Paper No. 07-242 - Wandsworth Borough Council

07-242 

PAPER NO. 

WANDSWORTH BOROUGH COUNCIL 

EXECUTIVE – 19TH FEBRUARY 2007 

Schedule of matters for decision at this meeting. 

Recommendations 

1. The Executive are asked:- 

(a) to decide on each of the matters referred to in the reports listed in the attached Appendix 

and to state their reasons for those decisions where those reasons are not already covered in 

the associated reports; and 

(b) to indicate which, if any, of their decisions need to be implemented immediately. 

Matters for decision 

2. The matters referred to in the reports listed in the attached Appendix require decisions by 

the Executive. These reports have also been considered by Overview and Scrutiny 

Committees earlier in the current cycle of meetings. The Appendix lists the matters on 

which decisions are required; contains the comments made about them by the Overview and 

Scrutiny Committee; and indicates any matters which are required to be submitted to the 

Council for approval or adoption, or which the Cabinet Member, the Overview and Scrutiny 

Chairman or the Opposition Speaker on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee have asked 

to be reported to the Council for information. It also gives the wording of any amendments 

under Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule No. 18(c) received in support of reference-up 

notices under Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule No. 18(a). Any decision by the 

Executive on the matters to which these amendments relate cannot be implemented until 

those notices have been reported to the Council and the amendments dealt with by the 

Council. 

3. The reports on matters which are for decision at this meeting, and which are listed 

in the Appendix to this report have been considered at meetings of the following Overview 

and Scrutiny Committees:- 

Overview and Scrutiny Committee 

Date 

Environment and Leisure 6th February 2007 

Health 7th February 2007 

Adult Care Services 13th February 2007 

Regeneration and Community Safety 15th February 2007 

Page 1 of 19 

(Paper No. 07-242)


The reports can be inspected at the Town Hall Concourse, SW18, at public libraries 

throughout the Borough and on the Council’s website, where they appear on the agenda for 

the meeting of the relevant Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 

Statement of Executive’s decisions 

4. Under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (England) 

Regulations 2000, and as reflected in the Council’s Constitution, a written statement of the 

xecutive’s decisions must be published as soon as reasonably practicable after their meeting. 

This statement must include, in respect of every decision:- 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

a record of the decision; 

a record of the reasons for the decision; 

details of any alternative options considered and rejected by the Executive at the 

meeting; 

a record of any conflict of interest in relation to the matter decided which is declared 

by any member of the Executive; and 

in respect of any declared conflict of interest, a note of any dispensation granted by 

the Council’s Standards Committee. 

5. With regard to (b), generally speaking, reports will contain reference to any alternative 

options for consideration and the supporting argument and reasons for recommendations. 

The statement of decisions will, therefore, in most cases, refer to the reports as the source of 

any alternative options considered and the reasons for decisions once the recommendations 

are adopted. If the Executive go further than the recommendations in a report, and make 

additional decisions, whose justification is not covered in the report, it will be necessary for 

specific reasons to be stated at the time. 

The Town Hall 

Wandsworth 

SW18 2PU 

G. K. JONES 

Chief Executive and 

Director of Administration 

16th February 2007 

Background Papers 

There are no background papers to this schedule. 

(Paper No. 07-242) 

Page 2 of 19


APPENDIX TO PAPER NO. 07-242 

(1) ENVIRONMENT AND LEISURE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 6TH FEBRUARY 2007 

Paper No. Subject matter of report Corrections/amendments/additions Comments of Overview and 

Scrutiny Committee 

Wording of referenceup 

amendment 

07-161 Control measures for foxes Recommendations supported. 

07-165 Legislation on the creation of a smoke 

free environment in enclosed public 

places 

Recommendations supported. 

