A literal book burning

Of course the burning of books is a message that publicly pronounces that people’s freedom to read is restricted and that means that democracy is at stake and taken away because the freedom to inform has been taken away.

Yet that 130 libraries in London are at threat of closure is literally the same effect as burning books in public because it equally removes access to books and freedom to read them.

I noticed that it is impossible to get certain law books in my area because public libraries do not stock them any longer and they are not available on the Internet free of charge like for example Gatley on Libel and Slander.

But if we read that Tim Coates, a former Waterstone manager (Waterstone is one of the biggest book retailer in the UK), analyses that the failure to run the library service cost-effective is responsible for closures by local authorities, we see that there is simply an excuse taken to remove the ability to read.

Out of £200 million to run London’s libraries only 11 million are spent on books, which is a scandal in itself. There are currently 33 sets of management, which I presume costs at least half of those 189 million that are not spend on books and further if the running of libraries were to be transferred to the Mayor’s office, they could run better and more cost effective and stay open.

This is in my view against Human Rights to take people’s ability away to read and inform themselves by mismanagement of funds.

Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 53,791 hits