;

LIPA Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, March 21, 2002

0920

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.))

Mr. Richard Paré (Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament)

Senator Vivienne Poy (Ontario, Lib)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. John Bryden (Ancaster--Dundas--Flamborough--Aldershot, Lib.)

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

0925

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

0930

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Hugh Finsten (Director General, Parliamentary Research Branch, Library of Parliament)

0935

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. John Bryden

Ms. Lynn Brodie (Director, Collections Division, Library of Parliament)

Mr. John Bryden

Ms. Lynn Brodie

0940

Mr. John Bryden

Ms. Lynn Brodie

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa--Vanier, Lib.)

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Jean-François Pagé)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Marcel Gagnon (Champlain, BQ)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

0945

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Denis Robert)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett )

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

0950

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

0955

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. John Bryden

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

1000

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Marcel Gagnon

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

1005

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Senator Vivienne Poy

Mr. Richard Paré

Senator Vivienne Poy

Mr. Richard Paré

Senator Vivienne Poy

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Senator Jane Marie Cordy (Nova Scotia, Lib)

1010

Mr. Richard Paré

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Mr. Richard Paré

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Mr. Richard Paré

1015

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Mr. Richard Paré

Ms. Dianne Brydon (Director, Parliamentary Public Programs, Library of Parliament)

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Ms. Dianne Brydon

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Ms. Dianne Brydon

Senator Jane Marie Cordy

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

1020

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. John Bryden

1025

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. John Bryden

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

1030

Mr. Hugh Finsten

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

Mr. Richard Paré

Mr. Mauril Bélanger

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Hugh Finsten

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Hugh Finsten

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Hugh Finsten

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

1035

Mr. Richard Paré

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett)

Mr. Richard Paré

CANADA

Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament

NUMBER 003

1st SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Thursday, March 21, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¿ (0920)

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.)): Welcome to this truly important joint committee. We now have quorum, we have a member of the opposition, and we're ready to go. We're disappointed we didn't have two John Brydens at this meeting.

We promise that whenever we meet in this building again, the address of the building will be more prominently displayed on the notice of the meeting.

It is my pleasure to begin today by introducing and welcoming this review of the Library of Parliament from the chief librarian. If you want to just begin, Monsieur Paré, we will then, I'm sure, have lots of questions.

Mr. Richard Paré (Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for inviting us to come to the committee.

We have circulated a briefing note, which was certainly passed to you by the clerk in both official languages. I won't read that briefing note. I will just make a couple of comments and then we will be pleased to answer questions.

Before I start, I would like to introduce Ms. Lynn Brodie, who is the director of collections of the library, and Mr. Hugh Finsten, who is the director general of the parliamentary research branch. Also in the room I have the director of parliamentary public programs, Madam Brydon, and the director of the public service division, Mr. Mike Graham. So if I need help in answering questions, I will take the opportunity perhaps to ask them to help me out. If there are questions that we cannot answer, we will be pleased to find the information and pass it onto the clerks to circulate it to the members of the committee after the meeting.

The last 12 months have been very hectic and busy at the library. In addition to the services to parliamentarians and the services to the public on Parliament, we celebrated the 125th anniversary of the library building in February 2001; we hosted the International Conference of Parliamentary Librarians last August; and just three weeks ago, we saw the closure of the library building for renovations.

In the briefing note I comment on the performance report of 2000-2001; on the committee assistance; on the library services; and on the parliamentary public programs. I make brief comments on the comparisons with the other parliamentary libraries and I mention what was new in the library.

I want to point out that in 2000-2001, much time and resources were attributed to the selection and evaluation of the collections to be moved from the main building of the library to the main branch at 125 Sparks. Part of the collection was also moved to the storage building in Hull. This has required an increased effort from the staff.

In What's New? I talk about LEGISINFO, which is a new electronic product that was launched by the library. It was launched officially February 18, 2002 , and since then we have already received over 10,000 hits. The first week we averaged over 1,000 hits, and since then we have 400 hits, on average, every day. So we believe it's popular, and we will continue to monitor its use and perhaps improve that product.

The last one, which I didn't mention in my note, is PARLREF, which is the new automated form to request information, research reports and books, and other library services. It is a library-secure and confidential system for managing library requests through Intraparl. Parliamentarians and their staff can initiate a request and ask for access to PARLREF by going through Intraparl and clicking on “Services”, then “Library”, and you select “PARLREF Request”.

I wanted to mention that because I forgot to indicate it in my briefing note, and it is an important management tool for the users and for the library.

[Translation]

I will stop here. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them.

[English]

Senator Vivienne Poy (Ontario, Lib): I'll just ask one question. What page were you on about the new system of getting information? Is it on this?

Mr. Richard Paré: No. This is why I added it. I mentioned that this is an addition.

[Translation]

We will now be happy to answer your questions.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Do the members have any questions yet, or do you want me to start?

Mr. John Bryden (Ancaster--Dundas--Flamborough--Aldershot, Lib.): I think you can start, Madame Chairman. I'm at a slight disadvantage in that I didn't read the briefing note beforehand. I do apologize, but we will certainly endeavour not to let the witnesses get away without having some questions asked.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I have a number of questions. In your introduction to the fantastic seminar this week, you presented your vision of what the role of the library could be for Parliament and for Canadians. Is there more we could do? What struck me was, since September 11 there's been a very acute awareness that way too much of Canadians' interpretation or knowledge of what's happening around the world comes from CNN.

When I met with Ursula Franklin and the grade ten students in my riding who had written the best essays, she was very keen that they understand Le Monde Diplomatique and The Guardian and wanted to be able to know that students, on an issues basis, could go and find the best articles from around the world.

I guess I was wondering whether you could foresee the Library of Parliament being able to take not only the Canadian journals that are in references, but do you think we could take a more international view of the articles that are out there?