07-168 & 

07-168A 

(1) 

Museum and Local History Service 

Agreed that the following additional 

recommendations be approved for referral 

to the Executive:- 

(i) officers be instructed to consider as a 

priority the display of material and artefacts 

currently held in the Wandsworth Museum 

collection in the Borough’s town centre 

libraries and at other locations in the public 

domain in the Borough, with any costs to be 

met from existing revenue budgets; 

(j) consider retaining or appointing after 

31st March 2008 staff with appropriate 

expertise to interpret and communicate 

artefacts available for display in the public 

domain in the Borough, subject to a further 

report on any proposals being submitted to 

Committee, with financial implications set 

out; and 

(k) to invite a representative or 

representatives from the Wandsworth 

Historical Society or any other local 

amenity society deemed suitable, or any 

Recommendations supported 

as amended (by 8 votes to 2). 

Page 3 of 19 







amendment 



(1) 

Museum and Local History Service 

(cont’d.) 

local resident with appropriate expertise to 

offer advice on the choice, dispersal and 

display of material and artefacts in venues 

throughout the Borough; and 

that the Executive be asked to agree that 

recommendation (d) in paragraph 3 of the 

report be revised to read as follows: 

“confirm the retention of two officers (2 

FTE) until 31st March 2008 to arrange for 

the safe storage or dispersal of 10,000 

individual objects held in Wandsworth 

Museum’s collections (paragraphs 12-14) 

but agree that in the event of the need for 

extension of staff contracts arising this 

would be the subject of a further report to 

Committee or authorisation under the 

Standing Order No. 83/83(A) procedures; 

and 

also that the General Purposes Committee 

be asked to approve a resolution reflecting 

recommendations (j) and revised (d) above. 

(Note: A schedule of additional information 

reported on orally at the meeting is also 

attached). 


Page 4 of 19






amendment 



(1) 

Libraries Review Recommendations supported, 

as amended (by 8 votes to 2). 

07-172 (2) Firework displays Recommendations supported 

(by 7 votes to 2). 

07-173 Battersea Park car parking charges Recommendations supported. 

07-176 Pyrolysis initiative References to “Andrew Reid House” and 

“Galleons Estate” corrected to read 

“Andrew Reed House” and “Orchard 

Estate” respectively. 

Recommendations supported. 

(1) To be reported to Council at the request of the Cabinet Member of Environment and Leisure, the Chairman of the Environment and 

Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Opposition Speaker on the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny 

Committee. 

(2) To be reported to Council at the request of the Opposition Speaker on the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 

In addition, Papers No. 07-167 (Environmental Services Charter Mark) and 07-175 (Local Public Service Agreement Targets) which are for 

information; and Papers Nos. 07-177, 07-178, 07-180 and 07-240, which relate to deputations and petitions will also be reported to Council at the 

request of the Cabinet Member for Environment and Leisure and the Chairman of the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny 

Committee, together with the Opposition Speaker on the Environment and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee in relation to all these 

papers except Paper No. 07-175. 

Page 5 of 19 



(2) HEALTH OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 7TH FEBRUARY 2007 

Paper No. Subject matter of report Corrections/amendments/ 

additions 

Comments of Overview and 



amendment 

07-165 Smoke-free premises and vehicles Recommendations supported. 

07-186 Mental health accommodation review Recommendations supported. 


(1) 

Bolingbroke Hospital Recommendations supported. 

(1) To be reported to Council at the request of the Chairman of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Opposition Speaker. 

In addition, Paper No. 07-187 (Public involvement in health) will be reported to Council at the request of the Chairman of the Health Overview 

and Scrutiny Committee and the Opposition Speaker. 


Page 6 of 19


(3) ADULT CARE SERVICES OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 13TH FEBRUARY 2007 


additions 




amendment 

07-150 Department of Adult Social Services Recommendations supported. 

07-205 (1) Telecare Recommendations supported. 

07-206 Direct payments co-ordinator Recommendations supported. 

07-207 (1) Pilot reablement service Recommendations supported. 

07-186 Mental health accommodation review Recommendations supported. 

(1) To be reported to Council at the request of the Cabinet Member for Adult Care Services. 

In addition, the ‘Active Days’ programme for older people (Paper No. 07-208) will be reported to the Council at the request of the Cabinet 

Member for Adult Care Services. 

