MINUTES OF THE BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, 14 MAY 2019

Minutes Status: Unapproved Draft Publication Status: OPEN with REDACTIONS (highlighted in grey)

Minutes of the 374th meeting of the British Library Board held in the British Library, Boston Spa on Tuesday, 14 May 2019, beginning at approximately 09.30 a.m.

Present: Mr Delroy Beverley Dame Carol Black (Chair) Dr Robert Black Ms Tracy Chevalier Lord Janvrin Mr Roly Keating (Chief Executive) Ms Laela Pakpour Tabrizi Mr Patrick Plant Dr Jeremy Silver Dr Simon Thurley Dr Wei Yang Apologies: Ms Jana Bennett In attendance: Ms Lynn Brown, Member of the Board’s Audit Committee Mr Nicholas Deyes, Member of the Board’s Audit Committee Ms Liz Jolly, Chief Librarian Mr Phil Spence, Chief Operating Officer Mr Richard Gibby, Head of Governance (Secretary) By invitation: Mr Jamie Andrews, Head of Culture and Learning (for item 3) Ms Linda Arnold-Stratford, Legal Deposit Libraries’ Liaison Manager (item 4) Mr Alasdair Ball, Head of Collection Management (for item 4) Mr Conrad Bodman, Head of Culture Programmes (for item 3) Ms Sandra Bradbury, Head of Assurance (for item 6) Ms Cilé Everett, Governance Manager (observing) Ms Jayne King, Head of Finance (for item 5) Mr David Sparling, Head of Technology (for item 4) Mr Andrew Wood, Assurance Manager (for item 6)

During the preceding evening, the Board had received a presentation from Mr Keating on “Living Knowledge: the next four years”.

BLB 19/38 Page 1 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

1 PRELIMINARY MATTERS

1.1 The Chair welcomed members to the 374th meeting of the British Library Board. She extended a particular welcome to Mr Beverley, Ms Tabrizi, Dr Silver and Dr Yang, who had been newly appointed to the Board by the Secretary of State with effect from 13 May, the previous day. The Library could not inform staff or interested parties of their appointments until the government had announced them, which was likely to happen within a few days. Ms Jana Bennett had also been appointed to the Board with effect from 13 May but was unable to attend this meeting and had offered her apologies, which were noted.

1.2 The Chair also welcomed Ms Brown and Mr Deyes, members of the Board’s Audit Committee, who had been invited to attend the meeting as observers on this occasion, in part because the Board meeting would be followed that afternoon by a meeting of the Audit Committee and a number of the agenda topics for discussion and approval during this Board meeting were germane to the business of the Audit Committee.

1.2 After members and attendees had introduced themselves, the Chair invited members to declare any interests pertinent to the issues to be discussed; none were declared.

1.3 The minutes of the meeting on 26 February 2019 (BLB 19/24) were accepted and approved, and the summary of matters arising from that meeting (paper BLB 19/25) was noted.

2 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S UPDATE AND INTRODUCTION

2.1 British Library North – The Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for DCMS, Michael Ellis MP, had visited Boston Spa during the previous week. It was the first such visit to Boston Spa by an arts & heritage minister for many years. He had been fully briefed about Boston Spa Renewed as well as about the work being done with Leeds City Council. He had asked the Library to issue an office notice informing all staff that he was impressed by the operations in Boston Spa and how proud he was to have the British Library Boston Spa within his portfolio.

2.2

2.3 St Pancras Transformed – Negotiations with TfL/Crossrail2 were making good progress and it was hoped that final Heads of Terms for a conditional development agreement could be finalised soon.

1 SMBL Ltd is the joint venture between Stanhope plc and Mitsui Fudosan (UK), formed to undertake this development.

BLB 19/38 Page 2 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

A full update on St Pancras Transformed would be given to Board members later this summer.

2.4 DCMS – Sarah Healey, formerly Director General of the Department for Exiting the European Union, had now taken over from as Permanent Secretary for DCMS. She was already familiar to the Library, having previously been a Director General at DCMS.

2.5 Spending Review 2019 – It remained unknown whether there would indeed be a Comprehensive Spending Review this year, in view of the continuing political uncertainty surrounding Brexit. Neither the Library nor DCMS had been given any scenario-modelling commission yet. The Chief Executive was due to meet DCMS’ Finance Director and Director for Arts, Heritage and Tourism later in the week.