¿ (0925)

Mr. Richard Paré: We already do much work in that area, because every week during the session we produce a selection of periodicals and articles that are selected from 700 titles, and the periodicals are from all over the world. So they are international. In that sense, we can have a selection of articles, and we do.

Of course, the big issue—and this is an issue for all libraries—is the bibliographical control of the Internet, the web. Nobody is able to ensure control of that. We spend much effort to do it, to select what is on the Internet and what is reliable. We know that electronic information can be changed from one day to another, so every time we select something we make a print copy—I think it's still the practice—and put it in the collection. So if they change it or remove it afterwards, we are sure we still have a copy. This is something that is very demanding.

Another big issue will be the conservation and preservation of electronic information. This is a major issue for all libraries. We don't have the right solution. Just to talk about Parliament, we know that here, for the electronic parliamentary information, we will have to find a way to ensure the conservation and the archiving of all this electronic information. This is one of the issues we are concerned with and that we are addressing. We expect with time we will be able to find a solution.

We know also that in information technology there will be new developments coming up, in terms of software to better help find the exact information we need. We will need more resources for that. We know the library will need at one point—like, probably, the House and the Senate—more resources in that area.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): As a committee, obviously we want to be helpful to you in getting the resources, if we can make a case that the library requires more resources when it comes to pre-budget or those sorts of situations.

Those of us who are pretty interested in things like parliamentary reform are very interested in the quality of research available to parliamentarians, separate from departments. Obviously, a lot of us feel the research branch of the library is our best source. Some of us think it would be better there.

The research capacity for parliamentarians is very important I think in terms of the role of Parliament versus the role of government.

Do you know where Canada stands in the world in terms of the research capacity members of Parliament would have compared to Congress, Westminster, or Australia?

¿ (0930)

Mr. Richard Paré: I thank you for the question. We have prepared, for distribution to the members of the committee, some comparisons with other main parliamentary libraries of the world. If we look at the figures, they come from the World Directory of Parliamentary Libraries and are an extract of it. We compare very well, except with the Americans, where they have far more staff than we have.

We are in the process of collecting the Library of Parliament entries. The number of staff on site is not 246 any more; it's 276. We received a request from the editor to update. I think the figure you have there was in 1998.

I also had the opportunity to visit some of the major libraries. I must say, we compare very well with all the libraries.

At the conference last summer that I was referring to, all the participants were very impressed and very pleased. There were many follow-ups asking for more information about the services we provide to our parliamentarians. In my view, it's a kind of proof that the services we provide are top-notch, we hope.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): You don't need any more money?

Mr. Richard Paré: I already mentioned information technology will need more money. I know the House and Senate will probably also need money. No, I never said that.

I want to mention that in the Speech from the Throne there was mention that we would have more resources for parliamentary research. This has materialized. We have additional staff for the research branch. It's mentioned in the brief, on page 5, when you go down to “Committee Assistance”. We now have had, I think, 14 research officers within the last year. This is certainly additional support for research to the committee, individual members, and parliamentarians

Perhaps I could ask Mr. Finsten to add more detail.

Mr. Hugh Finsten (Director General, Parliamentary Research Branch, Library of Parliament): I'm familiar with a number of the other research services in legislatures and parliaments in other countries. I certainly have contacts, especially with colleagues in Australia, Washington, and London. In terms of our resources overall, they're reasonably comparable, but one of the major differences in our service is the fact that we serve committees. Our staff serve as the ongoing staff for committees, and obviously the work of committees is key in the use of our resources.

Overall, year by year, usually about 60% of our professionals' time is spent serving committees. I think this is a very important difference and a very important area in terms of resources. Much of the important work of Parliament, of course, is done through the committee work. I think this is one area that's important to concentrate on in terms of how well staffed committees are.

As Mr. Paré just mentioned, in the Speech from the Throne we were allocated a budget to hire more staff for committees. Over the past year, we have been doing that, and we have increased our resources to committees. Certainly, in terms of comparing the research services in Ottawa with those in other countries, the important thing I would suggest is to look at committees and make sure the chairs and committee members, in both the House and the Senate, feel the resources are sufficient.

Thank you.

¿ (0935)

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): At our last meeting there was a discussion as to what the research capacity for this committee might be. Do you think it is a conflict for the Library of Parliament to supply a research officer for this committee?

Mr. Richard Paré: My answer would be that we can provide all the information you need about the library, but if there is a need for a special analysis, the committee might consider other options. We will provide all the information you need from the library, from the research, from the collections, from the public service, and the service to the public. We'll provide all the information we can.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Thanks very much.

Mr. Bryden.

Mr. John Bryden: I'd like Ms. Brodie to give us an overview of the collections and what makes the Library of Parliament collections different from the National Library's, or any other library's, for that matter.

Ms. Lynn Brodie (Director, Collections Division, Library of Parliament): The Library of Parliament's collection was Canada's original national library. We received all the books published in Canada and materials that were about Canada up until 1953, when the National Library Act was passed and we created the National Library, which, as you know, is just down the street on Wellington.

We've approached the issue quite differently than the Americans have. The Americans have their Library of Congress, which is not only their national library but also is their library for Congress. They have a separate unit within the Library of Congress called the Congressional Research Service, which is probably closer to what the Library of Parliament here represents. Of course, they draw on the Library of Congress' extremely large collection. The Library of Congress is, if not the largest library in the world, certainly the second largest.

The Library of Parliament in Ottawa, from the 1950s until the present, is really designed to be your library. It's there for senators; it's there for members of Parliament. The collections are really tailored to the needs we have perceived over the years. The collection is very strong in Canadian history, politics, administration, social affairs in Canada, current affairs of the day. It's fairly strong in business as well. It's not terribly strong in science and technology. We tend to rely on the Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information, which is in the east end in Ottawa, for more in-depth science and technology matters. But I'd say we cover most other subjects fairly well, many in depth.

