1 EVIDENCE Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament NUMBER 007 1st SESSION 42nd PARLIAMENT Thursday, May 2, 2019 Le jeudi 2 mai 2019 Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament CANADA [Recorded by Electronic Apparatus] EVIDENCE May 2, 2019 Committee Edited Evidence * Table of Contents * Number 007 (Official Version) Official Report * Table of Contents * Number 007 (Official Version) Témoignages * Table des matières * Numéro 007 (Version officielle) 07 02 05 2019 2019/05/02 12:05:00 House Of Commons Comité mixte permanent de la Bibliothèque du Parlement Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament BILI Co-Chairs Mr. Gagan Sikand The Honourable Lucie Moncion 1 42 (1205) [English] The Joint Co-Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand (Mississauga—Streetsville, Lib.)): Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the seventh meeting of the Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament. The meeting will be in public. Today's meeting will be divided into two portions. The first 45 minutes will be used to hear a briefing on client feedback mechanisms. The second portion will be focused on the main estimates of 2019-20, vote 1 under the Library of Parliament. For the first portion of the meeting, I am pleased to welcome the Library of Parliament, Heather Lank and her colleagues. Welcome. Ms. Heather Lank (Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament): Thank you very much. Honourable co-chairs, senators and members of the House of Commons, it is a great pleasure to be back before you to present, along with my colleague, the assistant parliamentary librarian Catherine MacLeod. We look forward to hearing your views and advice on client feedback mechanisms. I can think of no better forum to have this discussion. Shortly after assuming my new role as Parliamentary Librarian, I signalled to my management team and to all employees that active and ongoing communication with parliamentarians and their staff is essential to going forward. [Translation] This issue was raised at one of your committee's previous meetings. Mr. Ouellette then asked how we will consult members. He also wanted to know whether those consultations would be followed by a report, as well as concrete measures. That was an excellent question, and we discussed it among ourselves afterwards. I will share with you what I learned and the ideas we propose to improve our approach. [English] We want to hear from you, your colleagues, your staff and the public who interact with us. Client feedback is a popular subject, thanks in part to social media. Those who receive bad service or faulty products have recourse to an international platform to complain immediately. This environment has sensitized private and public sector organizations to stay close to their clients and to listen carefully. While social media is not the primary driver to improve client feedback at the library, it's important as part of the larger context in which we operate. Continuous improvement of our products and services is absolutely essential. Our role is to support and serve you. We need to align what we offer to what you need. As your needs change, so must we. [Translation] The library has always been receptive to constructive feedback, be it negative or positive. Library employees are in regular and close contact with the people they support and with whom they have ongoing exchanges and communications. From experience, I know that parliamentarians are not usually reluctant to say what they think. We are happy to work in an environment where we hear your comments. It is our pleasure to respond to them. For example, our analysts work closely with committee chairs and members and they adapt their products in accordance with the instructions and comments they receive. [English] Library management has consulted with committee and association chairs about the support they receive from the library. Nevertheless, the issue is that our connections with parliamentarians may be irregular and infrequent. They leave out some of our products and services, and the feedback we receive is not consistently captured or shared in the library to inform improvement, modernization and change. [Translation] Concerning this point, you can see on the third slide a list of many tools we already use to find out what you and your staff think about our work. Members of the public, for whom we provide guided visits and educational programs, are also part of our clientele. Therefore, we also want to get their feedback. [English] If you have the same reaction to this list as I had, you may be asking if this covers all that the library delivers. How do we gather and analyze what we hear and, possibly, how do we take what we have learned and improve our work to deliver what parliamentarians want? [Translation] I would now like to take a few moments to talk to you about one of our points of contact with you and your colleagues, as that is one of my priorities. I am talking about the library ambassador program. This outreach program has existed since 2011, and it assigns a library ambassador to each new senator or MP. Those employees are trained and well-versed to brief new parliamentarians on all library services and products. Ambassadors connect parliamentarians and their staff to the appropriate library experts based on their needs and interests. They can provide customized follow-up. [English] The thing with the ambassadors program, though, is that while it is solid, it could be, and will be, even better. For example, in the past it generally operated in the year following an election and then withered away. Given the very high turnover of staff in many parliamentarians' offices, it is my view that this program should be ongoing. There is an opportunity to help you by educating your new staff about all the ways in which the library is available to support you. We have recently launched our recruitment campaign for library ambassadors. We hope that many library employees will volunteer to be part of the program. The enhanced program will allow us to have an ongoing relationship with you and your offices, which I hope will facilitate the sharing of constructive feedback. Now I would appreciate your advice. Parliamentarians have an extensive and diverse set of responsibilities and commitments, and I know that your time is precious. The question is this: How do you think we should ask you about the support we offer? Given that we are in an extremely busy year, my sense is that we should increase our channels for feedback incrementally. I would appreciate your views on the following two-step approach. We've broken it down. [Translation] We now go to the next slide. (1210) [English] What we would like to do between now and the federal election is improve the rating form for individual research requests and develop a rating form for reference requests. We'd like to expand client feedback efforts in the library branches. We would also like to implement a client feedback initiative for new tours in the Senate of Canada building and in the West Block. Perhaps we could have short interviews with participants in these tours. We would also like to develop a feedback mechanism for the library collection services. I would like to draw your attention to this last point. As you probably know, our collection is mostly used by our librarians and analysts to conduct analysis and research. While perhaps less visible than other parts of the library, the collection is an integral resource for us to support you. It is very much a part of this picture. For the 43rd Parliament, we will have an extensive orientation program. This will include briefing sessions for all parliamentarians and their staff, provided by library ambassadors. We will have a series of seminars and information sessions that respond to parliamentarians' specific needs early in the life of the new Parliament. There will be targeted research publications on current and emerging issues of interest to parliamentarians. We will have promotional activities to raise awareness of the library service offerings, whether