The last couple of days have seen a number of articles about the potential threat to the finances of the British Library as a result of the current Government spending review. This article sums things up pretty well. I should declare interests. Apart from being a great fan of the BL I also sit on one its advisory committees and I love the Eduardo Paolozzi sculpture of Isaac Newton in its piazza.

Fortunately the Library has a very strong and vociferous bunch of supporters who will be arguing for its budget for reasons of culture, scholarship, history etc - for instance here. It does seem crazy that the while the 'creative economy' is being heralded as one of Britain's fastest growing and world beating industries that we should be contemplating cheese-paring at its heart.
I would like to add one thought only and it's to do with geography. In November 2007 the Channel Tunnel rail link will open at St Pancras and will deposit 50 million passengers a year literally a stone's throw from the British Library. The library will be not only a magnet for British citizens but for the whole of Western Europe. Apart from the clear cultural benefits to Britain, the possibilities for generating revenue for the economy are enormous. Don't let's miss the chance by administering pointless cuts now.
Australians have a particularly direct way of describing politicians with whom they disagree about such things. Former Federal Treasurer and then Prime Minister, Paul Keating, was a world-class insulter and here are his references to opponents in 1984 alone: harlots, sleazebags, frauds, cheats, blackguards, pigs, mugs. clowns, criminals, stupid foul-mouth grub, corporate crook, rustbucket, scumbag, rip-off merchants, constitutional vandals, perfumed gigolos, gutless spiv, stunned mullets, barnyard bullies, pieces of criminal garbage - courtesy Sydney Morning Herald and Matthew Engel.
From one great national and international insitution to another, Google Corporation. The spat over copyright and the Google library program continues and the lawyers are getting even richer. Meanwhile the story is beginning to make it into the broader press. Here's an excellent article from the New Yorker. The sentence below sent a shiver up my spine. The sooner the publishing industry can develop ways of working with Google on the basis of copyright licences and the sooner Google can accept that copyright is a genuine asset which cannot be appropriated without permission the better for all parties.
'The law is supposed to resolve issues like these—between self-interested parties with reasonable claims and legitimate arguments. But the rules of copyright are so ambiguous, and the courts so slow, that the judicial system serves largely to implement the law of the jungle.'