Of course, we do rely on other libraries to lend us materials that are not in our collection. We're open to your requests in terms of material you're not finding in our collection.

Mr. John Bryden: Do you have special collections that I might not be aware of normally, for instance, monographs, manuscripts, any of those kinds of things that relate strictly to Parliament?

Ms. Lynn Brodie: We have a collection of rare books. It's strongest in the exploration of Canada, so it's fairly historical. There are some very unusual, rare, and valuable items in that collection. It's all about the voyages of exploration.

We also have some manuscripts in our rare book collection. They have been contributed by the authors and tend to deal with political issues. We don't necessarily seek those out. Usually the author has done a fair bit of research at the Library of Parliament and has volunteered to provide us with their manuscript.

We also have quite a large collection of British parliamentary papers, as well as American official publications. Of course, we have a very strong collection of Canadian official documents.

One of the things we propose to do is to really take a strong look at our Canadian material, particularly parliamentary, to ensure we have an appropriate preservation collection. So we'll take on somewhat of an archiving role for Parliament, not of original manuscripts but of the published material of Parliament.

We'd like to bring that back to the main library when it re-opens and house it in an appropriate environmentally controlled room. It would have the debates, the journals, the bills, and any of the official documents Parliament has produced.

¿ (0940)

Mr. John Bryden: I have one more question, and then I'll come back a little later. Can you give me a sense of what kinds of researchers are coming to the library, who may not necessarily be associated with members of Parliament? Are general academic researchers coming to look at your collections? What's the general theme of their interest?

Ms. Lynn Brodie: Our collection is open to outside researchers when copies of the material are not available elsewhere. We get a number of people referred by the National Library when they don't have copies or their copy is in poor condition and our copy is in reasonably good condition.

Most of the researchers who come in are looking at researching political information as well as historical information. Those are the two big areas.

Mr. Richard Paré: They come mostly from universities.

Mr. John Bryden: Is this an area we should be looking at opening up a little bit more? The library is a resource that isn't as available to the general public, the general researchers, and perhaps it should be.

I know there's a longstanding policy here, but perhaps you could comment on that.

Mr. Richard Paré: The standing policy is to refer people to the National Library, which also has extensive collections. When it is for a specific work, we allow them to come to the collections.

I don't think we have the resources to support all the requests coming from the public. That would be an issue if we were to open more to the public.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Mauril.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa--Vanier, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. My first question is directed to you.

Is there a policy in place whereby documents must be tabled to the committee in the two official languages of this country and of this Parliament?

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): We're just checking.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: If there is no such policy, then we need to adopt one.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): That's what I mean. Otherwise I'll take a motion.

[Translation]

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Jean-François Pagé): By law, documents must be tabled in both official languages.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I may be mistaken, but I don't believe the document distributed to members this morning is a truly bilingual document.

Mr. Richard Paré: This document wasn't distributed earlier to committee members. This is merely an excerpt from a...

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I understand, Mr. Paré, but according to our policy...

Mr. Richard Paré: We did not anticipate that the document would be distributed.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I chair a committee. When we receive documents that are not bilingual, we have them translated before we distribute them to members. That's all there is to it.

If this committee does not have a policy in place, I propose that we adopt one stipulating that before a document can be distributed to committee members, it must be available in both of Canada's official languages.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon (Champlain, BQ): This is a major problem. In any case, the official languages policy is clear. Moreover, personally, I do not speak or read enough English to be able to discuss a unilingual English document.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: That isn't a problem for me, but that's not the issue.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: I understand that, but this puts me at a considerable disadvantage.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: If the motion is out of order because notice of motion was not given, Madam Chair, either I can put the motion, or give you notice. It's as you wish.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Can we vote on this? No, we don't have quorum.

I would just like to say that there is a consensus to do this, and it will be done.

[Translation]

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: With your permission, I'd like to ask another question. Must committee members vote on this? We're talking about this country's official bilingualism policy.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: We're talking about a different policy.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: It seems almost inconceivable for us to have to vote to ensure that the policy of two official languages is upheld by the Library of Parliament committee. This makes no sense.

¿ (0945)

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I agree.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I have a second question.

This morning, I received the briefing note addressed to the joint committee. The note isn't dated. When in fact was it drafted?

Mr. Richard Paré: It was drafted a week and a half ago and presented to the clerk on Monday.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: This past Monday?

Mr. Richard Paré: That's correct. We requested it for Monday.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Were copies sent to our offices prior to today? That may have been the case, although I did not lay eyes on the briefing note.

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Denis Robert): We sent a copy to all committee members, Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: When was that?

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Denis Robert): I believe it was either on Monday or Tuesday. Occasionally, distribution problems arise between the two houses and as a result, delays occur.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: As a rule, my staff sees to it that I get any documents sent to me. However, I did not see this briefing note. If steps could be taken to ensure that members from both houses receive documents prior to the meetings, whenever possible, this would be greatly appreciated. Had the note been dated, we could have traced the source of the problem. You did say that the note was drafted a week ago. Is that correct?

Mr. Richard Paré: That's right, either a week or a week and half ago. It was turned over to the clerk on Monday. That's the deadline we were given.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I have a third question.

Are the budget estimates for the Library of Parliament included in the government estimates tabled in the House?

Mr. Richard Paré: They are included in the Blue Book.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Is the Library of Parliament's Report on Plans and Priorities also included in the document that the President of the Treasury Board will be tabling before the end of March for the benefit of all departments and agencies?

Mr. Richard Paré: I don't believe so. The Reports on Plans and Priorities are tabled to both speakers who then decide whether or not if they should be tabled in the House, as is the case with the House of Commons and Senate Reports on Plans and Priorities.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: And has this report been tabled to both speakers?