2.6 Living Knowledge Network – the network had been formally launched in St Pancras on 2 April, following the success of the two-year pilot phase funded by Arts Council England. It now had 22 public library partners and the national libraries of Scotland and Wales.

2.7 Business & IP Centre network - the first Business & IP Centre service in Scotland, the twelfth National Network Centre based on the Library’s own Centre in St Pancras, had opened formally on Friday 26 April in Glasgow’s Mitchell Library. The new Business & IP Centre was a partnership with Glasgow Life, the National Library of Scotland and Santander, offering support to entrepreneurs and small businesses in Glasgow.

2.8 Start-ups in London Libraries – the Chief Executive and the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for DCMS, Michael Ellis MP, had both attended the launch of the three-year ‘SILL’ project, in City Hall on Thursday 2 May. In partnership with ten London boroughs, and with funding from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and support from JP Morgan, the coordinated network of free support for start-ups would launch in over 60 public libraries. An article about the initiative by the Chief Executive had been published in the Evening Standard.

2.9 Ethiopian collections – The Head of Collections and Curation, the Head of Asian and African Collections and the Library’s expert in Ethiopian collections had just returned from a visit to Addis Ababa at the invitation of the Ethiopian minister for culture, to discuss potential opportunities for knowledge exchange under the Library’s Memorandum Of Understanding with the Ethiopian national library. Board members might be interested in reading Dr Luisa Mengoni’s report of the visit.

3 EXHIBITIONS AT THE BRITISH LIBRARY: REVIEW OF 2016-19 CYCLE AND FUTURE STRATEGIC DIRECTION

3.1 The Chief Librarian introduced a presentation by Mr Andrews and Mr Bodman which highlighted key points from paper BLB 19/26. Members noted that the Library’s level of exhibitions activity, and the numbers of visitors and associated events, had all increased dramatically since St Pancras (and its spaces designed for exhibitions) opened just over

BLB 19/38 Page 3 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

twenty years ago. Some changes to the existing spaces were now being made to facilitate more exhibitions in a slightly different approach and, of course, it was anticipated that more galleries and spaces would be created in future as a result of the St Pancras Transformed development.

3.2 The Library also now planned exhibitions within a series of 3-year cycles, the first such cycle having just ended with Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms: Art, Word, War. This exhibition and Harry Potter: A History of Magic had seen the largest number of visitors, both considerably more than planned. On the other hand, Shakespeare in Ten Acts had performed the least well in the cycle while it was on, but had created the greatest legacy of the cycle in terms of additional resources and further interest.

3.3 Overall, the last cycle had achieved its goals, with some outstanding successes. The review identified a number of positive benefits and outcomes, as well as some lessons or issues to bear in mind for the next cycle. It also proposed, for the next cycle, some creative principles, strategic objectives and a core approach or methodology for exhibitions and their planning.

3.4 In discussing the paper, members noted that the next three-year cycle would again contain a mix of both ‘blockbuster’ exhibitions designed for general (popular) audiences and exhibitions designed more for certain segments. Overall, the cycle should cover its own costs through a combination of income from ticket sales and fundraising, although some individual exhibitions would generate more income and profits than others. Investments in online content, learning resources etc. may take longer to recoup, or may require additional fundraising. International (touring) exhibitions should always pay for themselves.

3.5 The Board considered adding another strategic objective, about using exhibitions as an opportunity to illuminate or add to the public debate about significant national issues and questions. For instance, Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms: Art, Word, War had helped people think about questions of national identity and Britons’ relationships with other Europeans at a time when such issues were part of the national debate.

3.6 Board members debated the paper’s distinguishing between ‘core’ and ‘aspirational’ shows. On the one hand they were a useful way of planning a varied programme of exhibitions designed to appeal in different ways to different audiences. On the other hand, there could be a risk that more creative energy was put into ‘aspirational’ shows and that, as a result, ‘core’ shows might be perceived as less attractive or worthwhile.

3.7 Bearing in mind the limitations of our current physical exhibition spaces, there might be benefits in exploring greater use of virtual reality technologies to enable additional people to ‘visit’ the exhibition online.