it be in-branch reference services, news monitoring or public education programming. There will also be a refreshed library-parliamentary intranet providing access to our products and services. As mentioned, we will ensure that the ambassador program includes return visits and the solicitation of feedback. [Translation] In the future, we will continue to improve our mechanisms for obtaining client feedback. Our goal is to adopt a strategic approach containing targeted, adapted and integrated feedback mechanisms, which will enable us to assess and continuously improve your spaces, our products and our services. [English] I see this committee as playing an important role in helping us to better understand and act on the needs of parliamentarians. As always, we look forward to your views, your advice and your comments. Thank you. The Joint Co-Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Thank you for your testimony. Moving to the questions, just as a quick reminder to the members, it's on a first-come, first-served basis, and you'll have five minutes for your questions. Borys, you have the floor for five minutes. Mr. Borys Wrzesnewskyj (Etobicoke Centre, Lib.): I'm not sure that I'll require the five minutes. The library does a tremendous job when it comes to researching topics that MPs make requests on. How do you deal with topics that may require access to information requests? Do your researchers make access to information requests as part of their research? You do broad searches of all sorts of materials for us. This is information that's right here, but it's not easily accessible. How do you handle these particular types of requests? Ms. Heather Lank: I will hand over that question to Catherine MacLeod, who is the head of all of our research services. Ms. Catherine MacLeod (Assistant Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament): We use publicly available information, so there are, frankly, some limitations in terms of what we can access in order to prepare our research and analysis for you. Mr. Borys Wrzesnewskyj: Let me follow up. Publicly available information is information that, by intent, is publicly available, but there is a process. Do you not do access to information requests? Ms. Catherine MacLeod: No, we don't do access to information requests. Mr. Borys Wrzesnewskyj: Why not? Ms. Heather Lank: With the permission of the committee, we have here one of our C executives who is responsible for the analysts in a number of areas who would be available to speak to that directly, if you would allow him to join us at the table. Is that all right? Marcus Pistor is a senior director. He works with many of you, I believe, on committee. He can give you a little more detail on why we don't. (1215) The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Do we have unanimous consent for that? Some hon. members: Agreed. Mr. Marcus Pistor (Senior Director, Economics and International Affairs Division): Thank you. Part of it is the timeliness. Access to information requests take quite a bit of time. When we receive requests, we usually complete research requests within a few days or a week or so. Also, we don't submit requests on behalf of clients on a particular issue. We explain that to clients and parliamentarians and ask them to submit them directly. That's been a long-standing practice, I think. Mr. Borys Wrzesnewskyj: This is information that falls within the parameters of publicly accessible; it's just that there are a few steps there. You mentioned timeliness, and it's something that frustrates MPs often. You make requests of various forms for information as you do your research. Is there a particular reason that you wouldn't? I'm still trying to understand why. Has there been a directive that the Library of Parliament cannot make access to information requests, or is this just something that, as a policy internally, you've followed and that, perhaps, should be reviewed? Mr. Marcus Pistor: We do contact departments, agencies, private sector companies and others for information when we have a research request where we require that. We go through the parliamentary liaison people and handle that request confidentially. If a parliamentarian has a question about a particular policy topic, we want to research that thoroughly. We get quite a bit of information from government sources in that way without using the official access to information route, but when they tell us we cannot get that information without going that route, we don't normally go there. We consult with the parliamentarian. I'd have to check back to see what we've done historically on that to answer your question fully. Maybe we can take that question with us and get back to the committee, if that's okay. Mr. Borys Wrzesnewskyj: Thank you. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Mr. Eglinski. Mr. Jim Eglinski (Yellowhead, CPC): I'll give my time to Mr. Sorenson, because my colleague across asked the question that I was going to. Hon. Kevin Sorenson (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC): Thank you for being here. I'm not a regular on this committee, but I have certainly appreciated for 19 years the good work that the library has done. As a chair of a committee, I always appreciate the professional work from the Library of Parliament. How many individuals are working in the library? What's the full-time equivalence? I see that the full-time equivalence went from 330 to 365 in 2017-18. Is that the current number you have there? Ms. Heather Lank: The current number for this year, not including the guides, who are always set aside from that, would be 363 FTEs. Hon. Kevin Sorenson: Okay. In 2017-18, you had a budget, according to this, of $48 million and something. But there was $2.674 million that wasn't used. Is that correct? Ms. Heather Lank: Yes. I can pull out my budget numbers, if you like, and I can double-check that. But yes, there was an amount that was not spent. That is absolutely correct. Hon. Kevin Sorenson: So you had over two and a half million dollars not spent, but then another $1.3 million was given in the new budget. Why was that extra money given if the previous budget wasn't even met? Ms. Heather Lank: You may recall that there was a large boost to the library's budget to enhance both our capacity in terms of research as well as in terms of building our collection and sustaining the collection. As I suspect, you can understand that with a large increase it takes some time to ramp up. In order to go through the hiring process, in order to make sure we get the right people for the right positions, the money was granted—the large budget increase that you mentioned—and it simply has taken us that time to do the hiring, to put in place the bodies and the skills that are needed to support you. The lapse, if you wish, was because of the time it took to essentially act on the budget increase, and we knew that we were continuing to build capacity into the next year in order to support you and committees and associations. (1220) Hon. Kevin Sorenson: So is this the kind of thing now— The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Sorry, Mr. Sorenson. Ms. Quach. [Translation] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach (Salaberry—Suroît, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also thank the library officials. I have a few questions for them. Ms. Lank, you are saying that people's feedback has not always been documented. Do you plan to improve the comment and feedback documentation and follow-up process? If so, what will be implemented and when will it be done? Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you very much for your question. Right now, the way feedback is captured does not enable us to analyze it easily. There isn't really a more comprehensive follow-up. For instance, if you provide feedback, be it to tell us that you are very satisfied or to point out a problem, we communicate with you to determine what the nature of the problem is and to find solutions. However, we do not necessarily carry out an analysis to check whether there are, across the feedback received, more difficulties concerning a specific publication or less satisfaction with regard to a particular element. The connections are not being made. When I was talking about developing an institutional strategy in the coming year, it had to do with the implementation of ways to capture the information that would enable us to work in a more strategic manner, instead of limiting ourselves to our relationship with a single parliamentarian or a single member of staff. The approach will become more global. We plan to create a library working group that would bring together employees from each service to consider what we currently have in place and to find ways to better capture and use feedback, while respecting confidentiality when circumstances require it. However, we still want to apply the principles. That is one of my goals this year, and we will certainly come back to you in the coming months—I hope—to tell you about what we have implemented. We will have really spent some time on assessing where we are at now, and we will then be ready to move forward. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: Will you implement some sort of a system or will there be an individual in charge of feedback tracking? Ms. Heather Lank: That is exactly what we are looking into. We are analyzing the options available to us and will decide on the best way or ways to proceed. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: Okay. Perhaps you have not yet decided on this, but will an additional person be hired? Will you rather entrust that work to people from each team? Ms. Heather Lank: We still don't know. That could be done within the limitations of our current resources, but we will also potentially seek out other resources. It is still to be determined. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: As for the ambassador program, I was part of the 2011 cohort, and I don't remember the program. That is an interesting aspect, but I don't remember having been contacted by an ambassador. Perhaps my memory is failing me. How many members used those ambassadors' services in 2011? When did that program start declining? Was it after 2012? Ms. Heather Lank: I don't know the exact number, but I could come back to you with the information. In fact, I am being told that 180 members met with ambassadors in 2015. I don't know about 2011, but we could send you the data. Your point is extremely important. You may have forgotten, but we may also not have made the necessary contacts. What worries me is that, at the beginning of a new Parliament, parliamentarians often have so much to do and there are so many requests for information that we need to carefully choose the moment to establish contact with them. Otherwise, it may simply be to no avail. So that is something we want to look at closely. That is also why we want to make a follow-up visit because, in the beginning, parliamentarians don't always know what questions to ask. It is difficult for new parliamentarians to know what the needs are. However, meeting with them after three or four months of activities, once they have gained a bit more experience, may be more beneficial. We could then ask them how we can help them. We are looking into that possibility, and we would be grateful for any guidance you can give us. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: You talked about hiring staff to ensure ambassador duties. Would that be full-time staff? Have you assessed the costs associated with that? Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you for the question. No, we are not hiring anyone for that. (1225) [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): A short answer, please. [Translation] Ms. Heather Lank: Current employees volunteer to do that work in addition to their regular duties. So there are no new resources set aside for ambassador activities. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Mr. Van Kesteren. Mr. Dave Van Kesteren (Chatham-Kent—Leamington, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here again. It's nice to see you. I must commend you. You certainly do facilitate members of Parliament. I think you have gone above and beyond. You have thought of things that certainly I wouldn't have thought of. You have made a big move, and we've visited you at the new library. Have you seen a decrease in—I'm seeing a nod there—visitation? Second, is there perhaps an uptick at the facilities in the Wellington Building? Ms. Heather Lank: Anecdotally, I would say that there is likely to have been a decrease, especially in terms of the West Block branch, which is a bit hard to find. It's not a space that you would necessarily walk by. We have an obligation to reach out to you and communicate where we are, what we can offer and how you can find us. I do know from speaking to the librarians assigned to that branch that it can be quite quiet there. I don't know how many of you have had a chance to see the branch in the Senate of Canada building. It is right outside the cafeteria. It is a through space. Because one side is where people are eating their lunch, and the other side is the library branch, assessing traffic—how many people have come to the branch, and how many have gone for coffee—can be difficult. I think it lends itself physically to higher traffic, but we still need to build the knowledge of our branches, and why it's worth coming. Why does it matter? One of the key things to remember is that we have two librarians on staff in those branches at all times. You can ask questions and consult with them. There are iPads you can take out. There are documents. We're developing and implementing quite an active communication strategy. Some of you might know that we have an open house next week, where there will be special exhibits in each branch, to bring people in, because we're not getting the traffic that we need. I'll now go to our reporting and tracking issue. Right now, we don't have reliable statistics on how many people are using our branches, and that's something I think we need to look at. Your point about 180 Wellington, Mr. Van Kesteren, is a really good one. It is a spectacular space that deserves to be used enormously. Again, because people don't necessarily know it's there, it doesn't get the use we want it to have. I'm committed to increasing traffic, increasing use and making it a place you and your staff want to be. The Hill is a busy place. Sometimes, you just need a place you can go to have some quiet time for reflection. I know that's a hard thing to find time for in your lives. I would encourage you to use all of our branches for that. We are working to market those spaces for you. Mr. Dave Van Kesteren: I can testify to how spectacular your branch is on Wellington. It's right around the corner from my office. I think you alluded to this, but if we were to look historically at how members used the facilities and services that you render, is it on an incline or decline? Ms. Heather Lank: Catherine, do you want to comment on that? Ms. Catherine MacLeod: It's been on a significant incline since the election. This Parliament has attracted a much higher level of demand for our products and services. We were fortunate to make the business case for an increase to meet that demand, with focus on your priorities, which included a number of different areas, such as comparative analysis and visual elements. The service we provide in the branches' reference function is equally important. We've taken advantage of the new branches to update and modernize our approach, in order to be more in keeping with the libraries of the future. You'll have more personal, custom contact at the branches. You'll have very modern, relaxed seating. You'll have collaboration rooms and media walls so you can still track what's going on in the chambers and elsewhere, and in the media. It's been a wonderful opportunity for us to modernize our service offering to Parliament. To the Parliamentary Librarian's point, now we're out promoting. We're generating excitement around the new branches that are closer to you, generally speaking. We are looking forward this year to hearing how we can tweak and fine-tune what we're doing, to be even better. (1230) Mr. Dave Van Kesteren: Finally, is there something we could do as a committee that would help you reach those goals, so that more people can realize just what an excellent service you have for us? The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Give a short answer, please. Ms. Heather Lank: First, I would strongly encourage you to visit all five branches next week, so you know exactly what we're about, when it comes to space. If you don't have time, ask your staff to check them out. If you or they see anything that you think the library should know, something we can do better, something you really liked or something we need to follow up on, please share that with us. We want you; you're our users. We're here for you, and we need to hear from you about whether we're meeting your needs, and your staff's needs. Please take advantage of that. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Thank you. Ms. Dzerowicz. Ms. Julie Dzerowicz (Davenport, Lib.): Thank you. Thank you so much for your presentation, and for being here today and all the great work you do. I have some comments and then a couple of questions because you asked for some feedback so I would like to provide it. I'm probably one of those people who has completely forgotten that the Library of Parliament actually exists. I say that lamentably because my first job in the whole entire world was working at a library for four years, so I have very fond memories of libraries. You mentioned the ambassador linked to an MP. I do think that's important. To be honest, I think that should be on our speed-dial. That should be on our phone—Library of Parliament, your ambassador's name is Yvonne—and there's a phone number there, and that carries with us through our term. I think my having that one person would really be helpful so that even if there's a changeover in the office, I constantly know that this resource is there. I agree with you in terms of regular contacts with MP offices because there are always changeovers in staffing. I think whether it's a twice-a-year check, at the beginning of the year, back in September, or whatever, I think it's a good idea. I also agree that there needs to be automatic feedback every time there's a research report—something that pops up. I would say it would be sent directly to the MP as well as to the staff member who actually asks for it. I think you might get some different aspects in terms of feedback. I think you mentioned that you do seminars. Do you do courses in any way? For some reason I thought that some of my staff had been involved in something at the Library of Parliament. Are there only seminars about what the library offers, or do you offer anything else on other topics? Ms. Catherine MacLeod: We have a seminar program. We have some information sessions on the use of the library and some of the services, but we have often issues that are of interest from a public policy perspective, everything from copyright to mental health. We bring experts in, and it's really usually a lively discussion for about two hours. By all means, we're very open to any topics along those lines that would interest you or your staff. Ms. Julie Dzerowicz: Okay. I have a general question about access to certain types of information. Would the library have access to all bills that were passed 10 or 20 years ago as well as anything that was discussed in the House of Commons around that as well? Okay. What type of feedback do you get right now, and what feedback do you feel you need? (1235) Ms. Heather Lank: You could go back to the list, but I think where we get the most feedback would be in terms of committee support. That's where I think we have the best grasp of the quality of our services and what your needs are, partly because the contact is face to face, and it's frequent, and we have followed up at the management level as well. That's an area where I think we have a very good understanding of what your needs are, and where you're happy or unhappy. Where I think it's weaker is in terms of some of the research that is done and the reference requests where the feedback is quite ad hoc. We haven't updated any of our tools for a very long time. It's not captured in a way that's terribly useful, and we need to very much enhance that side of our understanding because really that part we're not very good about. Even in terms of knowing whether the collection is what you're looking for, that's something where often you're working indirectly with the collection because we're supporting your staff, or we're supporting committees, and it's working its way up to you. But there may be blind spots for us that we're not aware of. We've tried to identify areas where we believe we can improve, and those are just some of them. Then in the course of this year we will come back with a comprehensive strategy. I think for the next Parliament you're going to see what you mentioned, something where, when you get a research request or a reference question, you can answer whether or not you were satisfied. We recognize that you don't have a lot of time and you're not going to want to fill out a questionnaire every time you ask us for work and we give you something. One of the questions we want to ask is how we can be efficient and effective in getting feedback from you. We will have new tools in place by the time you come back after the next election. Ms. Julie Dzerowicz: Thank you. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): The floor is yours, Mr. Iacono. [Translation] Mr. Angelo Iacono (Alfred-Pellan, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also thank the witnesses for joining us this afternoon. I apologize for being late; I was at another committee meeting. I have heard that a lot of progress has been made. When a move takes place, it is normal for there to be some obstacles. I can say that you have done very well. We are here, and everything is going smoothly. Like my colleague, I love libraries. I even met my wife in a library. That is the quietest and most restful place ever. I unfortunately do not have a lot of opportunities to visit libraries or to go sit in them, as our work always makes us run around a lot. I have heard that there will be a lot of changes when we come back. What exactly are you looking for and what specific data do you want to gather? What are you trying to improve? You mentioned that there were challenges, but what are they? Is it a matter of helping members and their office staff improve their knowledge of the services the library provides? In that respect, I may make a small suggestion. In every government building, there is a SourcePlus centre. Two or three people work there, or sometimes a single person. I have made extensive use of the services provided in those centres, and their employees help us resolve all sorts of issues. I think you could use those centres to get closer to members and their office staff. Someone from the library could present the services you provide there and help people understand better what exactly they consist of. I know that you are doing certain things, and I'm not saying that you are not doing enough—you are probably doing a lot of that stuff already. I often tell new employees to pay you a visit. I think that kind of bridge-building would be desirable, as it would enable you not only to spark the interest of members and their office employees, but also to learn about their needs. This may seem quite trivial, but you could, for instance, implement an activity—which would become something of a best practice—on the way to use Excel software. (1240) We may need guidance on creating tables in Excel, and you probably know more about that computer work than we do. By providing that type of a service, you would attract people to you, and they would learn other things at the same time. That would also enable you to establish more extensive contact with employees working in members' offices. When staff members from our riding come to the Hill, they could attend a course on best practices in terms of new products the library provides. Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you very much for your comments. The point you are making is about the importance of the library engaging in proactive communication. I think there have been periods when we were more reluctant to ensure a certain visibility. In my opinion, it is extremely important for the library to be visible and for members and senators to know where we are and to be familiar with the services we provide. It is also important to maintain that personalized relationship between the library and your offices, so that we can serve you better. I know that there are members sitting on committees who do not know, for example, that the analysts at the end of the table are the ones who drafted the documents they read and use in committee. The connection is not always made. It is my responsibility to ensure that you are well aware of the existence of our services and our staff, and of the fact that we are there to serve you. We really need to find better ways to communicate with you and your staff to be able to help you and to meet your expectations. We will take into account all your ideas and suggestions to build those extremely important relationships. Mr. Angelo Iacono: Are the new— [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Unfortunately, that's the end of your time. [Translation] Mr. Angelo Iacono: Okay. Thank you. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): We're going to momentarily suspend, allowing the second panel to join us. (1240) (1245) The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Welcome. We're continuing with the seventh meeting of the Standing Joint Committee on the Library of Parliament. The second portion of the meeting will focus on the main estimates for 2019-20, vote 1 under the Library of Parliament. In addition to this, joining Ms. Lank are her colleagues Sonia Bebbington, JoAnne St-Gelais and Manon Robert. The floor is yours, Ms. Lank. Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you very much. Before I delve into this year's main estimates, I think it might be helpful if I highlighted a few of the key accomplishments of the library in 2019-20, since they provide the context for this year's budget and our priorities. In 2018-19, as you know, we successfully opened retrofitted branches at 125 Sparks Street and in the Confederation Building, as well as opening the two new branches that I spoke to you about a few minutes ago. We now have five branches in the parliamentary precinct to serve you. We ceased operation at the main library and moved our employees, as well as the collection, for the period that Centre Block will be closed. Most of the collection was relocated to our retrofitted building at 45 Sacré-Coeur in Gatineau, and the rest was distributed to our five branches. The collection remains available to you. You can request office delivery, but you can visit our branches, and where applicable, you can request digital delivery. The work in our facility in Gatineau also includes a significant upgrade of the rare book room, increased shelving capacity and upgrades to the workspaces so that collections can be serviced and maintained throughout the closure. We implemented a new service model, which Catherine spoke about just a few minutes ago, with more face-to-face contact, collaborative spaces and an opportunity to use media walls and newer technologies. [Translation] The closing of Centre Block had a significant impact on visitor services. Tours were offered in Centre Block until January 25 and, a week later, new guided tours began in the Senate of Canada Building and West Block. Visitors were able to use the new electronic ticketing system, which was successfully launched in the fall of 2018, and the library undertook an extensive promotional campaign to raise public awareness regarding the new tours. A new, modernized boutique with expanded offerings also opened in the new Visitor Welcome Centre. Last year, the library significantly increased access to digital resources, including historical parliamentary publications, high-calibre research databases and statistical datasets. We also expanded our visualization capacity for research and reference products. [English] We continued to strengthen our research support to parliamentarians by building our capacity to provide cutting-edge analysis and products. We provide GBA+ analysis and detailed infographics, as well as increased support for your international work. We are also making good progress on our cutting-edge project with the National Film Board to give virtual access to Centre Block during the years of rehabilitation. Technical development of the virtual reality environment has been completed, and the immersive VR, online 2D experiences and national travelling classroom program are on track to launch this fall. With the committee's permission, I would like to table a status update on this project, which I hope you will find interesting. Another important accomplishment last year was to enhance the library's presence on the Parliament of Canada's website, including new content with improved usability, especially for mobile devices. These are just a few of the highlights of last year. (1250) [Translation] Each year, the library provides the speakers with an account of the library's accomplishments against a set of strategic priorities that are established by the speakers in consultation with the parliamentary librarian. While there is no legislative requirement to produce an annual report, the library has consistently published such reports, because we believe it is important to be transparent, to account for our resources and to report our results. For the last two years, the library has produced its annual report in a digital format first. A printable format is also available. We have received praise from parliamentarians that our annual reports are well designed, accessible in presentation and clear in content. Earlier this year, the 2017-2018 annual report was shared with the members of this committee. We received some very positive feedback, and if there are others who have feedback to share, it would certainly be most welcome, as we are beginning to work on the 2018-2019 annual report. We are committed to producing a document that is of interest to you and meets your needs. [English] The library is now in the process of fine-tuning our priorities for 2019-20. They have just been submitted this week to the Speakers for approval. They are subject to change, but I'm pleased to give you a sense of some of our key priorities for this year. They include, as you now know, enhancing outreach to parliamentarians and staff, ensuring operational efficiency and effectiveness of the new and renovated branches, enhancing public education programs to maximize visitor experience, and meeting demands of the 43rd Parliament including developing the orientation program I spoke about. We want to enhance our internal and external communication. We need to respond to the new requirements of legislative changes adopted by Parliament as they apply to the library. We will be promoting a respectful work environment with a focus on mental health and values and ethics, and finally we will be promoting diversity and accessibility at the library. [Translation] Of course, these priorities must be delivered in the context of our day-to-day operations. I will not repeat our mandate; I think that you are already very familiar with it. [English] Of course, if you have any questions about the work that we do, today or anytime, we are very happy to answer them. To deliver on our day-to-day operations and priorities in 2019-20, the library requested funding through the main estimates in the amount of $49,952,016. Roughly $34 million is for salaries, $5 million is for the employee benefit plan and $10 million is for goods and services. These estimates represent an increase of $1,866,011 or 3.9% over the 2018-19 main estimates funding levels. The basis for the increase in the main estimates can be captured in four broad categories: ongoing program funding, one-time program funding, economic