Page 7 of 19 



(4) REGENERATION AND COMMUNITY SAFETY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 15TH FEBRUARY 2007 


additions 

07-230 Security Vetting of Neighbourhood Watch 

Co-ordinators 



Recommendation supported. 


amendment 

07-225 Gating Orders Recommendation supported, subject 

to amendment to ensure that Ward 

Councillors are consulted on 

proposals. 

07-241 (1) Community Court Recommendation supported. 

07-234 (1) Roehampton Centre Recommendation supported. 

07-235 Enterprise Strategy for London South 

Central Programme 2007-09 

Recommendation supported. 

07-236 Re-structuring of EDO Recommendation supported. 

07-237 Employment Outreach – East Battersea Recommendation supported. 

07-238 Sub-regional Boundaries Recommendation supported. 

07-239 YPAC Management Board decisions Recommendation supported. 

(1) To be reported to Council at the request of the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Community Safety and the Chairman of the 

Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 

In addition, Paper No. 07-231 (Neighbourhood Policing), which is for information, will be reported to Council at the request of the Cabinet 

Member for Regeneration and Community Safety and the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 


Page 8 of 19


ENVIRONMENT AND LEISURE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE - 6TH 

FEBRUARY 2007 

SCHEDULE OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRESENTED ORALLY AT THE 

MEETING IN RELATION TO PAPERS NOS. 168 AND 168A 

1. General. The Committee Secretary reported as follows:- 

(a) That the Chairman of the School Governors of Alton Primary School had asked that the 

committee be informed the Governors had agreed at a recent meeting to express their 

opposition to the proposed closure of Wandsworth Museum. 

(b) That a petition bearing 180 signatures opposed to the closure of Wandsworth Museum 

had been received at the Town Hall (and was tabled). 

(c) That a petition bearing 560 signatures from Fircroft School opposing the closure of 

Wandsworth Museum had been received at the Town Hall (and was tabled). 

(d) That a letter from Battersea Society regarding the public meeting with the Cabinet Member for 

Environment and Leisure held on 30th January 2007 and attended by 100 members had been received 

(and was tabled). The letter indicated that at the meeting over 100 members of the various 

Wandsworth Amenity Societies agreed unanimously that: - 

The Council should agree to fund the Wandsworth Museum for a 

further twelve months in order to: - 

1. enable full and proper consultation with all interested local 

groups, 

2. enable full consultation with relevant professional bodies, and 

3. provide the opportunity for the development of considered 

alternative strategies. 

(e) That the following resolution of The Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education had 

been forwarded (and a letter setting this out had been tabled): 

The Standing Advisory Council wish to express their regret at the proposed 

closure of Wandsworth Museum, but welcome the proposal that exhibits currently 

held at the Museum will be relocated to Town Centre libraries. In addition they 

hope that the educational and cultural elements of the Museum will continue and 

be developed. 

Page 9 of 19 



2. Public meeting. The Chairman summarised the views and comments expressed by members 

of the amenity societies at the public meeting on 30th January 2007 as follows (grouped under 

the relevant headings):- 

(a) Consultation. 

(i) It was suggested more consultation should be undertaken. 

(ii) Consultation should be undertaken via Brightside. 

(iii) Consultation should be undertaken with Arts bodies. 

(iv) Consultation should be undertaken as part of the regeneration strategy. 

(v) A referendum on the proposals should be carried out. 

(vi) More time for consultation was requested. 

(vii) It was suggested a decision should be deferred. 

(b) Museum closure 

(i) The closure of museum was objected to. 

(ii) It was suggested the Museum collection should be kept together. 

(iii) New artefacts will not be obtained if the closure goes ahead. 

(iv) Museum could be relocated to 5 Garratt Lane. 

(v) West Hill library could become a new museum. 

(vi) School visits would be lost if the Museum closes. 

(vii) Work with schools should continue 

(viii) Work with children will be lost if the Museum closes. 

(ix) Children enjoy visiting the Museum 

(c) Museum staff 

(i) Museum could be partially staffed by volunteers: several people offered to spend 1 

hour per month assisting the curator 

(ii) Only professional staff should be used. 