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: The committee did not get a copy. Correct?

Mr. Richard Paré: I don't know if the report was tabled in the House.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I don't recall having seen it, Madam Chair. Before we adopt the estimates, perhaps we could examine the Library of Parliament's Report on Plans and Priorities.

Mr. Richard Paré: For your information, the committee clerk asked us to supply the necessary number of copies of the Library of Parliament's Report on Plans and Priorities for the year 2000-2201 as well as the performance report for the year 2000-2001. We complied fully with the request. I would imagine these documents were distributed to committee members.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I haven't seen them either.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: What I'd like to examine is the Report on Plans and Priorities for fiscal year 2002-2003, the one we're being asked to approve.

Mr. Richard Paré: That's the request that was made of us. The Report on Plans and Priorities for 2002-2003 is now being drawn up. It should be completed by late April or early May. Then, we'd be...

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: With all due respect, Madam Chair, I suggest we not approve the estimates until we've had an opportunity to examine first-hand the Report on Plans and Priorities for 2002-2003, that is for the period in question. Wouldn't you agree with me?

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett ): Agreed.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Do I have any time remaining?

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Yes.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you. I'd just like some information, as I'm new to this committee. There is some tremendous lobbying going on to join the ranks.

What accountability framework applies to the Library of Parliament? How does that work? Who appointed you to your position, Mr. Paré, and by what process were you appointed? Do you serve for a specific period of time, or at the pleasure of the person who appointed you? To whom do you report? Where do parliamentarians, and in particular the members of the committee, fit into the picture? I'm not sure whether this is the appropriate time for this question, but I need to understand how the hierarchical, administrative and decision-making structure of the Library of Parliament works.

Mr. Richard Paré: I understand. I will try to answer that question, Madam Chair.

First of all, since the founding of the Library, the Parliamentary Librarian has been appointed by the Prime Minister, by order in council. The Librarian serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister and reports to the speakers of the Senate and House of Commons. The speakers serve as ministers responsible for the Library. This practice dates back to Confederation and has changed little over the years.

The legislation stipulates that while Parliament is in session, the two speakers are seconded in their duties by a joint committee that advises them on the Library's management. This is more or less how the Library operates.

¿ (0950)

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: If a Member wishes to raise a question in the House concerning the Library of Parliament, to whom should he direct the question?

Mr. Richard Paré: The Library provides a service to Parliament. It is not like a department that reports to...

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Members cannot put questions to the Speaker.

Mr. Richard Paré: I would think such questions should be directed to the Speaker. However, if you cannot put questions directly to him, perhaps an alternate approach should be considered. You could either speak to him personally or through the committee. I imagine the committee can also put questions to the Speaker.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: However, the House is the forum of parliamentarians. If an MP or a Senator wishes to ask a question concerning the Library of Parliament, whether in the House of Commons or in the Senate, he is not able to do so.

Mr. Richard Paré: I neglected to mention one thing. If, for some reason, Cabinet were to assume responsibility for the Library—the two speakers are not members of Cabinet—then it would be incumbent upon the Leader of the Government in the House to convey the message or request to Cabinet.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Mr. Paré, are you telling me that...?

Mr. Richard Paré: That's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying that you can put questions to him. I'm saying that if for some reason, the Library had to seek the counsel of Cabinet, this would be the correct approach to take.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: In your opinion, is it normal for Senators or MPs, who represent the Canadian public, not to be able to ask questions in public about the Library of Parliament? That may not be a fair question, but I'm asking it anyway.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): How do you get the money you need? You have to go to both Speakers to get the money you need.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): After you sign off on a budget, what is the relationship between the House of Commons administration and the Senate administration in terms of the amount that gets spent at the Library?

Mr. Richard Paré: We always report to the two Speakers. Of course, we work very closely with the two clerks and the two administrations of the House and the Senate. This is done with cooperation all the time, but we are two different entities.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Therefore, if we have questions for a political figure such as a minister, we have to put them, through this committee, to either the Speaker of the House or the Speaker of the Senate. Is that what you're telling me?

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, or individually you can...

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: If we want to ask questions in a formal public forum, where a record of the proceedings is kept...

Mr. Richard Paré: As I see it, the only option is to go through this committee which, while Parliament is in session, advises the two speakers. That's how one must proceed.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I understand.

Unfortunately, Madam Chair, I realize this isn't the right time to raise my final point. However, this is the right forum in which to raise it. I had mentioned...

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I'm just asking whether it would be possible to call the Speakers.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Of course.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Maybe that's the place to ask some of these other questions.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'll stop there, because I've already taken up a great deal of time. Thank you.

At our first meeting, I expressed the desire to discuss an issue that most certainly will prove controversial, namely the matter of an appearance before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal of Library of Parliament officials and of representatives of a private firm here in Ottawa, as well as all related matters.

I would like some direction from you, Madam Chair. Do we need to convene a special meeting to dispose of this matter, or can it be raised at any time? Because I intend to pursue this matter further. Mr. Paré is not aware of this issue, but I'd like to know if this is the right time to broach the subject and if not, when that appropriate time might be?

¿ (0955)

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I'm looking at the first report of this committee from May 30, 2001. It said:

Your Committee recommends that it be authorized to assist the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons in directing and controlling the Library of Parliament; and that it be authorized to make recommendations to the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons regarding the governance of the Library and the proper expenditure of moneys voted by Parliament for the purchase of books, maps or other articles to be deposited therein.

I guess that's what this committee is supposed to do. Maybe it is at the will of the committee as to whether your particular issue should be with the Speakers present or whatever.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: It need not be, but I've given notice to the first meeting that this is an issue that I think has to be explored. I certainly wish to explore it and I think this committee is the appropriate forum in which to do that.

If you agree with what I've just said, the only determination, Madam Chair, would be when.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Well, in terms of the--

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Perhaps a briefing note to start the ball rolling might be appropriate.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Who would you like to have prepare the briefing note?

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: That's a good question.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Would you like to prepare the briefing note, Mr. Bélanger?

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: No, because I'm a biased party to this matter.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Well, in the future work for planning this committee, obviously, it's an issue that you raised last time and it may well be worth a special meeting, most likely the next meeting. How would you like us to proceed?

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Well, someone has to prepare an exposé of the facts surrounding the matter, and at that point, various members of Parliament or senators, if they wish to pursue it, can do so.

I mean, there are tribunal decisions, for instance, that are public documents and could be made available to all members of this committee, and whatever else, that are not subject to someone crafting them but that exist already. There was a proposal call, once, twice, a number of correspondents from the Library of Parliament, from the other party to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal and so forth. So a package could be put together detailing what has happened, and at that point we can start, perhaps, asking some questions.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I guess the question would be...with the will of the committee--

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I would entrust the Library of Parliament to do that, if they wish.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): We have had a letter from Mr. Paré on September 25, a memo to all members of the committee. In terms of dealing with this issue, would there be other witnesses you would want, Mauril?

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Yes, okay. Do you want us to chat quickly about the next...? If this is going to be an issue for a special meeting, then do you want to deal with the clerks about all those witnesses? I think the committee should have a say in terms of who those witnesses would be.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Do we have a steering committee?

Mr. John Bryden: I was about to suggest we have a steering committee and not debate this in the whole committee.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Okay, fine.

Mr. John Bryden: Let's find a steering committee of three members to suggest what to do to the main committee.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Give me the deadlines for submission of the names, Madame Chair, and I'll submit them.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Okay. We will need to have a Conservative senator on the steering committee, I believe. We'll try to get the position filled, and then we'll have a meeting with the steering committee. You can put your proposals for witnesses to the steering committee, if it's okay.

Monsieur Gagnon.

[Translation]

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: For a variety of reasons that were mentioned earlier, I am somewhat at a loss as to what questions to ask. I'm really not sufficiently informed to put any interesting questions at this time.

Clearly, some changes are in order to ensure that members are better informed in advance of meetings. Perhaps certain documents were sent to my office and I did not receive them, although that's rarely the case. I'll have to check into this.

You spoke of the range of services provided by the Library. I wanted to make a comparison. In response to a question as to who was responsible for the Library, you answered that responsibility was shared by the speakers of the House of Commons and Senate. Having served in the Quebec National Assembly, I know for a fact that the National Assembly Library is also under the authority of the Speaker of the National Assembly. I'm wondering if perhaps this is the traditional approach taken by many Parliaments. However, to my recollection, members of the National Assembly were allowed to question the Speaker about the Library. Perhaps I'm mistaken, and you can tell me if that's the case.

À (1000)

Mr. Richard Paré: Having also worked at the Quebec National Assembly Library, I'm quite familiar with how things work there. You're right to say that MNAs can direct a question to the Speaker, but that question is relayed through the Secretary General because the Director the National Assembly Library reports directly to the Secretary General.

That's the case in the majority of unicameral parliaments. Ours is a bicameral parliament. That explains why the Library is accountable to both speakers.

In the British parliamentary system, I believe there are two libraries, one for the House of Lords, and one for the House of Commons. Each reports to the Secretary General. To my understanding, the difference lies in whether parliament is bicameral or unicameral.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: Regarding the services provided by the Library of Parliament, do the different libraries exchange materials? Do they provide complementary services? I assume their primary mission is to serve parliamentarians, but judging from what I read quickly in the briefing note circulated this morning, the general public can also avail itself of the Library of Parliament's services.

Mr. Richard Paré: The services we provide to the public are of an informational nature, such as guided tours and the like. We do not provide members of the public with research assistance, for example, merely with informational services. If persons are seeking more detailed information, we direct them to the National Library. We would not have sufficient resources to satisfy all public requests for research assistance or background material.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: I can give you one very specific example. A young student attending a school nearby wants some background material on the history of Parliament. Could he direct his request to the Library of Parliament?

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, because it concerns Parliament. We field all such requests from the public for information about Parliament. That's why we offer public programs through our collections and client services. Information is always available to meet requests of this nature. However, the topic must be Parliament. If the request concerns another subject, we refer the person to a college or university library, or to the municipal library.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: Can a person borrow works from the Library?

Mr. Richard Paré: Senators and MPs have borrowing privileges and they answer for their staff, who can also borrow works. However, if a member of your staff fails to return any books, generally that person is contacted and arrangements are made. However, if a problem persists, then the Library contacts the MP or the Senator about the matter.

Mr. Marcel Gagnon: That's all for now. Thank you.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): On the same point, the Library of Congress has it all together and we have them separately, so how do you feel you work together? You've seen the Library of Congress system where the public national library and the Congress research are all under one umbrella. Do you think our system works well or do you think it would better to be all under one umbrella?

À (1005)

Mr. Richard Paré: This is a question that could be debated and discussed for a long period.

I must say that I was reading recently a new report entitled LC 21: A Digital Strategy for the Library of Congress. This is for the Library of Congress in the 21st century. In that study they were indicating that the CRS, the Congressional Research Service, was by far better organized in terms of information technology, support, research, and even documentation, to provide services to the congressmen than the Library of Congress, because the Library of Congress' mandate is far wider.

Reading that report, I had the feeling that it's good that the CRS is under the Library of Congress because they can have access to the collections. But we have the same access to the National Library. We can have collections. We are just within a mile distance so we can have access to a book the same day.

CRS was far ahead of the rest of them, especially in systems. I was told recently by an American librarian that one of the difficulties is that the CRS must deal with two information system infrastructures, one for the House of Representatives and one for the Senate. This creates a lot of problems, because in addressing that, the electronic tool or instrument has to be standard for both.

Here we have only one infrastructure, so this is an advantage we have.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Do you share that with the National Library as well?

Mr. Richard Paré: The infrastructure with the National Library is mostly in the exchange of catalogues, but with the House and the Senate we have the same infrastructure.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): But do you have the same “info-structure” as the National Library? Can you access the National Library and everything in it?

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, and already items that we catalogue and index are put in the AMICUS catalogue, except for the periodical articles we have. Everything is put in their catalogue.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): We'll let Vivienne go first and then Mr. Bryden.

Senator Vivienne Poy: Thank you.

Monsieur Paré, can you clarify the relationship between the library and the Speakers of the House of Commons and Senate? Is it strictly financial, the control by the...?

I'd like that clarified, please.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, I'll respond.

No, because I've met with the two Speakers several times but they are very busy in their functions. So I have developed a good working relationship with the two clerks, and I communicate very easily with the clerks. If there's an issue, they have access to the Speaker every day. This is the best way I've found to work with the two administrations.

Of course, we have financial and human resource services at the library and they work closely with the services in the House and the Senate. They communicate, and they have almost the same service that we provide, the same type of service.

For the Speakers, it's mostly the budget and also the services. They want to know about the special services, or special products; they want to know what we are doing. So this is mainly what we do.

Senator Vivienne Poy: So you report to them?

Mr. Richard Paré: Oh, yes, I report to them. They do my assessment every year, my evaluation.

Senator Vivienne Poy: I see. So when you need more money, you go straight to them.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes.

Senator Vivienne Poy: I see. It doesn't go through the House or the Senate on a vote.

Mr. Richard Paré: No.

Senator Vivienne Poy: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): I'm sure Mr. Bryden will allow Senator Cordy to have a question. Then we'll go back to him.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy (Nova Scotia, Lib): Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bryden.

Thank you very much for appearing before us today. I would like to say that I see Senator Poy also has the books. I received them last week, and it was very good to have received them, because you need time to go through them. Having had them a week beforehand was for me very beneficial.

There are a few things I wanted to raise, just having gone through the booklets. I'm fairly new at this, but it was interesting going through the booklets and knowing the number of services the parliamentary library provides. I think a lot of them are things you instantaneously think about--the information you can receive from the Library, and so on. But things like the tours and Quorum and the Teachers' Institute are not things that necessarily come to mind as being the responsibility of the Library of Parliament.

I know you have briefings for newly elected members of the House of Commons. That's pretty easy, because they all come in at the same time, with the exception of by-elections, and it's more difficult in the case of the Senate. Do you provide anything for new senators in terms of giving them information about what the Library of Parliament does? Briefing sessions?

À (1010)

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes. You are right, senators do not come when there's an election on the other side. When a new senator is appointed, I usually send a letter explaining the major services, plus a copy of this little guide to the services of the library, and I invite them to get back to us. Then we will provide meetings and a presentation of our services.

Sometimes they are very busy. They don't answer very quickly, so we usually make a follow-up after a period of time to ask if they are interested in having more of a presentation.

By the way, I don't know if all of you have had a chance to visit the new facilities of the library here at 125 Sparks. If, after the meeting, some are interested in visiting--because we can go inside; there's a communication between this building and the library--we would be pleased to have you. Mr. Graham and I would be pleased to have you there.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: I wonder if it would be possible, too, to have something in a bullet form about what the library does, because unless you're a member of the committee, if you get two booklets like this, it's unlikely, much as you would like everybody to go through them, that they would. But if you have just a one-page bulletin of the services the Library of Parliament provides, I think--

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, we did that, and it was very popular, so we plan to do it more, for the electronic services. We would have to update now, but it was really small, explaining in a nutshell just what the electronic services of the library are.

I must say this little booklet is just short text, but we could do better in bullets, as you said. As for these two reports, there's a pattern that was established by the Treasury Board. We follow the same pattern as the House and the Senate and the Treasury Board. We have a plans and priorities and then a performance report, which is in relation to that plan. We have to follow a certain pattern for it.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: I'm not saying do away with this; I'm saying in addition to this.

As a former educator, I took great interest in the Teachers' Institute you hold. in the year 2000 it was cancelled because of the election, and that was out of your control. I notice your planning was that you would hold two sessions a year in 2001, and that didn't happen. You said it was because of draining resources and the number of applications.

I didn't know if you meant too few applications or too many; I wasn't sure.

Mr. Richard Paré: Certainly, draining the resources...because that implies the staff, but also the participation of senators and members during that week.

We also felt we would perhaps have fewer candidates and it would become more of a routine. Now it's an event, and people who come spread the knowledge they have received and exchange and share with their colleagues, and also in their schools. We felt at the time maybe this is something that could be reconsidered, but at the time--plus, with the election coming--we decided to stop.

I must say, speaking of the Teachers' Institute, we had one last fall in November, and it was a full success. Everybody was satisfied, both in comments from the participants, of course, and from those who made the presentations, and the senators and members who participated in the program.

À (1015)

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: How many applicants do you get, on average, for your institutes?

Mr. Richard Paré: I will ask Madame Brydon to give me that figure.

Ms. Dianne Brydon (Director, Parliamentary Public Programs, Library of Parliament): We have about 250 applicants a year, but some provinces don't have the same number of applicants as others. To have representation from across the country would have been difficult for two sessions. That's really one of the concerns about the number of applicants.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: How many take part in each seminar?

Ms. Dianne Brydon: There are 70 participants that are selected to come. I should also add that 10 participants from the previous session are invited back as group leaders, discussion leaders. There are also 10 presidents or representatives from their provincial social studies associations that attend, and our advisory committee. So every time, about 100 educators are here learning about Parliament and taking the message back. So 70 are selected and then others are asked to help out with the program.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: You haven't ruled out holding two a year?

