Archived decisions

Hampshire County Council

Executive Member - Recreation and Heritage Item 4

11 March 2008

Controversial Material in Public Libraries - MLA Consultation

Report of the Director of Recreation and Heritage

 

Contact: Stephen Edwards tel: 826683 e-mail: [email protected]

 

1. Introduction

1.1 The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) is seeking comments on the content of draft guidance for Public Library Authorities on the selection and management of controversial material in public libraries.

1.2 In November 2007 the government commissioned the MLA to produce guidance on the management of extremist and inflammatory material. It is aiming to:

      · highlight duties and responsibilities

      · advise on legislation

      · share best practice within a context of local independence and accountability

2. Recommendations

2.1 That the Executive Member for Recreation & Heritage approve the following recommendations:

    i) That the Library Stock Policy be amended in the light of MLA guidelines on controversial material in public libraries to read:

    Some published material will cause offence to some members of the public because of its religious, political or moral line, or because it contains spurious alternative or controversial knowledge, or because it is designed by the author/artist deliberately to shock. All material which is legally available may legitimately be considered for purchase. Stock must be selected for the positive reason that it can be useful and/or interesting to some of the public, rather than rejected for the negative reason that it may cause complaint. However, our intention is not to knowingly provide publications or information which is intended to provide practical information for terrorists and for terrorist acts nor to knowingly provide information which is intended to stir up racial hatred.

    ii) That the managed access to controversial material envisaged in the draft proposals be rejected on the grounds that they would be of little practical use and would decrease the standard of service provided to all the people of Hampshire

    iii) That Hampshire should take part in the consultation on the MLA draft guidelines and pass on its views on stock policy and managed access

3. Legislative Background

3.1 Annex A of the draft guidelines summarise the key legislation affecting the provision of extremist publications. It should be noted that the definition of 'terrorist publication' covers not just books but includes providing access to the internet. The law reflects the tension between the need to safeguard national security on the one hand and the need to discourage discrimination and protect human rights on the other. To be weighed up are

    · the general obligation to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service (Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964)

    · the risk, perhaps small, of commission of an offence under the Terrorism Acts 2000 and 2006

    · the requirements of race relations legislation (Race Relations Act 2000, amended 2006, Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006)

    · the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 with the freedom of expression and freedom of thought articles

    · the implications of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 for involving local people eg in stock selection

3.2 It should be noted that under 2006 legislation, a terrorist publication is defined as containing matter that is likely to be seen as a direct or indirect encouragement to commit terrorist acts. This includes items which only contain a small part which does so. Historical accounts that could be interpreted as glorifying terrorism could however be stocked if there is little or no possibility that a current reader would try to emulate the acts described. Crucially, for a offence to be committed, there must be both a 'guilty act' and a 'guilty mind' - the latter being where there is an intention for conduct to encourage terrorism. Library staff are therefore only likely to have the intention to encourage terrorism in rare cases and the offence of 'recklessness' or the taking of unreasonable risks is also likely to be a very exceptional occurrence. However, the 2000 Act includes the offence of collecting a record of information, including photographs or electronic records, which are likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. The MLA overview suggests that 'library authorities should take pre-emptive precautions to ensure that information likely to be useful to terrorists is not stocked'.

3.3 Racial hatred legislation stipulates that the display and distribution of 'threatening, abusive or insulting' material is an offence if racial hatred is likely to be stirred up. The MLA gloss is that if library authorities 'stock particular material that falls foul of the Act, both the authority (as a body corporate) and any officer of the body who consented to the decision will be...

    liable to be proceeded against and punished'.

4. MLA Draft guidance

4.1 The MLA draft guidance valiantly tries to grapple with the complexities of ensuring 'free access to a diversity of information' and not rejecting material because it is controversial (' a good library should encompass controversial issues and different perspectives in the interest of democracy and discovery') alongside the need to 'operate within the law'.

4.2 The stance that 'in exceptional circumstances they (libraries) manage access to material regarded as culturally or morally extreme' leads to some uncomfortable conclusions. Exceptional circumstances are not fully defined and the idea that we need 'alternative ways to providing access to controversial material that are sensitive to diverse opinion' is also open to interpretation. Later the guidelines state that libraries may choose 'introduce managed access eg for reference use only or restricting use by children'. How this would deter the determined terrorist in practice is not clear - access to a photocopier would mean that reference items could be as pertinent as those for loan.