(iii) Redundancy of professional staff will mean expertise will be lost 

(d) Increasing museum income 

(i) Commercial sponsorship should be sought. 

(ii) Waterstones had offered sponsorship. 

(iii) A Trust should be formed to secure charitable and other funding. 

(iv) Section 106 planning gain from the Young's Brewery development site should fund 

Museum. 

(v) A "Friends" scheme should be initiated. 

(vi) A donations box should be placed in the Museum foyer. 

(vii) A Starbucks coffee shop should be located on the first floor of the Court House. 

(viii) Opening hours should be reduced. 

(ix) Finance should be raised by selling the building and leasing it back. 


Page 10 of 19


(e) Libraries-related issues. 

(i) The Court House building was unsuitable for a library. 

(ii) West Hill Library should not be closed. 

(iii) West Hill Library is not too far to walk to from the Town Centre. 

(iv) Supports displays in libraries as well as a Museum. 

(v) Displays in libraries not the same as a museum. 

(vi) The merger of the Local History section with Battersea Reference Library was 

objected to. 

(f) Borough finances 

(i) The Council’s Director of Finance’s calculations were wrong. 

(ii) All reductions in public expenditure were objected to. 

(iii) It was stated that an assurance had been received from the Minister for Local 

Government that Wandsworth will not be capped. A letter to this effect is on its 

way. 

With respect to his report on the public meeting, the Chairman offered Mr. Robson (who was 

leading the local community deputation opposed to the Museum closure) the opportunity to add 

to this account of the views and comments expressed or to correct any errors. Mr. Robson 

indicated that it accorded with his recollection and he could not think of anything to add. 

3. Deputations. 

There were two deputations received in respect of the Museum closure proposals. The first was 

organised by Wandsworth Historical Society and other local amenity groups and was led by Mr. 

Neil Robson. The second was organised on behalf of the staff by Staff Side and was led by Mr. 

Phillip Bradley, the Staff Side Secretary. 

Mr. Robson 's presentation to the Committee set out the following points:- 

The members of the deputation embody a cross-section of the "consortium" of Wandsworth 

Historical Society and other amenity groups. 

Whilst noting that the Council felt it was facing urgent financial issues, the deputation hoped to 

persuade Members to support their proposal that this decision be deferred for a period of twelve 

months, in order for proper consultation to take place involving all interested local groups and in 

collaboration with selected external professional bodies. 

Those opposed to the Museum closure had spent considerable time considering the proposals in 

Paper No. 07-168, but the strategy it contains gave them cause for the greatest concern. 

Mr Robson cited the following examples:- 

Page 11 of 19 



• No funding was allocated for displaying selected artefacts in the proposed town-centre 

displays. There was no indication of how these will be managed. Displays would be 

fragmented across the Borough, in any case, and could not hope to define with any 

effectiveness the unique sense of ‘Wandsworthness’ that had been referred to by the Cabinet 

Member for Environment and Leisure at the public meeting with amenity societies. 

• The proposed web-based heritage site would require specialist skills both inside and outside 

the Borough; yet no further details on funding are provided – only an indisputable remark 

that it is ‘unlikely to be a low-cost proposal’. 

• The Museum’s current Education Service was widely perceived as its greatest achievement 

and yet it was mentioned only once within the whole paper. This means that Members had 

been given no indication whatsoever as to how it is to be continued after September, if the 

proposals in this paper are recommended by yourselves. 

These and the other proposals could only hope to succeed he maintained if two other initiatives 

are successfully implemented:- 

• The setting up of a Heritage Centre in the Reference Library at Battersea Library. It was, 

however, patently obvious that the bulk of material would have to remain on an upper floor, 

and it was hard to envisage how the dedicated staff would be able to co-ordinate their 

transport downstairs, when requested, as well as their other duties such as protecting 

documents from damage and theft. 

• The conversion of the Courthouse into a town centre library. Mr. Robson suggested that 

those who knew that building well would seriously doubt that this 1860 building stood any 

hope of being converted into a twenty-first century library. It seemed almost certain in his 

view that the opt-out clause would be invoked, and the building would ‘become available for 

disposal’. 

