Despite repeated requests for detailed financial information about the proposed cuts and the justification for making them, so that alternatives could be put forward as part of a consultation exercise, senior management have refused to release precise data. It is now apparent why. A closer examination of material made available on their website, in their annual report for 2008-09, and via Freedom of Information Requests, has revealed the real reasons for the current proposals – financial incompetence of the highest order, and a blatant disregard for the very ethos of the archive.

Since 2005, The National Archives has blown its budget on hiring a disproportionate number of senior staff, whilst breaking current civil service protocol by paying them over the recommended odds, sometimes by as much as 50%; therefore the current freeze in its budget has meant that the savings exercise is the only way to maintain its continued operation – though staff lower down, undertaking crucial roles, will bear the brunt of the cull. The management board has expanded from 2 to 5 full time directors, earning upwards of £80,000 per annum, with only one recognized archivist present – although they are responsible for Technology, not Operations. Clearly, the new aim for the institution is Information Management, not archival excellence; and this new direction for the institution is stressed at every opportunity by the CEO. During this period, no less than 35 senior managers have been appointed earning over £40,000; and many have received ‘market supplements’ taking them over the potential highest salary. This is the reason that The National Archives is in a financial mess, not because inflation has generated larger electricity bills as the public are led to believe.

So where does the axe fall? Not a single member of the Management Board will leave, despite the fact that they collectively cost over £500,000 each year. Instead, 34% of all financial savings will be made from the directorate responsible for public services, carrying the highest proportional wage cut in the organization (nearly £1m out of a total saving of £1.42m), the highest casualty rate of redundancies – 12 out of 35 across the organization – and a restructure of staff roles and responsibilities that will result in less knowledge being imparted to the public in the shape of cataloguing and records advice; for example, the Principal Subject Specialists will perform mainly administrative roles, as opposed to cultivating their specialist roles – mainly because the room managers have been axed. This is nothing short of dumbing down, despite TNA claims to the contrary. There isn’t space to tackle other staffing issues – the removal of the Welfare Officer, which is affecting staff morale; the decimation of the Records and Collection Department; the removal of a Grants Manager – at a time when the need to secure external funding is at its greatest. How can this be justified?

Given the mess the Management Board has created, the need for cuts is now unavoidable. However, instead of focusing on the core business of the institution, and consulting stakeholders from the sector in advance of formulating proposals, the scheme now on offer was rushed through over 3 months and foisted on staff and users alike, so that the public consultation exercise could be completed as quickly as possible to ensure the plans were in place for the end of the financial year.

The public deserve a world-class service from The National Archives, not this ‘take it or leave it’ approach we have been treated to. The consultation process is flawed; managers have hidden behind ‘confidentiality’ to refuse to reveal key data; and the real reasons for the exercise covered up. The saddest thing of all is that there is genuine sympathy for the fate of the archives, and a group of people – historians, academics, professional researchers, fellow archivists – who were, and remain, ready and willing to help. The internal governance of The National Archives does not help; there is not even an independent chairperson to whom appeals against the executive can be addressed, contrary to all standards of good practice in public and private organizations.

We are about to lose one of the crown jewels of Britain’s written heritage – long live Information Management, because The National Archives is clearly dead.