by Gareth Hughes
The Green Party love libraries and want to protect them. In New Zealand a few special taonga in particular are under threat. The State Sector Management Bill will come to the house in the next couple of months integrates or ‘takes over’ Archives NZ, the National Library (and the Alexander Turnbull Library) in or ‘under’ the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA).
They were separated from the DIA just under a decade ago because the system was cumbersome and from accounts didn’t work well. Now we’re back to a National Government merging them again under the mantras of ‘efficiencies,’ ‘economies of scale’ and ‘future-proofing’.
I’ve blogged before on the issue of libraries under threat across the country from a right-wing attack, but firstly some good news! Tauranga will no longer be charging per-book charges thanks to more than 1000 submissions and some great local campaigning.
On the DIA takeover, the proposal just doesn’t stack up. It’s going to harm the important constitutional independence, access to the public and decision makers by the heads of Archives and the National Library and the cost efficiencies have been costed as delivering as little as $166,000 annually in savings over 3 years. Of course not a trifling amount to someone on the minimum wage but in the context of the Governments $60B expenditure not meriting the hassle, confusion, and other downsides, not to mention the effects on staff who no doubt are feeling demoralised, and fearing the approximately 15 job losses.
Why are we doing this when the Cabinet paper that proposed this acknowledged that these are “well regarded and successful institutions?” Is there even need for the ‘takeover or is this just a solution looking for a problem?
The ACT-led, John Key-led National Government ideologically repeats the mantra “efficiency,’ ‘economies of scale’ and ‘future-proofing’ and I believe simply looks like they want to be seen to be ‘tough on Government departments’ and reducing the number as opposed to good public policy. Look out I say to Women’s Affairs, Youth affairs and Ministry of Culture and Heritage who could be in for their own efficiency ‘integrations.’
We can do something about this.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by Gareth Hughes on Wed, June 2nd, 2010
More posts by Gareth Hughes | more about Gareth Hughes
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
The Government keeps talking about “low priority” spending but is vague about what this really means. When our first towns and cities were established by our foremothers and forefathers they had a strong idea of what should be provided as essential civic facilities and services, should this original vision be changed? Do we need to have a national discussion?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh no! 15 jobs! how tragic….not complaining about the hundreds of non public sector job losses I see…
and yes women’s affairs doesn’t have the right to be a separate ministry anymore, despite some issues with pay discrepancy which cannot be dealt with a govt body as that is a employer’s choice as to what pay they make to a person (minimum wage excepted) – it should become a body office of the MSD.
Like or Dislike:
8 
7 (+1)
So bludgers who want their reading funded by forced expropriation of others money get to squeal in glee that their piggyness will continue….welcome to NZ…..home of the troughers.
Whats so special about books that they need publicly providing when the private sector (all of us) already can access private libraries of toys ,movies,tools etc as well as books and not one gun need be waved in someones face to make any of it happen?
Like or Dislike:
7 
9 (-2)
Make a stand lad!
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
Gareth,
You didn’t make a particularly strong argument for or against integrating the library into the DIA. For example, why is it “going to harm the important constitutional independence, access to the public and decision makers by the heads of Archives and the National Library”? I do however agree with you that its probably just a solution looking for a problem.
Stephensmikm: Fair enough point about 15 jobs not being that many compared to the rest of the economy. On the other hand, the loss of 15 jobs to save $166 000 does not sound like a very effective saving. That just over $10 000 per person; what will the cost of these people losing their jobs be to the government if just a handful of them end up unemployed?
James: You should emigrate to a country where there aren’t publicly funded libraries; I’m sure you’d be much happier.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
There are still quite a few Govt groups that need to be amalgamated and this is a first step…perhaps we are afraid of a Ministry of Information living up to it’s somewhat different fictional counterpart
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
No Stephensmikm
The Ministry of Women’s Affairs minister Pansy Wong who stated she went to a Men’s Do and talked about Family and Women Supporting their husbands made me wonder if she should just be given the task of starting up a Men’s Affairs Ministry, given she’s more interested in a lovein with John Key and supporting men. We also know what their ‘affairs’ would be based on and should be terribly popular!
MSD? Stephensmikm? Women are already socially developed. It’s the NActMU men/woemen who need some social development to rid us of the rapists, beaters, batterers and murderers that hide behind the rightwing, religious conservatism.
