| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Proposed closure of Wandsworth Museum | |
| Posted by: | Valerie Bott | |
| Date/Time: | 10/01/07 18:49:00 |
| How sad it is to see that Cllr Lister is quoted as saying that the Museum was "not well used and not a great success" and that Cllr Grimston is writing reams on this Forum without any clear understanding of what museums do and how their success is measured. I have just run through the most recent statistics on museum visiting I could lay hands on - Wandsworth is join 9th for visitor numbers amongst the London Boroughs which wholly or partly fund museums. The figures are not always exactly comparable, since some include users of local studies and archives collection as well, but those occupying positions 3 to 8 range from 36,000 to 33,000. If the Borough Council had been concerned about the museum "not being a success", why were the staff not alerted and encouraged to improve. The fact is that the museum is not only well used for its size, but that it was also last summer amongst the first group of museums in Greater London to be awarded Accreditation, the new museum standard for the UK. Cllr Grimston seems determined to prove the museum a failure by calculating cost per visitor without including cost per user - what about all the telephone, mail, email and web uses that benefit from the museum's services? (The Audit Commission endorsed this calculation some years back). Reducing the cost per user could have been achieved by increasing usage and finding opportunities for earning more income rather than closing it down. Furthermore, reducing the cost overall need not require complete closure - but there is no evidence of any kind of appraisal of other options besides this one. Cllr Grimston has some peculiar ideas about museums - I cannot imagine where he has got the idea from that national museums are closing down direct access to collections in favour of internet access. He quotes South Kensington where the V&A alone is planning £9m of sponsored gallery development in addition to a major lottery-funded refurbishment of its mediaeval and renaissance galleries. Good museum web sites increase use of the real thing - they do not replace it. And digital access is not sufficiently reliable alone - look at all those sad broken down screens in parts of the Science Museum, for example. And other London Boroughs are planning museum improvements(Bexley, Enfield, Islington, Southwark, for example), have opened new or refurbished museums in the last five years (Brent, Croydon, Hackney, Redbridge, Richmond, Waltham Forest) or are planning completely new museums (Havering). Even more alarming, Cllr Grimston says "we will keep the best of the collections" - what does he propose to do with the rest and who will judge what to do with all that wonderful material with Wandsworth connections? Hundreds of local families have placed their trust in the Museum by donating objects made, used, owned, worn by their relatives and ancestors - how will he explain this proposal to them? The Museum is unquestionably successful - in the eyes of users, in the eyes of its peers and through the Museum Accreditation standard. It is dishonest to invent this as a reason for its closure and these councillors should be ashamed of taking this line - in reality they just thought it was an easy target on a valuable town centre site. |