This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
Attempt to introduce volunteer-run libraries stalls in court
High court stalls council's attempt to introduce volunteer-run libraries
(about 2 hours later)
Plans by a county council to remove paid staff from 10 libraries and replace them with volunteers were ruled unlawful in a judicial review at the high court on Tuesday.
A county council's attempt to remove paid staff from 10 libraries and replace them with volunteers has been ruled unlawful by the high court on Tuesday because of "equality" issues.
Two residents who challenged Surrey county council were backed by judge Mr Justice Wilkie, who said the local authority "failed to have due regard to the equality issues" raised by the case.
Two residents who challenged Surrey county council were backed by judge Mr Justice Wilkie, who said the local authority "failed to have due regard to the equality issues" raised by the case.
The council had planned to remove all paid staff from 10 community libraries, leaving them to be run entirely by volunteers, as part of a move aimed at keeping its 52 libraries open.
The council had planned to remove all paid staff from 10 community libraries, leaving them to be run entirely by volunteers, as part of a move aimed at keeping its 52 libraries open.
But the high court heard a detailed equality assessment, outlining how volunteers would be trained to deal with customers with equality issues, such as disabled people, had not been put before the council cabinet when it took the decision.
But the high court heard that an equality assessment, outlining how volunteers would be trained to deal with customers with equality issues, such as disabled people,, had not been put before the council cabinet when it took the decision.
Library campaigners hailed the decision as a victory. The council claimed the challenge had been upheld on a technical point and said there was no criticism of its plans for the libraries, "meaning the proposals could still go ahead".
Library campaigners hailed the decision as a victory. The council claimed the challenge had been upheld on a technical point and said there was no criticism of its plans for the libraries, "meaning the proposals could still go ahead".
The libraries identified as possible community facilities were Bagshot, Bramley, Byfleet, Ewell Court, Lingfield, New Haw, Stoneleigh, Tattenhams, Virginia Water and Warlingham. Claimant Nicholas Dorrington said he hoped the ruling would remind "senior country councillors that they should not forget that we employ them to provide efficient services and, as importantly, represent us as the electorate".
The libraries identified as possible community facilities were Bagshot, Bramley, Byfleet, Ewell Court, Lingfield, New Haw, Stoneleigh, Tattenhams, Virginia Water and Warlingham.
Lucy Williams, the other claimant, said: "Libraries are such an important part of local communities and for Surrey county council to remove funding for library staff would have had a terrible impact on the local area."
Claimant Nicholas Dorrington said he hoped the ruling would remind councillors "that they should not forget that we employ them to provide efficient services".
Phil Shiner, from Public Interest Lawyers, who represented the two, said: "This is a fantastic result for the claimants as well as a sharp reminder to local authorities up and down the country that a need for budget cuts is not an excuse for cutting local services without careful consideration of how such cuts will impact upon vulnerable groups."
•This article was amended at 16.30 on Tuesday 3 April. The original introduction did not fully explain that the ruling related to equality issues raised by the case
The challenge centred on whether the council had "due regard" to the equality issues required. The judge ruled that the decision-making meeting of the cabinet, "did not consider a relevant matter, namely the nature and extent of the equality training needs of volunteers" that had emerged from consultation on the plans.
Surrey county council said: "The judgment simply said the cabinet should have had more information in front of it about the work the council had already done to develop equalities training for volunteers when it made its decision in September".
It added that the court would reconvene in May, when the judge would make a decision on what should happen next. "Protesters had asked him to overturn the council's decision to created community-partnered libraries but his judgment today did not do that".
Helyn Clack, the council's cabinet member for community services said: "Today's decision is no reflection on our plans for communities to run local libraries with support from the county council.
"We've listened to disability groups to develop training programmes for volunteers from the start and the judge recognised this".
