There have been several developments since the last campaign update.
First, TNA have announced that the consultation process will come to an end on 12 September 2009, after which their proposals will become concrete plans that will be revealed at the next User Forum on 24 September. We are told that our comments and suggestions have been taken into account. This announcement was made last week, during the Chief Executive’s leave of absence, and barely a fortnight before the allocated deadline.
This is particularly concerning, given the response we have finally received to the open letter sent to the Chief Executive on 24 August; this is now posted on the website News and Views page for you to see.
In the open letter, 8 very specific requests were made concerning basic information about the proposals, ranging from baseline data about how TNA’s financial projections on operating shortfall were first made, to precise breakdowns behind the specific savings being suggested. Without this data, which has never been revealed either online, in public meetings or via presentations, it is impossible to make constructive alternative suggestions to TNA’s proposals.
As you can see from the Chief Executive’s response, TNA have not provided a single piece of information relating to ANY of the 8 requests.
They claim that this is a transparent and open consultation process – yet when pressed for information, they fail – or are unwilling – to provide it. This failure to provide information to a public request undermines the credibility of the consultation process, and those in charge of it.
When pressed on the issue of the process behind car park fees, I asked the Chief Executive whether she agreed with our conclusions that the public had been misled (see the open letter on this website for details). Her response was:
‘I pride myself on being open and honest, and have never once in my career lied about anything. So, no, I do not believe that we have misled anyone on car parking in any way.’
As she has said in the recent Open Forum (20 August 2009) she previously went on record in 2008 saying that she would never charge for car parking, fully aware that the planning application made in December 2005 implicitly requested a charging mechanism, and that in 2007 a senior member of her staff told the Council that the public had not yet been made aware of TNA’s intention to charge. Going on record to state that there will never be car park charges, knowing full well of TNA’s intention to charge, is misleading the public.
Furthermore, we are told that the planned closure of the reading rooms to the public on Mondays was an essential part of the cost cutting process, saving £500,000 (though no indication of how this sum was calculated has ever been provided, despite our requests for information). Yet in a letter to MP Andrew Slaughter, whose constituent had raised concerns about TNA’s proposals, the Chief Executive stated:
‘At the same time we are reallocating our resources to meet the demand we now receives (sic) from our customers…
‘This does include reducing our onsite opening hours from five days to six days a week, but also includes funding regional and online access…
‘We are funding the creation of seven regional centres to offer free access to the 1911 census, to support those researchers who are not able to come to use the London services at Kew…’
‘I hope this explains why we have proposed reducing our opening hours’
This letter contradicts virtually everything the public have been told about Monday closures during the consultation process – that it was necessary to save operating costs as opposed to reallocating resources elsewhere; that onsite visitors matter as much as online users; that online digital access would generate revenue (as opposed to TNA funds subsidising digital access provided by commercial partners), and that all users would be treated equally. It is obscene that staff will lose their jobs to subsidise TNA’s outreach scheme. It is obscene that our tax payers money should be subsidising TNA’s commercial deals.
We agree that the economic climate is difficult. We recognise that TNA faces challenges as a result. We recognise that changes are needed. However, the way TNA senior management have treated the public, their staff and their fellow professionals is nothing short of contemptible and a national disgrace.
We will be raising these grave concerns about the consultation process, and the direction TNA has been taken by its senior management, with the Minister in charge of TNA, Michael Wills MP, and ensure this receives as much media coverage as possible. In the meantime, we urge you to continue to write to your own MPs so that this issue does not simply disappear after the proposals are, it would seem, inevitably railroaded through.
