Sunderland statistics 1 - Our Libraries must not close!

I have been following the debate in our newspaper, the Sunderland Echo, with a great deal of interest, because I owe a lot to the library system, and also because as a teacher, I have seen for myself how children benefit from visits there. I was particularly appalled by the recent article on how they were simply not used much these days. A noted local author, Terry Deary, used the phrase "long overdue," which I found particularly infuriating.

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/local/all-news/sunderland-libraries-facing-closure-under-850-000-savings-plan-1-5401946

Interesting that in a BBC interview, he complains that he objects primarily because a book read in a library generates much lower royalties than selling a book. Not an attitude that does him any credit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-21433152

Not being one to take the council's word for it (cynic? Moi?­­) I put in a Freedom of Information request so I could see the exact figures and analyse them for myself. Here they are.

Library loans	2010/11	2011/12	Decrease % (my figures)
Bunny Hill	50035	46269	7.5
City Library	341824	318481	6.8
Doxford Park	38487	32223	16.3
East Herrington	27827	25644	7.8
Easington Lane	12131	10233	15.6
Fence Houses	9064	7708	15.0
Fulwell	85868	77370	9.9
Hendon	31068	29781	4.1
Hetton	39277	36468	7.2
Houghton	80176	71388	11.0
Kayll Road	58096	50651	12.8
Monkwearmouth	27271	26995	1.0
Ryhope	30978	30321	2.1
Sandhill	35304	34499	2.3
Shiney Row	47413	46222	2.5
Silksworth	41741	39796	4.7
Southwick	30837	30554	0.9
Washington Green	21521	20248	5.9
Washington Millenium Centre	42256	39843	5.7
Washington Town Centre	140445	130055	7.4
Whole City	1191619	1104749	7.3

So. Yes most libraries show a decrease in loans, ranging from 1.0 to 16.3%. But hang on a minute, that's somewhat deceptive. Look at the bottom line! Across the city, 1,104,749 books were borrowed in 2011/12, down slightly (7.3%) from 1,196,619 the previous year! That's well over a million books being borrowed in the city in a single year! What was it Deary said? Libraries have had their day? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Reducing libraries is a way of restricting information: it's an attack on our freedom to learn.

Alright: so we've established that there's a healthy borrowing rate in Sunderland. Let's dig further. Five of the libraries show a higher decrease in borrowing - Doxford Park 16.3%, Easington Lane 15.6%, Fence Houses 15%, Houghton 11% and Kayll Road 12.8%. What explanation can I suggest for this.

First of all Kayll Road, the library I went to for my first 20 years: easy. Parking next to the Hospital has always been a nightmare, and much more so in the last couple of years.

 Doxford Park is closed some days, and is tiny: still it manages a respectable 32,223 loans. I could also point out that in recent years, huge numbers of houses have been demolished in its hinterland, and regeneration of the area is ongoing.

Easington Lane, and Fence Houses are more difficult, but I notice that these libraries are only open for part of the time; Fence Houses only for half days, so perhaps a community survey could make it more efficient. I don't know Houghton well enough to comment.

Back to the statistics. I also asked for borrower numbers, so here they are.

Library	2010/11	2011/12	% change (my figures)
Bunny Hill	1823	1822	-0.1
City Library	17744	16380	-7.7
Doxford Park	979	867	-11.4
East Herrington	698	657	-5.9
Easington Lane	337	308	-8.6
Fence Houses	234	198	-15.4
Fulwell	2771	2578	-7.0
Hendon	725	762	+5.1
Hetton	1495	1303	-12.8
Houghton	3446	3130	-9.2
Kayll Road	1886	1719	-8.9
Monkwearmouth	409	342	-16.4
Ryhope	1126	1142	+1.4
Sandhill	1127	1116	-1.0
Shiney Row	1441	1458	+1.2
Silksworth	862	838	-2.8
Southwick	866	844	-2.5
Washington Green	282	259	-8.2
Washington Millenium Centre	1049	975	-7.1
Washington Town Centre	6898	6391	7.3
Whole City	46198	43089	6.7

Once again, initially there seems to be a decline, though over the whole city, it's very small - 43,089 lenders in 2011/12 from 46,198 in the previous year, but look! Three libraries are actually increasing their membership:- Hendon, Ryhope and Shiney Row. Not declining at all there! You can spot the smaller libraries from the data though, and I can see that Fence Houses must be a tiny library. Yet those 198 borrowers managed to read a total of 7708 books last year! This is a nice segue for my cross-referencing of the data to calculate the average number of books borrowed by a lender at each library, for reasons which will become obvious.

Library	books per lender 2010/11	books per lender 2011/12
Bunny Hill	27.4	25.4
City Library	19.3	19.4
Doxford Park	39.3	37.2
East Herrington	39.9	39.0
Easington Lane	36.0	33.2
Fence Houses	38.7	38.9
Fulwell	31.0	30.0
Hendon	42.9	39.1
Hetton	26.3	28.0
Houghton	23.3	22.8
Kayll Road	30.8	29.5
Monkwearmouth	66.7	78.9
Ryhope	27.5	26.6
Sandhill	31.3	30.9
Shiney Row	32.9	31.7
Silksworth	48.4	47.5
Southwick	35.6	36.2
Washington Green	76.3	78.2
Washington Millenium Centre	40.3	40.9
Washington Town Centre	20.4	20.3
Whole City	25.8	25.6

Now this shows one or two very interesting pieces of information. Note the figures for Monkwearmouth, one of the most deprived areas of the city, with lots of social housing and high rise flats. Astonishingly, the average number of books borrowed there is a staggering 78.9 per borrower, per year, up from 66.7 in the previous year. So in the area where people are most likely to be poor and unemployed, or by whatever poverty criteria you care to use, reading is at its highest in the whole city. It says an awful lot for the people there that they aren't the skivers popular myths and stereotypes would have us believe, but in fact, try hardest to learn, though they can least afford to buy books. Of course the population there is boosted by students from the University but this just underlines for me the importance of libraries for young people. How can anyone say that libraries are going out of fashion, given such evidence. To reinforce this, other "deprived" areas such as Hendon, with a borrowing rate of 39 books per reader, and Silksworth with 47 books/reader also have a healthy reading population. I find myself far more optimistic for the human condition. Except of course, for councillors!