3.8 The financial case was noted. A dedicated project manager was vital and could help coordinate with both the commercial and fundraising teams to ensure the greatest benefit from each exhibition. Further thought should also be given to maximising sponsorship, whether from separate sponsors for each individual exhibition or from a few sponsors supporting a whole programme of exhibitions. A delicate balance in the choice of exhibition themes and exhibits must also be maintained, between those which might be attractive to

BLB 19/38 Page 4 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

potential sponsors and, perhaps, those which might be more attractive to relevant audiences.

4 NON-PRINT LEGAL DEPOSIT: POST-IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW AND TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS

4.1 The Chief Librarian introduced Ms Arnold-Stratford who, while based in the British Library, was employed by all six legal deposit libraries jointly to coordinate the implementation of non-print legal deposit and actions relating to the recent review of regulations by DCMS. The review had commenced the previous year and DCMS had now published their conclusions.

4.2 Ms Arnold-Stratford advised that, after paper BLB 19/27 was distributed to Board members, DCMS had informed her that they would, in fact, need to consult formally on all four recommendations, not just on the two for which the legal deposit libraries and publishers had offered differing views. However DCMS envisaged a very short consultation on the two accepted recommendations, so that they could be implemented as early as possible. The Chief Executive added that it would be helpful if Board members could engage and encourage relevant parties to respond to the consultation(s) when launched.

4.3 Implementing recommendation 3, on the deposit of digital copies of printed newspapers instead of physical copies, would require an amendment to the Legal Deposit Libraries Act 2003 (primary legislation) whereas other recommendations might be implemented via secondary legislation amending the regulations under the Act.

4.4 The usage of digital content, and users’ expectations, had changed considerably since the regulations were drafted in 2012; for instance, researchers now were more interested in using the web archive as a dataset for analysing themes or trends than in examining individual web pages.

4.5 Referring to paper BLB 19/28, the Chief Operating Officer noted that the Digital Library System had been developed when no off-the-shelf or other suitable solution was available. It had not been designed for the quantity of material, especially digitised images of physical collection items, that the Library was now collecting and must be replaced. We were working with the other five legal deposit libraries to agree a future solution for non-print legal deposit material but, in the meantime, the British Library had issued a Request For Information (‘RFI’) to cloud providers for the storage and preservation of its own, mostly digitised, collection materials.

4.6 Mr Sparling added that responses to the RFI should be received in June, after which some form of ‘proof of concept’ or pilot exercise would be run, with a view to being able to make a recommendation to the Board in autumn, probably in September 2019.

4.7 In discussion, it was suggested that there might perhaps be an opportunity to discuss potential solutions, perhaps even to collaborate or combine forces, with other national institutions having a similar preservation need such as Companies House or The National Archives. However such joint arrangements and partnerships were very difficult to achieve in practice without an overriding political imperative.

BLB 19/38 Page 5 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

4.8 With regard to storage of the non-print legal deposit collection, it was unclear whether the Sottish or Welsh government might also require a copy to be maintained (via a node or offline) within their nation. Such a requirement could perhaps be avoided if the relevant officials were satisfied that the relevant national libraries had both the power and the ability to make a copy for themselves if it were to become necessary. Dr Black, as the Board’s member appointed by agreement with Scottish ministers, offered to support any discussions with Scottish officials if needed.

5 2018/19 OUTTURN REPORTS

5.1 Introducing the four outturn reports, the Chief Operating Officer remarked that, while there were small number of issues to note, overall they indicated that the Library had had a very positive year. The Finance report (paper BLB 19/29) indicated a positive outturn and the Library had only needed to draw £121k from reserves compared with around £5m originally budgeted. However this was partly because of some project delivery delays and overly optimistic planning, as evidenced in the Strategic Performance Dashboard (BLB 19/30). The Library had commissioned RSM to review its project and programme management practices and, as an outcome of the review, anticipated setting up a centralised programme management office which would help improve our planning, forecasting and timely delivery of projects and change programmes. The Key Performance Indicators (BLB 19/31) had all achieved their targets, or just missed be a small percentage, with the exception of the ‘charitable giving’ indicators. However these used the method of calculation specified by DCMS which excludes grants from publicly-funded bodies such as the National Lottery Heritage Fund and which excludes most future pledged income. The Fundraising report (BLB 19/32) indicated that, in the Library’s calculation, fairly good progress had been made in fundraising for the Living Knowledge Campaign. The Chief Executive endorsed this, indicating that he felt relatively positive about the results for 2018/19.