Mr. Robson stated that the paper was a flawed document. The recommendations it contains were 

ill thought-through and shed no significant light on how these far-reaching plans of the Council 

could be implemented. If the paper were to be adopted, Members would be endorsing a set of 

proposals that contains virtually no mechanism for measuring effectiveness, or identifying 

shortcomings against target. 

It concerned the deputation that there was in their view no evidence whatsoever that the Council 

had attempted to explore alternative models in order to ensure that the Museum Service could 

continue in a form similar to its present one. Far and away the most striking feature of the 

meeting between the amenity groups and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Leisure at 

the public meeting was the demonstration of lateral thinking from those attending. The 

knowledge, extent of professional experience, and the range and variety of ideas was truly 

impressive. Mr. Robson gave examples including suggestions for commercial sponsorship e.g. 

with the developers of the Young's Brewery site or through the creation of a café within the 

building. There were plenty of offers of professional help and the Council could engage with the 


Page 12 of 19


Museum Libraries and Archives Council to develop an alternative strategy which would keep the 

Museum open in something like its present form. 

Mr. Robson indicated that the deputation respected the many financial dilemmas that the 

Council currently finds it is facing. However, the deputation were gravely concerned about the 

hurriedness with which this proposal appeared to have been prepared. Such unseemly haste 

could well be justified if the speedy closure of the Museum was critical in order to preserve other 

services under immediate threat. But this was not the case, he maintained. At last Tuesday’s 

meeting, the Council's own Director of Finance had stated that, with a 5% increase in this years’ 

council tax, there would be no significant budgetary shortfall, and this sentiment was further 

endorsed by Councillor Lister at the meeting of the full Council meeting the previous 

Wednesday. In other words, funding for the Museum for a further twelve months would still be 

affordable. 

Mr. Robson stated in conclusion, that if the Committee recommended acceptance of the 

proposal, they would lend their authority to a step that, once taken, could not be reversed. A 

valuable and fragile collection of Wandsworth’s heritage would be broken up, and parts of it 

disposed of. With the dispersal of a team of specialist staff, the loss of expertise would be 

irreplaceable. The paper containing the proposals was a heavily flawed document, and the 

Committee would be endorsing a package of proposals that contains no objectives in terms of the 

quality of the proposed new service. The Committee were faced with a grave decision. A 

rushed decision would be a poor decision. 

The reputation of the Council, he asserted, was at stake – its capacity to show itself as committed 

to promote concepts of citizenship and a sense of belonging to the community that is the 

Borough of Wandsworth. Also there was the issue of its ability to act as a responsible trustee of 

the Borough’s heritage collection for the future. 

Mr. Robson urged the Committee to support the deputation's proposal – namely that the decision 

to close Wandsworth Museum should be deferred for twelve months, to allow for a process of 

consultation with the amenity groups, schools and other stakeholders, as well as certain 

appropriate external professional bodies, preparing feasibility studies and identifying priorities 

under the direction of Council officials. 

The deputation considered this was to do the responsible thing – to vote in favour of a ‘stay of 

execution’, and endorse the right of committed residents of Wandsworth such as those present at 

the meeting to have a say in how the Borough's heritage should be promoted – not only for now, 

but also for our community in the years to come. 

Mr. Phillip Bradley's presentation to the Committee set out the following points: 

Mr. Bradley quoted from an annual review report (Paper No. 06-643) by the Director of Leisure 

and Amenity Services on the Museum Service from September 2006. This spoke well of the 

Museum and its value to the Borough. The report noted that provision of a local museum service 

while not mandatory enables the preservation and active presentation of the history and cultural 

diversity of the Borough, which encourages people to value the place where they live and fosters 

Page 13 of 19 



a sense of belonging and community cohesion. The report also noted that the quality of the 

present-day service was confirmed by the award in June 2006 of Full Accreditation Status from 

the Museums Libraries and Archives Council. 