Like or Dislike:
1 
6 (-5)
The Problem is with creating a separate Men’s Ministry is that you reinforce the problem of Gender Separation, that gender’s are meant to inequal – if there needs to be separate ministries then there must be something wrong with the other gender, as is the current issue – women having a separate ministry suggests that NZers cannot be trusted to act properly despite over half our population being Female…
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
It’s bigger than you might think. Canterbury University has all but obliterated Professional Librarians with mass redundancies. Lincoln University has been flying without a University librarian for ~6 months and is looking like there will be a manager in charge of the Library and them not sure how to gloss over the statutory requirement to actually have a “University Librarian”.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
“You should refuse to set foot inside of any of those nasty Public Libraries James, until the public (us) see sense!”
…and stay out of the parks, don’t walk on the footpaths and don’t park in municipal carparks (though I’m sure you can’t get to them as you don’t use the nasty roads the state has forced money out of you to build). And I’ve heard you can catch socialism off a public toilet seat.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
Scott, As a Canatab Student I’m quite aware of this I responded to an email that had been expressing outrage of some sort from LAWSOC and they have as yet not responded…strange – my argument is that for students on loans and low incomes it is far better to have a minor but cheap service, to make people work for less to ease their suffering while at the same time not bothering with this 19 strong task force or whatever unless they are going to also be put into front line rotation- I know from experience it isn’t hard to teach someone to shelf, return and lend books
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Whats so special about books that they need publicly providing
Perhaps this?
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” –Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816.
One might consider that Libertarianism as well demands that the populace be so well informed as to preclude gross public deceptions. So the opposition to public libraries arguably has no basis in libertarianism. It appears to be solely the province of those who prefer tyranny.
“The German people have no idea of the extent to which they have to be gulled in order to be led” – Adolf Hitler
“A violently active, intrepid, brutal youth – that is what I am after…I will have no intellectual training. Knowledge is ruin for my young men.” – Adolf Hitler
The public library is one of the tools that makes us more equal. Shared knowledge is one of the binding forces in any society.
The descent into private individual hells that is supported by those who would gut the public libraries, is something they seem happily unaware of. Ignorance is, after all, bliss.
Isn’t it?
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
As I have paid for them already by force why shouldn’t I use these things Sam? Although I won’t have anything to do with Kiwibank….a socialist sop to pathetic tribalistic people with little self esteem and a liabilty to every taxpaying New Zealander.
No matter which way you cut it theft of peoples property to subsidise things like libraries is just wrong…..and when its not even nessessary as people would voluntaraly fund those things by choice if left alone it just compounds the violation.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
James, I’m running a theory which says that education (words) and violence are, to some extent, substitutes for each other. If it’s right, we can get much more cost-increase out of three-strikes by making libraries unaffordable. Is that an experiment you’re enthusiastic about trying?
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
“No matter which way you cut it theft of peoples property to subsidise things like libraries is just wrong…..”
You would have a point if you were talking about things that aren’t overwhelmingly supported. I certainly resent having my money taken to pay for politician’s perks or Peter Jackson’s amusing but rather childish films. But in the case of libraries, parks, footpaths etc. we have made a collective decision as a society that we want these things and are prepared to pay for them. One can argue about the mechanism – I certainly would, but to have a decent society we need collective action.
There will always be a few malcontents grumbling about this. Perhaps you should move to Somalia or Haiti and enjoy their freedom from state-controlled services?
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
“James, I’m running a theory which says that education (words) and violence are, to some extent, substitutes for each other. If it’s right, we can get much more cost-increase out of three-strikes by making libraries unaffordable. Is that an experiment you’re enthusiastic about trying?”
So state theft is the way to discourage private criminal theft is it…? Sigh…
Sam:”“No matter which way you cut it theft of peoples property to subsidise things like libraries is just wrong…..”
“You would have a point if you were talking about things that aren’t overwhelmingly supported.”
Aside from the little matter of peoples individual rights not being determined by a majority vote if they are “overwhemingly supported” then people will pay for them in the private market…your threatening State is not required is it? Do we need the state to provide restaurants,movie theaters,rock concerts etc…?No….its only the stuff that the lefty liberal elite think the common plebs should have foisted on them regardless of wheather they even want it…for their “own good” of course…
“I certainly resent having my money taken to pay for politician’s perks or Peter Jackson’s amusing but rather childish films. But in the case of libraries, parks, footpaths etc. we have made a collective decision as a society that we want these things and are prepared to pay for them. One can argue about the mechanism – I certainly would, but to have a decent society we need collective action.”