increases and an increase in the rate of the statutory employee benefit plan. I will present each of these in turn. [Translation] To ensure excellent service to parliamentarians and Canadians, the library has identified several areas where an ongoing increase in program funding is required to cover additional operating costs. The library requested $1,306,860 to relieve operational pressures resulting from the closure of Centre Block and the opening of new branches. The increase in program funding consists of two amounts, the first being $843,646 that will enable the library to add eight more front-line library resources to serve senators and members now that we have five branches. The second allocation in this area is $463,214 to increase the number of parliamentary guide hours to support tours in two locations: the Senate of Canada Building and West Block. (1255) [English] In terms of one-time program funding, the virtual reality experience of Parliament program is seeking a net increase of $119,105 for 2019-20. This amount includes salary, operating funds and statutory benefits. Another budget pressure relates to economic increases that were granted to two groups in 2018-19. The library negotiated economic increases with one of its bargaining units and the Treasury Board Secretariat released the economic increases for their executive cadre. In order to remain competitive, the library sought and received approval from the Speakers to mirror these Treasury Board increases. These two developments have resulted in an amount of $407,461 being allocated in the main estimates for economic increases for Library of Parliament employees. Finally, the library's main estimates also include an increase in statutory expenditures in the amount of $32,585. This amount relates to the increase in the rate of the statutory employee benefit plan, which is a non-discretionary, statutory expense that, in accordance with Treasury Board benefit rates, has been adjusted from 15.2% to 15.3% of salaries, effective April 1, 2019. Approval of the library's main estimates submission was given by Speaker Furey and Speaker Regan in December 2018. It is this submission that is before you today. My colleagues and I look forward to your questions. [Translation] Thank you very much. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Ms. Quach. [Translation] Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you once again, Ms. Lank, for this additional information on the budget. My first question is about your latest annual report. My attention was drawn by the section on a healthy workplace. It says that there are improvements to be made in terms of respect and courtesy, but also in terms of clear leadership and expectations. I am wondering what has happened. Why is that aspect being focused on? Is there a lack of effectiveness in that regard? Does that affect workplace health? This is pretty important. How will that aspect be improved? Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you for your very good question. This observation falls within an extremely positive context. We conducted a survey of our employees regarding the health of their workplace. The results were very good, but our management team wants to take things even further for our organization. The results show that our workplace is very healthy. However, we felt that there was room for improvement in areas such as our internal communications and our way of promoting the leadership vision. We identified areas for further development as part of this drive for improvement, not because issues arose. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: That's fine. There's also a $1 million reduction with respect to information services for parliamentarians. What's your explanation for this reduction for the 2019-20 fiscal year? Ms. Heather Lank: I'll ask Ms. Robert, our director of finance, to explain the amount that's causing confusion. Ms. Manon Robert (Director, Finance, Materiel Management and Corporate Planning, Library of Parliament): Thank you for your question. The $1 million represents purchases and sales associated with the boutique. The boutique is a cost-neutral environment for which our budgets still set aside $1 million. The boutique has just had a very good year, despite the move. We expect to end the 2018-19 fiscal year with revenues of nearly $1 million. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: Okay. Is the boutique part of the information services? (1300) Ms. Manon Robert: Yes. As you may know, our budget is divided into two categories. These categories are internal services and services to parliamentarians. Anything not included in the library's internal corporate services, such as human resources, information technology services and finance, is found in the programs category. This category includes information services. Ms. Anne Minh-Thu Quach: Okay. Ms. Lank, you talked about the need to improve the visualization capacity for research products. Before you arrived, we discussed the whole issue of the digitization of records and documents. Is that what you're referring to? What are your plans? [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): A short answer, please. [Translation] Ms. Heather Lank: We're talking about improving our capacity to provide infographics in committee reports. I would like to ask Ms. MacLeod to elaborate on this project. Ms. Catherine MacLeod: Thank you. We're talking about integrating images, maps and factual analyses into committee reports. Parliamentarians have told us that they want to see more images in the reports. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Thank you. Next is Mr. Lauzon. The floor is yours. Mr. Guy Lauzon (Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, CPC): Thank you very much. It's nice to see you again, Ms. Lank. I think it was about a year ago that we endorsed your appointment. Have you been there about a year now? Ms. Heather Lank: Nine months. Mr. Guy Lauzon: Nine months, okay. Hopefully, you'll be there in a year. Ms. Heather Lank: I sure hope so. Mr. Guy Lauzon: You'll make the year. One of the things that I twigged to is that you are asking for an increase of 3.9% in your overall budget. Can you give me an executive summary as to why you need 3.9%? Ms. Heather Lank: Absolutely. There are two key drivers. The first one, and perhaps the one that would be most obvious, is the closure of the Centre Block, and the opening of the new branches. By no longer having that one branch, and tours only in the Centre Block, we need to increase our capacity. Now we have tours in the Senate of Canada building and in the West Block. A guide used to be able to run a tour through the whole building, showing both the Senate and the House of Commons, but we now need more personnel simply to manage the fact that we have tours in two locations. That's one significant pressure. We also have more branches, and because of what Madam MacLeod was speaking about, in terms of wanting to modernize our service offering, and have more face-to-face contact, it's really important to us that those branches are not empty or just have books. We want our staff there to serve you in those branches. We have five branches now, and need to increase the number of front-line library staff to meet your needs. That's the second kind of front-line pressure. In terms of the other element, the virtual reality experience project, which I think is of great interest to all of us, is an extraordinarily complex project. We have worked very effectively, I believe, with the National Film Board. The project was conceived with an extraordinary vision, but as we have worked through the actual complexity of what we are building, it has proven to be a bit more expensive than we originally thought it would be. That's where you see about $119,000 added this year. It's part of the complexity of meeting those needs. Finally, I'm sure you can appreciate that when economic increases are granted to employees, be it through negotiated settlements or implementing the government-wide increases to executives, we simply don't have the capacity to absorb