Because most of my research is in London and other parts of the country, I've become quite used to planning a month or so in advance- ordering and planning my trip according to my orders. I haven't had reason to access anything from the archives in Birmingham since they moved, but I can understand that it is frustrating.
I think that it's important to understand that there are two separate things that are affecting access to the archives in the library:
- the method of accessing the archives and the number of holdings are now using that method
- the cuts
The method of accessing the archives does seem less than ideal, particularly when less is on general access. But the holdings are safe, in a temperature-controlled environment. Hopefully one day, the system will be improved. Until then, we all have to plan our research, I think
The cuts are completely unrelated to the building of the new library. I have explained this elsewhere, but I think it's worth clarifying it here as well:
- The building of the library was a capital expense, largely funded by a grant from central government, with the rest coming from the capital expenditure 'pot'. It was one of the last major project to receive funding from central gov. when the austerity axe was wielded (in 2010) after the crash of 2008. The cost of building the library is unrelated to the cuts; you cannot use money from capital expenditure projects to plug holes in operating budgets.
- Running costs (staff, heating etc) are from the operating budget, which is funded by council tax and gov grant (which had been cut). The operating budget has been deeply affected by the equal ops ruling from EU. That ruling was the direct result of the council implementing a grading system that was full of holes, but the payouts have to be funded from the operating budget. Part of it is coming from a 500m loan, but the rest has to be found from savings - hence the huge cuts across the council services.
The cuts to the library service would have happened anyway, to contribute to the payout fund. We would have been left with a leaky building that threatened the integrity of archives and resources on the top floor of the old building. The staff cuts would have still happened and probably been effected by closing the whole floor for several days a week. We were already in the situation where access to the archives section (as opposed to the general local studies section) was restricted to certain times a week (even before they started getting ready for the move). By the way, fixing the old building wouldn't have worked either - that huge cost would have come from the operating budget, causing even further cuts!
I hope that helps to clarify why we are in the situation we are - it's not a happy situation. Without the (in my opinion, avoidable) ruling from the EU, we would have been in a better place