Ms. Dianne Brydon: At the time, we ruled it out. In the last couple of years, we have really improved our promotion. We're using electronic promotion a lot more. At this moment, we have more applications for next year than at any time before. The deadline is April 30, which is over a month away, and we already have about 15 applications, which is unthinkable for these kinds of programs. We're hoping to increase the number of applications, and if the number rises, we may reconsider having two.

That means not only money costs but staff time to do this. When we have an institute, it means taking time away from producing other educational resources other teachers can use. So it's a bit of a balance to ensure that all educators have access to information about Parliament, and not just the 70 or 100 that come each time.

It's the best value for the money, in terms of influencing a teacher, who will immediately go back into the classroom and influence up to 300 students, if they're in high school. I think there really is an attitudinal change. So it is something we can look at.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: Thank you.

I have one final question, Chair, if I may.

I notice you have items for sale in the parliamentary boutique. Is this a profit-making venture for the library?

Mr. Richard Paré: We make some profit, depending on the sales. Last year we expected to have a very good year, but the events of September 11 resulted in fewer sales for the last few months. The profits are always reinvested in service to the public. They are in the range of $200,000 a year.

Senator Jane Marie Cordy: Thank you very much.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Just to go back to the Teachers' Institute, which part of your budget does that come out of? There's information, documentation, the research branch, public programs, and administration. So is that a public program? How is your budget divided among those four areas? Where do I find that?

Mr. Richard Paré: In the report on planning and priorities, you can find better information about that.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Does that remain relatively stable over a period of time? Does the Speech from the Throne that targeted extra for the research branch mean that will change? How do you develop your budget?

Mr. Richard Paré: We incorporated that at the time. We were asked to make a proposal a few weeks before the throne speech, so we made the proposal and it was accepted, for that purpose. The budget is divided into five functions.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Okay. Thanks very much.

Mr. Bryden.

À (1020)

Mr. John Bryden: Hello, Mr. Paré. You're familiar with the Access to Information Act.

Mr. Richard Paré: Familiar I might not be, but I know the act.

Mr. John Bryden: The Library of Parliament is not under the Access to Information Act. Do you see any reason why? Is there any way in which it would compromise your ability to provide services to have the Library of Parliament under the Access to Information Act?

Mr. Richard Paré: It's a very good question. My answer would be this. I believe the library should have the same privileges as the House and the Senate. This is a service to the House and the Senate. It may happen in a situation that you would have to go over the act.

It reminds me of a short story that happened a few years ago at the library. You may remember, at one point, there was information that was banned by an Ontario judge. I was asked by one of the media from British Columbia, if I were to receive a request by a member or a senator, would I provide the information. I indicated if it was for the purpose of legislating, I would certainly ask for perhaps a written request, but I would provide information. It turned out the information was already available through American sources. It would have been easy to get it.

It will always be the role of the members and the senators as legislators. If one needs information, we would try to find a way to provide the information.

Mr. John Bryden: The Access to Information Act wouldn't reveal confidential exchanges. The Access to Information Act kicks into the Privacy Act and protects personal information.

I should say, though, the reason for the wording of my question is I appreciate that the Library of Parliament straddles two other institutions not covered by the Access to Information Act: the House of Commons and the Senate. However, there is some debate going on that these two other institutions should be covered by the Access to Information Act, at least in terms of budgets and financial exchanges.

You were talking about your concession for selling souvenirs. It's the type of thing, in normal government departments, that would be covered under the Access to Information Act. It's in the public interest sometimes to know what type of contracts you may be entering into with the various suppliers.

I would have to come back to the point that the answer I'm looking for is an answer that comes only from the Library of Parliament, on the assumption that the other two institutions would, in one way or another, come under the Access to Information Act.

Is there any reason why, being under the Access to Information Act, you would consider it difficult to provide it or your services would be in any way compromised? You may not be able to answer the question now.

I think, Madam Chairman, I would suggest that Mr. Paré, rather than try to answer on the fly, take my question under advisement, consider it with his officials, and then report back to this committee.

The reason it's important, Madam Chairman, is there is very much a desire on the part of Parliament to reform this piece of legislation. The Library of Parliament, the Senate, and the House of Commons are all under consideration, whether they know it or not. It would be very useful for the Library of Parliament to consider this proposal and have an answer for the time when the House of Commons considers reforming the legislation. It will occur.

Mr. Richard Paré: I will certainly take the advice of the honourable member to consult my advisers and then my managers. A quick answer would be, I suppose if the House and the Senate were under the law, the library would be too. We will have to abide by the law, if the House and the Senate are under it.

Mr. John Bryden: Yes. Again, when the members of Parliament and the senators are considering the problem of reforming the Access to Information Act, we need to know the negative consequences as well as the positive consequences. The House of Commons financial reporting and the Senate financial reporting are two separate fields.

I'm concerned that the Library of Parliament has some special problems. It does have relationships with members of Parliament and senators. I don't know. Only the Library of Parliament can look at the legislation as it exists now and tell this committee, and a future committee that might be considering the Access to Information Act, whether there are negative or positive consequences. Only the Library of Parliament can answer it.

À (1025)

Mr. Richard Paré: We certainly will pursue it.

Mr. John Bryden: Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Thanks very much.

Mauril.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to come back to a subject I raised earlier, namely Plans and Priorities. I'd like to understand how we arrived at the current situation. If I'm not mistaken, all departments and agencies seeking public appropriations must submit their plans and priorities in addition to a budget. However, the Library of Parliament is under no such obligation. Perhaps there's a valid reason for this, but I'd like to know what it is. How did we arrive at this situation?