“We” as a society have made no such decision….society is an abstraction and doesn’t exist as an entity with rights.Only human individuals exist…and only human individuals have rights.A “decent society” would not allow some people to be threatened and robbed by others to fund the others lesiure activities.A decent society would prevent that occuring by protecting the right of every individual to keep and choose how THEY will spend their money…and punish those who try to stop them.
Sorry but you guys are trying to defend the morally indefensible….
“There will always be a few malcontents grumbling about this. Perhaps you should move to Somalia or Haiti and enjoy their freedom from state-controlled services?”
Yes…they are “free from the rule of law.private property rights and free market Capitalism…..but then thats what you lefties want for them…..and everyone,and their situation is what you get so not good examples to base your case on…
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
“We” as a society have made no such decision”
Yes we have.
“Aside from the little matter of peoples individual rights not being determined by a majority vote”
Property rights aren’t individual rights.
” if they are “overwhemingly supported” then people will pay for them in the private market…”
Some people can’t afford to, and we, as a society, have decided to supply them to everyone.
“your threatening State is not required is it?”
Not my state, mate, I’m sticking up for collective social action, not the state – very different things.
“Do we need the state to provide restaurants,movie theaters,rock concerts etc…?”
In a way, yes. The state doesn’t run them, just ensures some access via the social welfare system. Anyway, you are talking about luxuries, which libraries aren’t – they are an important part of our education system which is necessary to create a prosperous and happy society.
“No….its only the stuff that the lefty liberal elite think the common plebs should have foisted on them regardless of wheather they even want it…for their “own good” of course…”
Last I saw a survey, support for the local library was in the region of 95% – it was cited as one of the few things the council did well and attracted support.
Yes…they are “free from the rule of law.private property rights and free market Capitalism”
Not all, they are firmly free-market, property rights are firmly upheld in Haiti, less so in Somalia where the rule of law is that the strongest get to keep what they have grabbed (which forms the basis for property rights everywhere – it’s just that Somalia is a little behind the game). Law is simply a matter of the strongest enforcing their will, so you can hardly claim that there is no law there – if anything there’s rather too much of it.
“Sorry but you guys are trying to defend the morally indefensible….”
These are the morals of a spoiled adolescent – I want everything MY way. I don’t want to be part of a group. I don’t want to clean up my mess – I don’t care if the bathroom’s scungy. No I won’t turn the stereo down… I didn’t ask to be born… etc. etc. ad infinitum…
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
A deluded lefty writes:
“Yes we have.”
Ahhh no we haven’t…..”SOME” people with the gun of the State backing them against the rest have…..non existent society has not.And just what happened to the supposed equality you socialists bleat about?How do some get the unequal right to force their wants on the rest of us? “All animals are equal…but some animals……eh?
“Property rights aren’t individual rights.”
They can ONLY be individual rights…there are no others.Indeed the most personal property rights are to ones life and the property of ones body…..care to explain how thoses aren’t individual rights?
“Some people can’t afford to, and we, as a society, have decided
to supply them to everyone.”
Oh….so should “society” also provide sexual services to the unlucky in love…? Children to the sadly infertile? Anything anyone claims to need at all…? Oh wait….look who Im debating with…How generous you are with other peoples money and lives.God forbid you might consider that people should be free to choose to help their fellow man and not be enslaved to him instead.
“Not my state, mate, I’m sticking up for collective social
action,not the state – very different things.”
No….you are defending COLLECTIVISM…..not collective action which are two very different things.The former is empowered by the state….the latter is just the free market in action.Collective action by consenting individuals with a common goal is ….well….capitalism!
“In a way, yes. The state doesn’t run them, just ensures some access via the social welfare system. Anyway, you are talking about luxuries, which libraries aren’t – they are an important part of our education system which is necessary to create a prosperous and happy society.”
Oh please! How are libraries not a luxuary when compared to a say a restaurant which provides food….something,unlike books,which most certainly is a nessessity for a human being?
“Last I saw a survey, support for the local library was in the region of 95% – it was cited as one of the few things the council did well and attracted support.”