that money internally. Salaries do grow bit by bit, and the need for us to be able to fund this growth is obvious. Those are really the only pressures we have included here. Mr. Guy Lauzon: You mentioned, I believe, 363 full-time equivalents. Ms. Heather Lank: Yes. Mr. Guy Lauzon: In the upcoming year, in the period covered by these estimates, what will their increase in salary be, percentage-wise? Ms. Heather Lank: I wish I knew the outcome of those negotiations, Mr. Lauzon. Those discussions are ongoing at the bargaining table or at arbitration. (1305) Mr. Guy Lauzon: Is this 3.9% going to cover that? Ms. Heather Lank: No. We have only built in what we know, because we simply cannot anticipate what will be negotiated or decided by an arbitrator, and for us to put it into the main estimates would suggest an outcome that we simply are not— Mr. Guy Lauzon: You're going to be back looking for more money when that contract is settled. Ms. Heather Lank: I can't promise you that I won't be, but I should mention that last year there were times when we were able to absorb the increase internally. We will come back as needed, but it will depend on the numbers. I really don't know how that will pan out in the long run. Mr. Guy Lauzon: In a past life, I was in a management position in the public service. Out of curiosity, what would your sick-time rate be? Ms. Heather Lank: I do not have the answer to that off the top of my head, in terms of the number of sick days, on average. What kind of information are you interested in, Mr. Lauzon? Mr. Guy Lauzon: I remember going into an office where we had a 14% sick-leave rate. When I went to seek more money from my seniors, they said, “Well, maybe you should do something about your sick rate.” All we did was mention to the employees that when they don't come to work, their colleagues have to pick up the slack. Surprisingly, our sick rate went down to 6%. Through economy, could you not come up with 3.9% on the size of that budget? That doesn't seem like a terrible amount of.... Have you looked at that? The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Unfortunately, Mr. Lauzon— Ms. Heather Lank: For sure, we have looked at it. We have looked very hard at it. Indeed, when I came into this role, I was very clear with my management team that any increases to our budget required a robust business case, after we looked to see if we had the capacity internally. We have not put in anything beyond what we feel must be there, unless we cut service. Ultimately, that's what it comes down to. In order to provide librarians to you in the branches, and to serve through the various avenues we spoke about this morning, we need these resources. If we had to cut— The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): I'm sorry to cut you off, Ms. Lank— Ms. Heather Lank: We don't want to cut service to you, is what it comes down to. On the sick leave— The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Perhaps you can answer the rest of that in another question. Ms. Heather Lank: Can I just make one comment about sick leave— The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Yes. Ms. Heather Lank: —because I think it's really important. In my experience— The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Keep it short, please. Ms. Heather Lank: —on the Hill, our bigger problem is presenteeism, rather than sick leave. I cannot tell you the level of dedication of the library staff to be there for you when you are here, no matter how awful they are feeling. Sometimes, we have to tell them, “You must stay home,” because they want to be here for you. While I don't have the numbers, and I'm happy to come back to you with that, I think the level of dedication of the library staff is extraordinary, and I'm extremely proud of the fact that they make themselves available to you at every opportunity. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Thank you, Ms. Lank. We certainly do appreciate your services, and those who serve us at the library. Mr. Iacono, you have the floor for five minutes. [Translation] Mr. Angelo Iacono: Thank you, Mr. Chair. In 2017-18, the research and analysis services and business support services had lower expenditures than planned. Why were the actual expenditures for these services lower than expected? Ms. Heather Lank: You missed the previous question. I think that you'll recall, Mr. Iacono, the substantial increase in the library's budget, which amounted to $5 million. This increase included $4 million for research services and $1 million for collections. Change takes time, because the necessary networks must be established. Even though we had more money to invest in research, we weren't yet able to launch staffing processes and hire people to serve you. We needed time. So it's simply a gap between the budget and the staffing processes. (1310) Mr. Angelo Iacono: Okay. You said that you must now serve two separate spaces, whereas before everything was under one roof. I know that the House of Commons has a boutique. Does the Senate have a boutique? Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you for your question, Mr. Iacono. Unfortunately, it doesn't have a boutique. There has been a great deal of discussion on this issue. However, the space available in the new Senate building is very limited, and we haven't been able to find a place to set up a boutique. Mr. Angelo Iacono: My next questions will focus on the current performance of the boutique in relation to the previous performance. Have product sales increased? Have you noticed a difference? Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you for your question, Mr. Iacono. We're still in transition. The fact that we haven't yet gone through a summer tourist season in the West Block and Senate building explains the significant decrease in the number of tourists since the move. Sales have decreased slightly, but we now hope for an increase in these figures as summer approaches. However, we need to work on communications and marketing. In addition, people aren't yet familiar with the new building and are wondering where to find the boutique and what they can purchase there. We're considering providing online access to the boutique so that people can shop from their office or iPads. We also have plans for the Senate building, where we could open a pop-up boutique, despite the lack of space. We're looking for ways to increase our sales. Mr. Angelo Iacono: One way or another, the performance of your store helps you cover your expenses. Ms. Heather Lank: Yes. Mr. Angelo Iacono: Could you capitalize a little more on the boutique? You have a much larger space than before. Could you change the items that you sell? Not long ago, I went into the boutique. To be honest, I didn't see many items that appealed to me. Perhaps it would be necessary to change the products. You could make this change by involving the members of Parliament. In their provinces, there may be items that are labelled “Canada” and that are made by someone from the province. That way, tourists would have the opportunity to purchase items from different parts of Canada. We would need to receive an email from you, which we could then forward on your behalf. In the email, you would introduce the West Block and the items in the boutique. We all have constituents who visit Ottawa. Sometimes, we don't know that they're visiting or we hear about their visit after the fact. We could make posters and advertisements for you to inform people about what they can expect to find. For example, if I travel to Italy, I'll do a Google search. [English] What is the hot tourist item to buy at this point? It's exactly the same thing I'm trying to bring here. [Translation] Why not sell products that are very popular with tourists who come from around the world? It would be necessary to have items that are much more popular than the current items. That way, you would perform better. First, the boutique would pay for itself, and second, the revenues from the boutique would help you pay for other things. I think that the boutique's revenues should be maximized. It would also be useful to consider setting up a boutique at the Senate to cater to visitors. All visitors must be given the opportunity to purchase a souvenir. (1315) [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Mr. Iacono, that's the end of your time. [Translation] Mr. Angelo Iacono: I want to finish my point. Some people will visit the West Block and then visit the Senate. They figure that they'll purchase souvenirs at the Senate. However, they then realize that the Senate doesn't have a boutique. Ms. Heather Lank: Yes. That's very important and useful. Thank you. Mr. Angelo Iacono: I would also like to receive a report on your summer sales. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Unfortunately, that's the end of your time. [Translation] Mr. Angelo Iacono: You said that the sales were affected by tourism. The report would show us the result linked to summer tourism. Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you. [English] The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Mr. Eglinski, the floor is yours, for five minutes. Mr. Jim Eglinski: I'll come back to the 3.9% increase over the 2018-19 main estimates. Is that 3.9% what you were referring to in the latter half of page 5, and page 6, of your report? The library requested $1.3 million, and an increase in program funding of $843,000. The second allocation is $463,000. Is that where the $3.9 million is coming in? Ms. Heather Lank: Yes, that's correct. Mr. Jim Eglinski: My math might be a little off, but I seem to be shy about a million dollars here somewhere. My quick figures for 3.9% of $49 million was about $3 million, and I figure we've got about $2 million here. I'm wondering where the other $1 million is that I'm missing in my quick calculations. Ms. Heather Lank: Is it possible, Mr. Eglinski, that it's the $1 million for the boutique that you didn't take into account? You'll see a line there, in the mains, with respect to one— Mr. Jim Eglinski: Oh, I see. Ms. Heather Lank: That's exactly $1 million, so I'm thinking that might be the source of the issue. Mr. Jim Eglinski: That's probably where my calculations have fallen off with yours. I thank you for clearing that up, because I was looking at those figures and putting everything together really quickly. Ms. Heather Lank: Thank you for asking for the clarification. That's important. Mr. Jim Eglinski: I'm not bad at math, but sometimes I might miss something. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Moving on, Ms. Dzerowicz, you have the floor. Ms. Julie Dzerowicz: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a thought, so I want to pass it along. This is more around feedback. As part of the orientation and training for MPs, I think helping us with the right questions to ask.... Sometimes, how well we ask the question determines the type of information we get. I've asked for certain reports, and then think, “Oh, that's not what I wanted.” It sounds obvious, but what you're asking for in a question on a report is really important. Making that part of the orientation for an MP is important, because you do a lot of work. Is it wasted if it's not exactly what we were looking for? I think as part of your last presentation, you mentioned that there has been some effort to increase mental health support within your department. I wanted to ask why you felt that was needed. What is it that led to that program or support being introduced? Ms. Heather Lank: You would be as aware as we are of the increased focus on the importance of mental health generally in Canadian society, and a greater openness to having discussions to try to get rid of the stigma associated with it. It's something I'm deeply committed to, and have been for a number of years. I have taken mental health first aid and encouraged my employees to do so. I've seen the value of employee assistance programs, within my own life and those of people I work with. For me, it's part of making the library the kind of place everybody would want to work, and making sure that people feel supported and know that the institution values mental health as much as we value physical health. The Hill is a spectacular place to work. It is, of course, one with enormous pressures, as well. We can serve you best if we are healthy in all ways, physically and mentally. It's linked to our survey of the well-being of our staff. They clearly value mental health. I think it's really important for us as an organization to invest in it. It comes from that broader Canadian and worldwide conversation we are a part of. It is fitting into that broader context, and out of the deep sense of how important this commitment is throughout the organization. (1320) Ms. Julie Dzerowicz: I wanted to be a little more specific. It sounds like it's come from some staff feedback that there was a need for it, in addition to its importance from a national perspective. Ms. Heather Lank: Within our staff, we have certainly spoken about it. In fact, we spoke about it at my very first meeting with all staff, when I became Parliamentary Librarian. After my opening remarks, the first question had to do with mental health. A staff member asked about my feelings about it, and I shared some experience and knowledge. It's about creating a safe space. I think one of the things I'm responsible for is making sure that everybody who works for the library feel supported and safe. It's all part of that. It links into our overall commitment to being an employer of choice. The better the people who work for us, the better the support you're going to get. Ms. Julie Dzerowicz: I think I've mentioned this at a previous meeting—I'd love to go to the boutique and buy everything. I'm a very big believer that there are a lot of opportunities with the boutique. We could get Canadian designers, on an annual basis, or every couple of years, to do some guest designing, whether it's cups or paraphernalia. I think that would be a really nice addition. It could add to revenues that would help to support more sophisticated library operations. I wanted to hear a bit more about the plans for the boutique, moving forward, in whatever time you have left. Ms. Heather Lank: In speaking to Anny Spooner, who is in charge of our boutique, I think she sees this new space as an enormous opportunity. As Monsieur Iacono said, we can do more with that. May I suggest just an idea? If any of the members of this committee would like to have a tour of the boutique with our staff so that you can have a dialogue with those who will be making those kinds of decisions or giving the advice on that.... First of all, it has to be revenue neutral; it pays for itself. Also, we want to make sure that it's a place where you want to shop and where Canadians and visitors from around the world want to shop. I know that Anny has brought in many new things and has grown the diversity of products, but there's more to be done. I love your idea of having a Canadian designer or multiple Canadian designers contributing. We're certainly open to looking at that. Perhaps one thing we could look at, with the committee staff, is setting something up for you so that you can talk to Anny and her team and say, “Here are some ideas.” The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Yes, I was actually going to save that for the end, but if there is any interest, you can either express that now or get in touch with the clerks afterwards as well. Ms. Heather Lank: Great. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): If there aren't any other questions, we will move to the vote, pursuant to the order of reference by the Senate and the order of reference of the House of Commons, and in accordance with the Standing Order 81(4) of the House of Commons, on the main estimates 2019-20. Shall the vote carry? LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$44,707,087 (Vote 1 agreed to) The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): Shall I report the vote on the main estimates to the House? Some hon. members: Agreed. The Joint Chair (Mr. Gagan Sikand): As long as there's no other business, that concludes our committee. We're adjourned.