Regent House officials have reacted furiously to a “carte blanche” proposal to radically change the structure of Cambridge University’s library services.

The General Board announced plans to develop the role of the University Librarian to become Director of Library Services, making the Language Centre and the Centre for Applied Research in Educational Technologies (CARET) sub-departments of the UL.

The Board also stated that “the UL should have a more pro-active role in the organisation of Faculty and Departmental libraries and liaising with College libraries”.

Encouraging “closer links” between the services, it added: “The current structure of independently run Faculty and Department Libraries does not permit the delivery of a coherent strategy, and those libraries are often keen to maintain their independence.”

The aim of the proposals is to create a single library system in Cambridge, enabling better access to books and electronic resources. However, the General Board neglected to publish its plans, prompting accusations of “managerialism” from members of Regent House, the University’s governing body.

Bob Dowling told a Topic of Concern Discussion at Senate House: “I do not understand the General Board's decision not to publish. It has inspired only suspicion. Nobody would have blinked if it had been published.”

Julian King stated that he was not concerned with the specifics of the proposals. He said: “They may be right, they may be wrong. My concern is that there is no way for a normal member of the Regent House to be able to weigh up the evidence and come to a conclusion. The University is intended to be managed by the members of the Regent House, and if we fail to have an open process then this intent will clearly fail.”

Professor Gillian Evans emphasised the importance of consultation and transparency on key decisions affecting University staff and students. She told Varsity: “Of course, it could all turn out to be a brilliant idea. But we need a chance to have an open discussion.

“If [the General Board] are allowed to ignore the Regency House this time, they will take that as carte blanche to do it again”.

The Language Centre rejected the reforming proposals in a statement issued on Thursday: “The Language Centre would like to reiterate that it is not in favour of becoming a sub-department of the UL for the main reason that there is little academic synergy between these two organizations, and neither has much to gain by association with the other.”

However, Professor Andrew Cliff, Chairman of the Advisory Committee, defended the General Board’s plans.

He said that he did “not accept the assertion that the report should have been published immediately”, explaining that the publication of all such reports was unnecessary and could “detract from the effectiveness of the review process”.

He added: “Once they have come to a considered view on the review committee’s report and on the substantive changes needed to implement the report’s proposals, the Board will report, as necessary, to the University."