Most people are wrong about most things most of the time.The number of aderants to a particular view is redundant if that view is objectivly wrong.Is gang rape ok in your view as the rapists outnumber the victim? Blunt example I know but the principle still stands….mmm? If not just WHY is it a crime?
“Not all, they are firmly free-market, property rights are firmly upheld in Haiti, less so in Somalia where the rule of law is that the strongest get to keep what they have grabbed (which forms the basis for property rights everywhere – it’s just that Somalia is a little behind the game). Law is simply a matter of the strongest enforcing their will, so you can hardly claim that there is no law there – if anything there’s rather too much of it.”
If you truly think Haiti is a free market theres no point debating you…..you are fighting unarmed.I don’t bully the weak.
“These are the morals of a spoiled adolescent – I want everything MY way. I don’t want to be part of a group. I don’t want to clean up my mess – I don’t care if the bathroom’s scungy. No I won’t turn the stereo down… I didn’t ask to be born… etc. etc. ad infinitum…”
You are right….YOURS are the morals of a spoiled adolescent.In contrast I don’t want everything MY way….Im advocating that everyone be allowed to pursue their OWN happiness,whatever that may be even if I disagree with it….as long as they respect everyone elses right to do the same.Its YOU whos wanting things his way….and you are willing to use the gun and the club via the state to make it happen……..not I.Im all for you and whoever else starting up and funding libraries or whatever….go for it! But stop bullying me and others who don’t want to be involved or made to fund them against our will.To carry on doing so shows who the adults are…. and who the spoiled adolescent here really is…..
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
It’s kind of hard to argue with somebody who makes absurd statements along the lines of “society is non-existent”. It would be a bit like me defending collectivism by claiming everyone always has beautiful intentions and is never selfish. Society is real, it works, and it has created many of the things that make your lifestyle possible.
Restaurants are a luxury because there are other ways of getting food, and we collectively ensure that people have access to food, curently by way of a social welfare system.
“the most personal property rights are to ones life and the property of ones body…..care to explain how thoses aren’t individual rights?”
You are extending the definition of ‘property rights’ to the ridiculous.
“How generous you are with other peoples money and lives.”
A fair chunk of it is my money. And a chunk of everyone’s money comes from the collectively owned resources and infrastructure that we, as a society, have built. Have a look at how rentier states work – would you seriously suggest that people in Brunei shouldn’t get government support because the Sultan owns the oil and should keep the profits for himself?
BTW, what makes Haiti not a free market – it seems to be thriving there?
Your individualism might work in a place in which most people are largely self-sufficient – such as early colonial America where these ideas largely sprung from. In the modern world it’s unworkable. Take the highway outside my place – it spoils my enjoyment of my property – it’s noisy, ugly and creates fumes which intrude on to my property. Should I be able to demand that the noise and fumes be kept off my property? If not, why not? As I’m a reasonable person and I’m happy to accept financial compensation for their intrusion on my property – which I price at $10 million (market forces at work). This would require re-routing the road (which would suit me fine).
The reality is development won’t happen in a society where one cantankerous property owner can block it, and where society can’t appeal to reasonableness, fairness to others and the greater social good (all of which are social constructs).
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
“It’s kind of hard to argue with somebody who makes absurd statements along the lines of “society is non-existent”.”
Then show me this “society”…and I’ll show you individual human beings with their own minds and dreams.Society…like communitys,nations and familys are just abstractions from the only concrete actual entity that matters….the individual.When individuals go their seperate ways then society melts away…it never having been an actual entity no?
“It would be a bit like me defending collectivism by claiming everyone always has beautiful intentions and is never selfish. Society is real, it works, and it has created many of the things that make your lifestyle possible.”
No….individuals pursuing their own happiness and often working collectively with others towards the same goal have done that.Thats capitalsim…and I have no issue with that.Its practicle because its moral….objective reality allows no other option that works as well.
“Restaurants are a luxury because there are other ways of getting food, and we collectively ensure that people have access to food, curently by way of a social welfare system.”
The neeed of one person does no impose any unchosen obligation on another to meet that need.A doctrine that says otherwise is slavery….pure and simple.
“You are extending the definition of ‘property rights’ to the ridiculous.”
No….the fact is that is the crux of property rights….ownership of ones self and the product of ones effort.There can be no other definition that isn’t illogical and coontradictory.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)