily - couldn't the same approach be used by today's councillors to demonstrate that they really are working for the people? If they did, then it may restore the public's opinion of the democratic system.

Now how long before a councillor complains about this post?

Morris Hickey says...
9:10am Tue 7 Dec 10

Not only were the services of aldermen voluntary so too were those of councillors. I believe that allowances were firstintroduced in 1974. When I first became a councillor in 1978 they were £7.00 for an "approved duty" of up to 4 hours and £12.00 for a duty of more than 4 hours. The time included a standard half hour each way travelling time within the borough, so 3 hours actual meeting time. You could see certain people (at least one of them still a councillor) itching to keep a meeting going once it had reached 2 hours and 50 minutes. The payments were taxable and, where they may in any month have exceeded the specified threshold, subject to national insurance contributions. There were NO "responsbility allowances". The present system means in certain cases that payments exceed (sometimes hugely) the earning capacity from full-time employment of individuals and are to be deplored. The cost to the public can be reduced by a reduction in their numbers. Nobody (apart from they) would notice their loss.

click2find

Most popular






About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree