Let me make a declaration right at the start. I love libraries and always have. They’re one of the most fundamental and important places in our cities, towns and villages, not least because they represent a simple truth. We should all try to learn.

Libraries represent knowledge, curiosity, culture and an innate human desire to know more. For centuries, they have been the institutions that have set apart great civilisations from the rest, cherishing intelligence, spreading information. Democracy is based on the idea of an informed population so that’s why democracies have always had well-stocked libraries, and dictatorships haven’t. 

Of course, it’s not all about borrowing treatises and learning about political theory, but it is about stimulating the brain. Ask any teacher and they’ll tell you the most important thing for a child is to read. “Get them to read anything,” as we were told recently, “a newspaper, a novel, a text book, a telephone directory.” 

And nowhere, of course, embodies that requirement more than your local library. It’s not just that the place will be full of books, but  it will be staffed by people who love them, who will recommend titles, chat about authors and, most importantly, inspire children. These hold activities across the year to engender a love of reading into youngsters – and it works. For the sake of a poster, a badge or a pencil, kids will get through their first long book, and discover a passion that will hopefully last a lifetime. You get the idea. I’m big on libraries. And now I’m worried they’re under threat, here on our doorstep. 

Hertfordshire County Council has a programme called “Inspiring Libraries” being enacted. It seeks to turn your library into a “vibrant community asset” (ours, manifestly, already is that) and an “enhanced gateway to reading, information and wellbeing” (which appears to be management speak for, er, what a library does already). 

“We want them to attract more visitors and be open for longer hours”, says the document, “and we also expect them to cost the taxpayer less.” DING DING. There’s the important bit. £2.5m is being cut from the county council’s budget as part of £147m of cost savings over the next four years. And libraries will get clobbered. 

So we’re going to get a three-tier system. Libraries in big towns, such as Watford, will be classified as Tier 1, and, by the sound of it, be protected from much change. Then there’s Tier 2, including Radlett, Bushey, Croxley Green and Rickmansworth. These will provide “core library services” with “additional services” tailored to meet “local demand”. These expressions, of course, could mean absolutely anything – it’s exactly the sort of woolly language consultants love, because it can be manipulated. 

But Tier 2 libraries do introduce into our lexicon the concept of “volunteer supervised self-service”. Which means getting amateurs in, presumably getting rid of some professional librarians.

As for Tier 3, including Chorleywood, Kings Langley and Bovingdon, you get “self-service access to library services” and – wait for it – staff assistance via a “virtual librarian”, which appears to be the chance to Skype someone in another library. However, generously, the council says “we will invite local communities to add value to these self-service facilities through volunteer support and...” well there’s more, but it’s too miserable to carry on copying it. 

Oh. Hold on. There is one more bit, and it’s about mobile libraries. Well, forget them. They’re going to be binned on cost basis. Instead, there’s going to be a new service that delivers books and recordings to the homes of customers who can’t get to their local library. It’s hard for me to know which irritates me more. The fact our precious library services are under attack, or the sheer weasel-worded management speak of this document. Not only does it have the distinct undertone everything has already been decided but it treats us like simpletons. 

Of course we don’t want volunteers running the library; we want professionals. Nobody with half a brain cell thinks it’s some kind of improvement to sack librarians and replace them with well-meaning amateurs. If it has to happen, then we’ll have to cope – but this sort of insincere double-speak is the equivalent of sending a letter of condolence then drawing a smiley face on the envelope. 
There are other proposals here, including improving the buildings and developing technology. There’s also “volunteering opportunities” (yup...), increased income generation (including charging for the spectacularly vague “additional services”) and “more effective promotion”, which seems to be the brainwave of using social media. Well done to the internet guru who came up with that. 

And yes, I admit self-interest. I visit Chorleywood library regularly and it’s on the list to be reduced to Tier 3. It would deprive my community of a fantastically precious resource that has improved the lives of everyone in my family. I don’t ask for a lot from my county council, and I don’t expect perfection. But there are a few fundamental things we need. Rubbish collected, roads repaired, vulnerable people cared for, decent schools, special educational needs. And libraries. 

Is it too late to change minds, to re-allocate resources? Hopefully not. The county council has distributed questionnaires asking for  views on how libraries are divided into tiers and also the idea of axing the mobile library service. I’d heartily recommend you fill one in. They’re available, like so many other things, from those helpful people at your local library. 

I’m writing this sitting on the floor of a Virgin Trains service, heading up to Manchester.

Two hours ago I had the rather fascinating experience of interviewing the Duke of York at Buckingham Palace. Now I’m sitting outside a chemical toilet, because there are no seats. It’s one thing standing on the Tube, or on a rush-hour commuter train, but why should anyone be left without a seat for a two-hour train journey? Shouldn’t a company like Virgin stop selling tickets when the train is full? Answers on a postcard.