Five reasons why DCC may wish to trim library spending

Raymond Huber attempts to come to grips with proposals to cut the Dunedin library's budget.

What an incredible idea! Astonishingly bold.

Yes, I admit that at first I thought only a fool would think that cutting the library budget was good for Dunedin.

But then it occurred to me that the DCC are not fools, so there must be strong reasons for proposing cutbacks.

Now, I've finally worked them out: here are the five reasons why the DCC might want to reduce library services: Firstly, it will destroy the character of Dunedin.

Libraries are the cultural heart of a city - "the sinews that bind civilised societies" (James Michener).

Even the DCC's own policy states the "cultural life of Dunedin is a central feature of its character and identity", and is essential "to the wellbeing of the city".

How could a council oppose its own policy, I hear you ask? I did too, then I realised that this daring council is not bound by the limits of staid, dusty bureaucracy - it would seek to reshape the identity of Dunedin (from "staid city to stadium city" perhaps?).

Secondly, it will discourage lifelong learning.

Apart from schools, libraries are the most readily available resource for ongoing education in a community.

The DCC is boldly questioning this philosophy.

Do we really want people to have the right to freely acquire knowledge? Where will all this enlightenment lead in the end? Horrors, the masses might start voting for a new council.

Thirdly, it will discourage people from visiting libraries.

They've become safe and welcoming community places, and library patronage has soared 30%.

But again, the DCC throws down a challenge to people, especially those who are not well-off.

Do people really need the library open every evening and weekends? What is TV for anyway? It's here that another DCC policy seems to contradict the proposed cuts: "the council will pay special attention of the needs of its citizens with limited resources".

I struggled with this, until I realised its clever wording.

Reducing library services would affect those citizens most of all - maybe that is what the DCC means by "special attention".

Fourthly, it will mean fewer new books.

The proposal may mean cutting back the book-buying budget.

Libraries have been called "the diary of the human race", and "a delivery room for the birth of ideas".

But the DCC would be overturning poetic principles like these and hurtling towards a blissful, book-free future.

Once again, I marvel at the bravery in ignoring thoughts like this: "Whatever the cost of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of an ignorant nation" (Walter Cronkite).

And the fifth reason why we should cut library spending? Libraries breed thinkers and writers, and they are dangerous people.

So I encourage you to write to the DCC and let them know exactly what you think of their bold proposal of library cut-backs.

Its certainly got me energised; I have not come across such a remarkable idea since the DCC's "we will dump it on the beaches" idea - its grand design for dealing with sewage.

 - Raymond Huber is a Dunedin writer and teacher