Lawyers are smart…aren’t they?

I mean, they’ve all gone through many years of expensive education, designed to weed out those who’re not able to perform to the high levels demanded in the competitive world of the law. In the case of Advocates, Solicitor-Advocates and Barristers, after their initial degree qualification there’s even more training involved, again, accepting only the best minds to this higher level of education.

And then, once they’re out practising in the Big Bad World, they have to be able to assess information presented to them, the accuracy of that information, identify opportunities and threats, and figure out what’s really a sensible conclusion to many issues.

So…with all that education, knowledge, experience and business skill, just how the hell did this proposal get any further than a 4am late-night-cheese-snack-induced nightmare?!?

The Executive Committees of Inner Temple and Middle Temple have agreed to commission a feasibility study to investigate the potential benefits of merging their Libraries and creating a Joint Education and Advocacy Centre.

The study will be overseen by a working group chaired jointly by Master Jonathan Hirst for Inner Temple and Master Stanley Burnton, Deputy Treasurer, for Middle Temple.

The results of the study are likely to be available in the late summer and no decisions are anticipated until much later in the year, after full consultation with staff and consideration by the relevant Inn Committees, Bench Table and Parliament.

In particular, no assumption has been made as to which Inn would house the Library and which the Education Centre, should the project proceed.

Vivian Robinson QC
Treasurer

Now, having worked at a large institutional legal library myself, my brain just shuts down in shock when confronted with a lunatic proposal like this. Really – this is actually a serious proposition, from these “smart” people? Charon QC has commented extensively on this here, and here: please feel free to take part in his poll. Many others have also commented on the absurdity of this proposal.

Even in Scotland the Inn Libraries have an outstanding reputation. Their extensive holdings and experienced staff are essential to the smooth running of the legal system in England and Wales, just as the Advocates Library is here in Scotland. Without the knowledge and skill of the library staff, and the immediate access to a wide range of legal materials they have in stock, the barrister profession of England and Wales would be hamstrung.

So, to propose that that wealth of experience and materials would be effectively halved by merging the Inner Temple and Middle Temple Libraries is verging on the insane! And where is the actual detail on this proposal? What exactly are they studying the “feasibility” of? Cutting staff? Cutting stock or putting it into storage? Losing study space? Saving money? Ahhh…saving money. I think we may have found the reason here. Because you can be sure that this initiative is not for the benefit of the members of these libraries…it’ll be about cutting costs, while pretending to (as is a favourite excuse) “modernise” the service.

Because, of course, a modern service is one that has fewer staff, and fewer resources, but looks shiny and pretty. As, after all, nobody reads those musty old things called books any more. And librarians just sit at desks and stamp books. And users can navigate the intricacies of all the massive databases with ease, because they’re designed to be nice and user friendly. And all the books that users actually do want (strange, old fashioned users that they must be!) are always right where you want them….

Right?….

Badgers v. Solicitors

I think in this case, the badgers win

Apparently they’re asking for a solution for their badger problem. I do happen to know that, although it’s illegal to move a badger without a proper licence, or “interfere” with it and its sett, if a young badger does happen to move in somewhere inconvenient (say…under a joiners workshop), and try and establish its home there, that a period of full-volume dance music / cheesy local radio, played through speakers in that workshop while in the course of using it for the established business seems to be a good encouragement to those wandering young badgers to move along to a more serene location to establish themselves in… 😉

Pride and Prejudice…and Zombies

I’m not one for Regency romances, or any book where the “plucky” heroine has to struggle womanfully against the suffocating strictures of the moral code of her day (in a ladylike, delicate manner), so Jane Austen books have never appealed to me…but if you throw in something a bit different, like zombies, I perk up! So, when I read there was a new book coming out, a mashup of Pride and Prejudice, with zombies, I pre-ordered straight away!

I’ve enjoyed reading this (despite some editing / proof reading errors: e.g. I know for a fact that the English countryside has at no point been the native home of chipmunks, and the concept of “coy ponds” instead of “koi ponds” in a Japanese parkland setting was a bit jarring), and the addition of zombies definitely made it more entertaining: no walk in the English countryside, or carriage ride to London was safe from violent zombie attacks. And no young lady of refinement is considered to be accomplished unless she is skilled in the Deadly Arts, and has studied them in Japan or China. So the various encounters, and methods of despatching then certainly made for a bit of light relief when the “thwarted love that it was indelicate to discuss” thaaang kept coming up. And, although I early on thought I’d like a copy of the original to compare this to, to see where the differences from the original text are (other than the zombies), now I know I just couldn’t cope with having to read it. It ain’t made an Austin fan of me…but perhaps it has made a zombie fan of me.

Next, I shall read of one poet’s descent into the zombie horror by buying Zombie Haiku…

CILIP Council open session, Wednesday 29th April

So, tomorrow’s a big day – CILIP Council are experimenting with an open session to discuss how CILIP could / should be using Web 2.0 tools to interact with and support its membership.

If (like me) you can’t be there in person, you can take part via Twitter (although I’m not sure how this is going to be integrated into the session), and the presentations of Phil Bradley and Brian Kelly are either already available in draft form, or will (I think) be made available after the session.

CILIP Council blog post here.

Twitter hash tag is #CILIP2 (#CILIP2.0 tag has been abandoned as the ‘point’ disrupts some applications)