4.3 The issue of internet access is well dealt with by the guidelines: 'it would be counter-productive to restrict anything other than the demonstrably illegal'. Best practice is that we should have 'an internet usage policy' with the library user retaining 'responsibility for acting within the law when using the internet' and with parents 'responsible for children's use' but in the context of library staff intervening 'if they are aware of potential illegal activity'. Hampshire already complies with best practice in this area.

5. Hampshire's response to the guidelines

    Stock Policy

5.1 Hampshire's stock selection is carried out by trained and experienced staff using information from book suppliers and the book trade and in the context of customer requests, enquiries, suggestions and knowledge of usage patterns. It should be noted that the guidelines state that 'in all circumstances stock policy remains the responsibility of the library authority' and this does have implications for the well intentioned aim to involve customers more in decision making and the current vogue for supplier selection. Hampshire's current stock selection methods are both effective and provide value for money.

5.2 However, since most material is ordered pre-publication, it is not possible to check the full and detailed content of publications. It is also possible that a wide range of publications could contain some element that some might find encouraging or supportive of the terrorist point of view. The truism that one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter is germane to the problem. We do not want to censor or self censor or impede the free flow of ideas and information while we do want to foster understanding of different cultures, religions and differing political points of view.

5.3 Perhaps the one clear caveat that we can identify however is that our intention would be not to purchase or provide items that would provide practical guidance for the commission of terrorist acts nor do we wish to purchase material that is clearly intended to stir up racial hatred. It would be advisable to enshrine this principle in our stock policy. Even here one must enter another caveat - there may well be technical publications which the majority reading them would put to innocent use but where some part of it might be put to nefarious purposes. Similarly, there will be publications whose political or religious views individual readers may strongly disagree with but which add to our understanding of the world. Our enduring principle to provide the fullest possible range of information within the law could be expressed as:

5.4 Some published material will cause offence to some members of the public because of its religious, political or moral line, or because it contains spurious alternative or controversial knowledge, or because it is designed by the author/artist deliberately to shock. All material which is legally available may legitimately be considered for purchase. Stock must be selected for the positive reason that it can be useful and/or interesting to some of the public, rather than rejected for the negative reason that it may cause complaint. However, our intention is not to knowingly provide publications or information which is intended to provide practical information for terrorists and for terrorist acts nor to knowingly provide information which is intended to stir up racial hatred.

    Stock Management

5.5 The exceptional circumstances that the MLA guidelines refer to when access should be restricted are hard to define or envisage in practise. Would we be carrying out our role if we were to withdraw or keep in reserve an item that the majority of users would find useful or stimulating or informative because a small minority might find it encouraging to a terrorist viewpoint? Would restricting access by making items reference only or available only to adults have any practical use in deferring terrorists or terrorism? Would it be acceptable to vet requests for inter library loans on the basis of their content? It would be impossible to provide a comprehensive and efficient service with 'free access to a diversity of information' if we were to amend our current practises in the ways outlined above. The democratic way of life is vulnerable to those malevolent enough to wish to attack it and the question as to how far we should restrict freedoms and access to information without denigrating the freedoms we wish to protect in the first place is a quandary that Legislators and society as a whole is still grappling with.

5.6 In terms of practical steps that should be taken in the light of those threats, it seems sensible to carry out our stock selection in a clear and responsible manner as identified in paragraph 5.1 and to continue to provide services such as access to the Internet in a responsible manner, but then to make information and our stock as widely available as possible without any hindrance or managed access. Trying to manage access in the ways the MLA suggest may in certain circumstances be needed would limit the service we provide to all the people of Hampshire and would be of little practical use in furthering the ends that were intended.

    Response to MLA guidelines

5.7 The consultation deadline for making responses to the MLA guidelines is 7 April. It is proposed that we respond to them putting forward the Hampshire stance outlined in paragraph 5.1 and 5.2

6. Impact Assessment

6.1 The Hampshire stock policy has been impact assessed - it enshrines our duty to provide a range of materials in order to satisfy both expressed and anticipated demand. We aim to meet the informational, educational, recreational and cultural needs of all members of the community regardless of age, gender, race, class, ability, ethnic origin, language, culture, religion or sexual orientation.

LINK TO CORPORATE STRATEGY

                  Yes No

Hampshire safer and more secure for all _

Maximising well-being _

Enhancing our quality of place _

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - Background Documents

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

    1. Published works

    2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the act.

TITLE LOCATION

Draft MLA Guidance Library HQ, North Walls