Letter to the Speakers

Back to the Report

 

 

 

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT  DE LA BIBLIOTHÈQUE DU PARLEMENT

 

House of Commons - Chambre des communes

The Senate / Le Sénat

OTTAWA, CANADA K1A 0A6

 

 

 

June 16, 2003

 

 

 

The Honourable Dan Hays

Speaker of the Senate

 

The Honourable Peter Milliken

Speaker of the House of Commons

 

 

Dear Sirs:

 

The Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament is appointed in accordance with the Rules of the Senate and Standing Orders of the House of Commons.  Among its functions, the Joint Committee assists the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons, in whom is vested the direction and control of the Library of Parliament (“the Library”).

 

The Joint Committee has held a series of meetings in recent months, and we felt that it was important to inform you about the issues that have been discussed.  In particular, we would like to highlight major points of interest and concern arising from those meetings, and identify plans for the future work of the Committee.

 

Since March 27, 2003, the Committee has met five times.  At the first meeting on March 27, 2003, the Committee’s Joint Chairs were elected and the Committee discussed some areas of future business for the coming months.  At the second meeting, on April 10, 2003, the Committee heard testimony from the Parliamentary Librarian and senior management from the Library of Parliament on the Library’s Main Estimates 2003-2004.  On May 1, 2003, the Committee received a briefing from officials from Public Works and Government Services Canada and the Library on the progress of the renovations of the main Library building.  Committee members received a guided tour of the renovations site following the meeting.  The fourth meeting on May 8, 2003, was a briefing on the role of “e-consultation” in the democratic process presented by Stephen Coleman, an expert in e-democracy issues, from the Oxford Internet Institute.  At the same meeting, members of the Committee received a briefing from Library management and staff on the role of the Library in an e-consultation pilot project conducted for a House of Commons Sub-committee study in 2002-2003.  At its meeting on May 15, 2003, the Committee heard testimony from members of the firm Compas on the results of its 2003 consultations with Parliamentarians and their staff on their information and research needs and on their perceptions of the Library’s role and image.

 

The Committee heard positive testimony over the course of its meetings about the function and importance of the Library.  Members were pleased to see that the renovations of the main Library building are on time and on budget to date, and that delivery of services has not been affected by the renovations.  The survey of Parliamentarians and their staff conducted by Compas confirmed the impressions of members of the Committee that the Library is an extremely important source of timely, professional and non-partisan information and analysis for Parliamentarians. 

 

Testimony heard during the appearance of Stephen Coleman before the Committee emphasized the increasing importance of the Internet in democracies around the world, and how the interactive quality of the Internet might help to reengage citizens’ interest in democratic processes and political institutions.  Dr. Coleman described how the Internet has been used successfully in the United Kingdom to consult with citizens on several bills before Parliament.  Testimony from Library staff on the e-consultation pilot project employed by the Sub-committee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities during its 2002-2003 study on the Canada Pension Plan Disability suggested that the e-consultation component was an important addition to the study (see the Appendix for an explanation of how e-consultation was integrated into the Sub-Committee’s study).  Library staff pointed out the significant level of additional human resources required to set-up and monitor the information and consultation components of the Sub-committee’s web site, and to analyze the results from the e-consultation.  The Committee believes that Parliament needs to develop the expertise to run e-consultations in-house since committee support staff has both the subject expertise, knowledge of parliamentary procedure and “corporate memory” that outside consultants may not possess.  The Committee notes that the Library’s committee support function may be considerably broadened if other parliamentary committees decide to use e-consultation in their studies.

 

 

Some areas of concern about the Library of Parliament’s operations surfaced during the Committee’s meetings, which we identify below:

 

§         After studying the Library’s Main Estimates 2003-2004, some members of the Committee expressed concerns about whether the Library has a long-term vision for the Library’s growth and operations.

 

§         Other members questioned whether the Library has sufficient resources to keep pace with technological change, and to provide training and professional development opportunities for its staff. 

 

§         The issue of the adequacy of the Library’s financial resources came up again during the meeting with officials from Compas on the survey of Parliamentarians.  Some Parliamentarians and their staff recommended that the Library should receive more resources, and that the Library should not offer new services or innovations if it does not have the level of resources to maintain the quality of the “traditional” services it offers. 

 

§         Other members voiced concerns with respect to the impartiality of some of the outside consultants hired by parliamentary committees, and asked whether these consultants should be sub-contracted through the Library rather than be hired independently by committees. 

 

§         After seeing the results of the Compas survey, some members felt that the Library should be doing more to advertise the services it provides since many of its services are under-used by Parliamentarians and their staff.

 

 

In the fall, the Committee plans to investigate the concerns expressed about the Library’s budget and make recommendations on this matter.  It will also study the issue of e-consultation in more detail and the potential for expanding it to studies by other committees of the House and Senate.  The Committee’s study will include an examination of the evaluation report on how the e-consultation pilot project worked, and an assessment of the financial and human resources needed to offer e-consultation during studies by parliamentary committees.  The Committee will make recommendations as to the role of the Library in helping to provide e-consultation for committees, and on the level of additional financial resources required by the Library to deliver this service.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Carolyn Bennett, M.P		The Honourable Yves Morin
Joint Chair of the Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament		Joint Chair of the Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament

 

 

cc.:       Board of Internal Economy

            Senate Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

 

---

 

Appendix

 

Integrating E-consultation into Committee Studies 

 

E-consultation is one in a series of complementary steps in an integrated approach to a committee study.  The Sub-committee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities (“Sub-committee”) included an e-consultation component in its 2002-2003 study on the Canada Pension Plan Disability program.  The main steps taken by the Sub-committee in integrating e-consultation into its study are outlined below.

 

 

1. The Sub-committee identified the issues to be studied and its researchers conducted initial research on the subject.
2. The Sub-committee’s researchers wrote background papers on the issue.
3. Federal departments related to the issue briefed the Sub-committee.
4. A Roundtable with all stakeholders involved was held – the larger subject was split up into smaller issues, and specific areas of concern were identified.
5. An information-based web site was launched; it provided an overview of the study and information on the particular areas to be examined
6. An e-consultation site for the study was developed based on the results of the Sub-committee’s research on the issue.  The e-consultation site had three main elements for soliciting the input of Canadians on the CPP Disability program:  (1) Issue poll:  participants answered questions on major issues facing the program; (2) Share your story: participants shared their experiences on the program; and (3) Present your solution: participants provided suggestions on how the CPP Disability program could be improved.
7. Traditional hearings were held in concert with the e-consultation.  Witnesses and questions were selected based on the Sub-committee’s research and on some results from the e-consultation.
8. Analysis of e-consultation data.
9. Report on e-consultation.
10. Roundtable with some of the e-consultation participants.  The participants provided comments to the Sub-committee after seeing the recommendations presented during the hearings and e-consultation.
11. The Sub-committee’s report integrated the information from all components of the study.