Mr Bradley queried what, given these very positive statements in the report in September 2006, 

had changed to lead to the proposal closure being put forward. The grant settlement was, he 

maintained, not so adverse as to require such a complete reversal of policy. He stated the closure 

was being pursued purely as a cost-cutting exercise as confirmed in statements made to staff. He 

noted that the Museum staff themselves had not been involved in drawing up the proposals or 

asked for their opinion on the issues involved. 

He noted the proposals would involve potentially 15 compulsory redundancies and that 

redeployment of such specialist staff would not be easy. The proposal that the new Heritage 

Service could be maintained by just two staff was, he considered, not credible. The Council was 

squandering the excellent skills base that had been built up and which had been recognised by 

the Museum Libraries and Archives Council. 

He maintained that the Town Centre library proposals had been brought forward at the last 

minute as a way of addressing concerns about the sale of the Court House. He maintained that 

the proposed staffing levels and stock for a library at that location would be inadequate. 

4. Presentation by the Director of Leisure and Amenity Services. The Director of Leisure 

and Amenity Services dealt specifically with a number of questions or issues that had been raised 

by members of the public, community groups and others, as follows:-etc. 

(i) What attempts have been made to identify alternative funding for the Museum, and is there 

reason to believe a trust seeing funding would have the same problems as the Council? 

Regarding trusts, it is true that a number of museums and indeed libraries and other arts function 

are run under ‘trust’ status. But in nearly all cases there remains a contribution required from the 

Local Authority. 

Indeed the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council in their 2006 report on “moving to 

Museum Trusts” says “moving to a trust rarely achieves substantial financial savings to the 

devolving Local Authority. 

One such Trust Wigan Leisure and Cultural Trust has been cited as a Trust model. This trust 

which covers a numbers of areas will in this financial year receive £15.7M from Wigan Council. 

With respect to the option of selling the building and leasing it back, if for example, the Council 

received £2M from the sale of the building, that capital sum, assuming it could be invested, 

would generate around £100,000 annual income, but this would only cover the cost of the rent 

that the Council would incur and therefore there is no financial advantage to this option. 

Regarding local business funding, the Department has recently piloted a scheme to generate 

business income/sponsorship but it was not successful. In fact, it produced very little. A 


Page 14 of 19


particular retailer had been brought to the Director of Leisure and Amenity Services' attention. 

However, enquiries had not indicated that any significant and ongoing support is available. 

In relation to community funding, the Director of Leisure and Amenity Services indicated that he 

was sure there is a willingness to contribute. He noted that Wandsworth Council had in the 

Friends of Battersea Park one of the best and most effective “Friends” schemes supporting a 

local facility. They are able to make valuable contributions but on a scale of one or two tens of 

thousands of pounds. Funding on that sort of scale was not sufficient for what would be required 

for the Museum - hundreds of thousands of pounds - and he noted that any such funding would 

have to be on an ongoing basis. 

Income generating schemes, such as sponsorship, have been investigated but there is no evidence 

that they would begin to approach the £416,000 required to run the Museum 

The Director of Leisure and Amenity Services was therefore of the view that a decision on the 

closure of the Museum and the creation of the new library should not be deferred. However, he 

noted that if, during the two years up to the closure of West Hill library in late 2008 an 

opportunity existed for an exploration of alternative funding to see if there was any feasible 

alternative. It has to be noted that the capital receipts from the disposal of the two libraries are to 

be applied to funding for the new town centre library with any residual going towards Tooting 

library refurbishment. Therefore any exploration must take account of this. 

(ii) Will the Museum’s Education Service continue in any form? If so, with what staff, and in 

what form, given the dispersal of the Museum’s exhibits? 

The Director of Leisure and Amenity Services indicated he would be speaking with the School 

Heads through the Director of Children’s Services to determine their need. The Committee 

should be aware, however, that the two museum education officers provide specific training for 

teachers, as well as teaching children in sessions linked to the national curriculum. 

The Leader of the Council had written to a number of schools and had made the point that this 

work should be funded from the dedicated schools grant rather than the general fund as the 

officers are a specific resource for the schools. 