5.2 Adding to Mr Spence’s comments, Ms King noted that the Finance report was provisional, prior to completion of the annual audit; she informed the Board that the auditors had asked the Library to make an audit adjustment by including a specific provision from general reserves for the Voluntary Exit payments that the Library was anticipating it would make in 2019/20 as a result of the call issued to staff in January. She confirmed that the business case for the Voluntary Exit programme had been submitted to, and authorised by, DCMS and before the call had been issued; it complied fully with Cabinet Office guidelines and anticipated achieving full payback against the cost of redundancy payments within three to five years.

5.3 Responding to Board members’ queries and comments on the Fundraising report, the Chief Executive confirmed that the Library needed to continue reporting its Charitable Giving results using the DCMS method of calculation for as long as its current Management Agreement remained in force. However, the Library was hoping to agree a different method of reporting in future. In the meantime, we would continue working to simplify and improve the format and style of reporting financial and fundraising performance for Board members.

BLB 19/38 Page 6 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

6 UPDATED STRATEGIC RISKS AND RISK APPETITES

6.1 The Chief Operating Officer introduced paper BLB 19/33 with Ms Bradbury and Mr Wood in attendance. The paper, with appendices, proposed an updated framework of strategic risks, with revised controls and risk management actions, for the Board’s agreement. The paper also proposed a revised set of risk appetites for the Board to approve. Ms Bradbury added that the strategic risk definitions were taken from those identified by the Board and Audit Committee members at their risk management workshop in October 2018, following which the Executive had reviewed all the relevant controls, actions and sources of assurance. The risk appetites framework had been revised by merging and revising some categories of risk (from 16 categories previously down to nine, slightly broader, categories now proposed). The appetite levels and scoring framework had also been updated to reflect the Library’s evolution over recent years into a more modern and ambitious organisation. Overall, the proposed appetites reflected an organisation that, although still careful, was less risk-averse than it had been 10-15 years ago.

6.2 Ms Bradbury drew attention to the risks heat map in appendix 2 of the paper as a relatively simple, ‘at-a-glance’ summary of all the strategic risks, in each case showing the inherent level of risk (calculated by scoring the probability of the risk materialising multiplied by the potential level of impact if it does), the residual level of risk after all the controls and actions used to manage it are implemented, and a box indicating the range of residual risk scores indicated by the proposed appetite. In three cases, this suggested that perhaps the risks were being over-managed and the Library could be willing to accept some relaxation of the controls. However, in all cases the Board via its Audit Committee also needed assurance that management actions were being implemented and that the controls were indeed as effective as the scoring suggested they should be, in order to be confident that the residual level risk was actually within the relevant level of appetite.

6.3 After discussion, the Board approved the register of strategic risks (as listed in appendix 1 of paper BLB 19/33). However the Board concluded that it needed more assurance before accepting the proposed framework of risk appetites; members needed a better understanding of how individual risks were scored, how individual appetites related to individual risks, and whether the proposed levels of appetite were appropriate. The Board therefore directed that the framework should be reviewed again by the Audit Committee at its next meeting before being accepted.

7 TRUST FUNDS EXPENDITURE FEBRUARY TO MARCH 2019

7.1 The Board, in their capacity as trustees of the relevant funds, ratified the expenditures listed in paper BLB 19/34

8 ITEMS FOR NOTING AS INFORMATION

8.1 The Board noted the following papers provided for information:

 BLB 19/35: a summary report of significant Heritage Acquisitions in 2018/19

BLB 19/38 Page 7 of 8 BRITISH LIBRARY BOARD Minutes of 14 May 2019

 BLB 19/36: draft minutes of the Audit Committee meeting on 14 March 2019

9 ANY OTHER BUSINESS

9.1 There being no other business, the Chair closed the meeting at approximately 12.45 p.m.

Secretary July 2019

BLB 19/38 Page 8 of 8