Mr. Richard Paré: I believe it has to do with the fact that the Library submits its budgetary requests to both speakers after having reviewed them with the two clerks. As a rule, the two clerks hold preliminary discussions. These are followed by a presentation and a discussion with the two speakers who either approve, reject or amend the budget. The budget is then forwarded to Treasury Board for approval. That is the procedure followed.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: It's not included in the Estimates.

Mr. Richard Paré: It is included in the Blue Book, just as expenditures are included in the Public Accounts.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Exactly. Then why isn't the same true of the Plans and Priorities?

Mr. Richard Paré: It all depends on the policy of the two speakers. They are the ones who decide whether or not to table the report. I believe some reports have been tabled in the House, while others have not. The same holds true for the Senate.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: For Plans and Priorities?

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'm not talking about reports.

Mr. Richard Paré: No, we're talking about the two...

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Regarding plans and priorities, I have difficulty understanding how parliamentarians can be asked to examine estimates, to approve them and to make recommendations, when in some instances, they can review plans and priorities, while in other cases, they cannot and these must be obtained elsewhere. That can be somewhat awkward.

Shouldn't this be rectified and steps taken to ensure that plans and priorities are included in the documents Treasury Board is supposed to table to the House? I was told that this information would be supplied before the end of March. I would imagine that we will get it this week, or shortly after we return. In the case of the other committee on which I serve, we waited until we had the plans and priorities before we reviewed the estimates.

Mr. Richard Paré: In that case, I think the decision to table the plans and priorities, as well as the performance report, in the House or in the Senate, rests with the two speakers. In the case of the Senate, sometimes these plans are tabled, while at other times, they are not.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Perhaps this question should be put to one of the speakers, Madam Chair, if ever they were to appear before this committee.

I have another question. Is there a protocol in place for assigning researchers to standing committees or are there unwritten rules that are followed? Is there some protocol whereby the steering committee, that is either the chair or the vice-chair, or better still committee members, are consulted before any final assignment decisions are made? Does one exist?

Mr. Richard Paré: To answer your question, research branch directors are constantly in communication with the committee chairs. They exchange information. Moreover, one of Mr. Finsten's main responsibilities is to communicate with the chairs and to assign resources to committees.

From a staff selection standpoint, we follow a selection process, with candidates, competitions, a selection committee and written interviews for researchers, since they must have writing skills. We make up teams of economists and lawyers. We always discuss with the committee chairs and members the assignment of research staff. The lines of communication are kept open.

Hugh voudra peut-être en dire plus à ce sujet.

À (1030)

[English]

Mr. Hugh Finsten: We do have our ongoing expertise, so our experts in that area are usually a continuing source of assistance to the committees. Certainly if there's some issue with staff, usually when there's a new chair on a committee I talk to the new chair in terms of the sorts of services that are normally provided and whether there is anything else that the chair would like us to do, that type of thing. But we have our ongoing people who are working on the committees, often because those are the people who have the experience, the background, and the expertise in those different areas.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I'm asking if you have a protocol. You do not have one.

Mr. Richard Paré: No, we follow established procedure.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I see.

With all due respect, isn't it true that committee clerks are under the authority of the Library of Parliament? Naturally, I wanted to congratulate you on your choice of clerks for this committee, Madam Chair.

Do you have any idea of the kind of resources allocated to the Library's “external mission” as compared to its “internal mission”, if I can use this terminology.

Mr. Richard Paré: Parliamentary public programs fall under the Library's external mission. Of the $26 million overall budget, $2 million are earmarked for this purpose.

According to this performance report, approximately 8% of the resources are allocated for this purpose.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: That's not a significant percentage.

I have no further questions at this time, Madam Chair. Thank you.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): On the research, I've always been impressed, in terms of parliamentary associations, with the quality of the work that's done. Is that online? Is that available to students? The work on the Canadian health care system that we took with us to the Canada-France...is that available so that any member of Parliament can look at it, or would I have to phone and ask, do you have a review of the Canadian health care system?

Mr. Hugh Finsten: These are the papers we prepare in advance for the associations when they're discussing these issues at their various international meetings. We have a publications list, and in some cases we will take some of those papers and put them on the publications list. But otherwise, as you say, someone can call us up and ask if we have some papers on this, and we would make them available.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): How many parliamentary associations do you look after?

Mr. Hugh Finsten: I think we're dealing with all of them. In some cases, we may just be preparing background documentation. In other cases, we also provide the advisers who travel with the associations. But I think we're probably assisting all of them.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): You're saying the documents that are prepared don't always go to the publications list?

Mr. Hugh Finsten: Right. They don't always go on the publications list. In fact, sometimes we forget. Our staff may forget that we should put one on our publications list because it might be of wider interest. In other cases, they've been prepared quickly, and there may be something that isn't relevant to the wider client list.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Okay.

Mr. Richard Paré: [Editor's Note: Inaudible]...demand of the meeting.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): Right.

I think because we've drizzled away in terms of our quorum, concerning your invitation to come and see 125 Sparks Street, my spies say it's pretty spectacular there, so maybe it would be advisable to have a date and a time, which we would advise the members of the committee of, if they wanted to come and have a peek. Could we organize a special viewing? Otherwise I thank you for that invitation and rain check.

We thank you very much for coming today, and we hope it is the beginning of an ongoing relationship, because as you know, this committee is committed to meeting more than once a year.

À (1035)

Mr. Richard Paré: If I may make an additional comment on the structure, because you talk about the committee, it came back to my mind that at one point, about 15 years ago, the two Speakers were the co-chairs of the committee. That was at the beginning of the 1980s--yes, I came in 1980. Of course, there was only one co-chair to chair the committee, but yes, I recall that the meeting was co-chaired by Madame Sauvé.

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): So is there a history of the Library of Parliament document?

Anyway, thanks very much.

Mr. Richard Paré: Thank you very much

The Joint Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett): We're adjourned.