If schools wish for these officers and the work they do with schools to continue and consider it 

important enough to agree to fund it, then the Director of Leisure and Amenity Services would 

seek to agree with schools a way forward. 

(iii) Why has there not been more consultation? 

The Council is not under a statutory obligation to consult on the Museum closure and the 

Director of Leisure and Amenity Services indicated he had not been required to consult on the 

matter. However the report on tonight’s agenda had created the opportunity for the expression of 

residents’ views. Meetings with staff on the consequences of the proposals hadtaken place and 

further meetings would be put in place. 

Page 15 of 19 



There had been no discussion with staff on alternative options to closure as the need for the 

release of the building and the generation of the full revenue saving were clear objectives. 

(iv) What would be the additional cost of the Museum remaining open for a year in order that 

alternatives to closure could be explored? 

The additional cost would be the £416,000 saving identified in the Museum report but there 

would be a delay to the proposals for a town centre library and the £102,000 saving identified in 

the libraries report could not be achieved by the deadline of March 2009. 

(v) For what reason is no funding being allocated for providing heritage displays in libraries? 

No additional funding has been sought for heritage displays in libraries to achieve the overall 

reductions in expenditure, but the budget for the Local History Service remains and will be used 

to support the production of displays which will circulate between libraries every few months 

(vi) How will space be found in libraries for heritage displays? What will be removed to make 

way for them? 

When they were refurbished, Balham, Battersea, Putney and Southfields libraries installed glass 

cases with museum objects on display in the early 1990s, but these were later removed to make 

way for a video lending service to generate more income. However, videos have now been 

replaced by DVDs, which take up far less space, while it is very likely that DVDs themselves 

will soon be superseded by television developments e.g. downloading. The museum cases will 

now be replaced in town centre libraries and will display objects to support the current display 

about the borough's history 

(vii) Who will be responsible for organising exhibitions in libraries? 

It is anticipated that the Heritage Officers will arrange the circulating displays supported by 

library staff. 

(vii) How will displays in libraries be looked after, or will everything be behind glass? 

It is anticipated that objects will be displayed in the lockable glass cases, while reproductions of 

pictures and photographs with supporting information will be shown on display boards in each 

library. 

(viii) How will the Council find the 'local expertise’, which is acknowledged to be necessary 

(para 17)? 

The proposed Heritage Service is ring fenced to the current staff group and therefore local 

expertise will be retained. 

(ix) Why does the Council's press notice of 29 January promise 'a new online catalogue' when 

this has not yet been costed at all? 


Page 16 of 19


Catalogue records of the Museum and Local History Service's collections are already 

computerised and therefore only require a means of linking them to the Council's website, and it 

is anticipated that this can be achieved within existing budget provision. 

(x) Why is the Museum Curator designated as the person to investigate the feasibility of this 

proposal (page 23), when this post will soon be abolished? 

The Museum Curator was asked last year to investigate the feasibility of creating more webbased 

resources and to obtain detailed costings. It is expected that this work can be completed 

before the proposed closure of the Museum in September 2007. 

(xi) Has the Council considered combining the historic parts of the brewery, the existing 

Museum collection and the De Morgan collection to create a museum capable of attracting 

higher numbers of visitors and significant sponsorship? 

This has been considered in the past and could be a welcome development, but, unfortunately, 

the redevelopment of the brewery site appears to be many years ahead, and would not allow the 

current requirements for reductions in expenditure to be achieved. 

(xii) What is the basis for the assessment that two staff will be able to disperse the 10,000 items 

in the Museum collection in six months? 

Not all items will require a lot of attention but the estimate was based on the calculation that 

10,000 items over 26 weeks is equal to 384 per week, 38 per day to be considered by each of the 

proposed two staff. 

(xiii) Who will conduct the review determining whether items are kept or disposed of, and what 

professional curatorial staff (para 12) will be drawn on? 

As the report says, if the proposals are approved, officers with the appropriate skills will be 

identified from the Museum's staff team to take decisions on the future of the objects in the 

Museum's collections in line with the 'disposal procedures' detailed in appendix 3 from the 

Acquisitions Policy. 

(xiv) What is the basis (in advance of any survey) for the estimated cost of only £20,000 for 

surveying Council property and making it suitable for long-term storage of Museum objects? 

It is an estimate and is still subject to decisions by the Council, such as whether the Court House 

can be converted into a library which would allow the retention of some storage space in the 

unused part of the building. 

(xv) Why is no funding at all (e.g. for security) allocated after 2007/08 for looking after Museum 

items placed in long-term storage? 

It is anticipated that these costs will be contained within the budget provision for the Heritage 

Service. 

Page 17 of 19 



(xvi) What conditions will be imposed if Museum items are given to community or educational 

groups (e.g. a duty to look after them) (para 13)? How would any such duty of care be enforced 

and at what cost? Would the groups be allowed to sell such items? 

As the report states, the Borough Solicitor must agree the terms and conditions for any gifts or 

loans to ensure the Council's assets are properly protected. The work on drafting these 

conditions will commence should the recommendations on the future of the Museum and the 

availability of storage facilities be agreed. 

(xvii) What objectives have been set for the Heritage Service? 

The objectives for the Heritage Service will be in line with those detailed for the Local History 

Service in Appendix 1, with an added emphasis on the active promotion and dissemination of 

both the Borough's history and the heritage of its diverse communities across the Borough 

(xix) How was it determined that the Service could be run with two staff? 

The Local History Service currently has an establishment of two full-time equivalent staff – and 

moving the service to the ground floor will mean that the reference library staff, whose main 

function is to answer questions from customers, will be available to assist with local history 

enquiries, once they have received additional training. 

(xx) What assessment has been made of the extra staff needed to convey all documents to and 

from the ground floor for consultation there? 

There are various options including storage of the more frequently used documents on the 

ground floor, and a joint approach to the responsibilities by the heritage, reference and lending 

library staff combined. 

(xxi) What parts of the Local History Service will be relocated to the Reference Library? Will it 

include the extensive card indexes and a large table for consulting maps, and where will the 

necessary space be found? 

Relocating the Local History Service in the Reference Library will require physical changes to 

both services, but these will be achieved to meet the needs of both services as far as possible. It 

is too early to answer detailed questions on what will be included and what changes will be made 

to the layout. 

(xxii) What arrangements are being made to ensure that unique documents and illustrations 

(often loose in boxes) are not stolen? 

Appropriate arrangements to ensure the security of all items will be made. 

(xxiii) What secure storage will be provided in the Reference Library for documents ordered in 

advance? 


Page 18 of 19


Appropriate arrangements to ensure the security of all items will be made. 

(xxiv) In the absence of any catalogue or a reliable system of finding documents, how will the 

Council ensure that an archive service entirely dependent on the memories of existing staff can 

operate effectively? 

This alleged approach is not an effective way to operate a service and, if accurate, is a good 

reason for the proposed changes to the Local History Service. However, the position should be 

better than suggested given that the Local History Service's own forward plan for 2006-09 states 

that "staff assist visitors to use the finding aids and to access the collections", and that a Database 

Editor has been employed in the service since 2001 to create catalogue records. 

(xxv) What attempt is made in the Council's figures to distinguish between someone spending 

several hours exploring the Museum and someone dropping into a library for a few minutes to 

borrow or return a book? Are any figures collected specifically for people spending more than a 

few minutes in the Borough's libraries? 

Many library visits last for much longer than a few minutes: for example, all libraries provide 

newspapers and magazine, which require more than a few minutes to read and are well-used. 

Since April 2006, there have been 350,000 uses of library computers for an average of 45 

minutes each, which could well be directly comparable with time spent at the museum. 

(xxvi) What attempts have been made to benchmark the visitor numbers and costs of the 

Museum against those of museums elsewhere? 

Museums in London boroughs have been found not to be directly comparable due to different 

approaches to counting visitor numbers and co-location of services 

__________________________________ 

Page 19 of 19

Paper No. 07-242 - Wandsworth Borough Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?