LIPA Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DE LA BIBLIOTHÈQUE DU PARLEMENT

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, March 31, 1998

• 1533

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi (Bramalea—Gore—Malton, Lib.): We will start the meeting.

Members, first of all, I would like to thank you and congratulate you because this is our first meeting of 1998.

We are going to visit the library for half an hour before the meeting so the members have an opportunity— if they have any questions for the librarian over there. After that we'll come back to the meeting. Mr. Paré and the director have the estimates for this year, and they will answer our questions.

Also, before that, I would like to have the opportunity for us to take a group photo, which some people can use in their householder in the future.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt, Lib.): Before we discuss that, Mr. Chairman, did I distinctly hear you say that we're talking about doing a visit to the library? That is not on the memorandum we received, and some of us might have alternative meetings to attend to after 4 p.m.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Well, if you want to go, it's up to you.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: But, Mr. Chairman, the memorandum that went out says 3.30 p.m. to 4 p.m. All of a sudden, you have another agenda.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Do you have any problem?

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: Yes, I do.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Do you have anything?

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): If it's more convenient for the member and for those on a tight schedule, we could proceed with the meeting immediately and conduct our visit later.

• 1535

[English]

Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Chairman, the note I received at my office earlier today says:

The meeting will consist of a brief tour of the Library of Parliament from 3:30 until 4:00 p.m. followed by the appearance of Mr. Richard Paré, Parliamentary Librarian.

So this doesn't look like a surprise field trip. We did know about it ahead of time. I think Jim—

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: May I also point out to you the March 24 memorandum?

Miss Deborah Grey: Okay, but I got this one on March 25.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: Well, there is a March 24 one, but whatever—

Miss Deborah Grey: Maybe we should just go to the library.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Does everybody agree? Yes? Before we proceed, though, I want a group photo with all the members.

• 1537

• 1608

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): We have witnesses here from the parliamentary library, and I will ask them to introduce themselves.

Mr. Hugh Finsten (Director General, Parliamentary Research Branch, Library of Parliament): I'm Hugh Finsten, director general of the parliamentary research branch of the Library of Parliament.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): And François?

Mr. François LeMay (Director General, Information and Documentation Branch, Library of Parliament): I'm François LeMay, the director general of the information documentation branch.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi: Thank you.

Now I will ask Mr. Paré to brief us on the main estimates for 1998-99 for the parliamentary library.

Mr. Richard Paré (Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for the short visit to the library. I want to invite you to come again. If you want to visit us, just give us a call. We are always pleased to receive you.

Mr. Chairman, if I may, I will just make a few general comments and then I will ask my two colleagues, Mr. Finsten and Mr. LeMay, to expand a little on their own services.

When preparing my notes for this meeting, I couldn't resist making a parallel between the Library of Parliament of 15 years ago and the library of today.

In 1983 there was only one computer in the library. Many staff were using word processors at that time. Today the majority of our staff work with desktop computers. This committee room, the reading room, was at that time the real reading room of Parliament, where Senators, MPs, and their staff came to consult magazines and newspapers, including a complete collection of regional weekly newspapers and a current collection of works of fiction. Today we no longer collect fiction and regional weekly newspapers. Our book and document selections focus more on Canadian political and parliamentary affairs, government, economics, law and legislation, parliamentary history and procedure, political science, international relations, social services, and Canadian history.

• 1610

[Translation]

The catalogue: 15 years ago, we were still using the card catalogue. We had a micro-catalogue (catalogue on micro-fiche) covering previous years and we were developing the on-line catalogue.

Today, the on-line catalogue which includes more than 300,000 titles is available at your fingertips from your office on the Intranet.

Moreover, at the same time you have access to Articles and to the Library's weekly Acquisitions List.

[English]

I was very pleased to send a memo to all members and senators a few weeks ago entitled “ParlCat”, which gives the information about this access to the on-line catalogue, the articles, and also the recent acquisition list.

In 1983 responses to information and documentation requests reached 42,000. Today the benchmark is in the range of 100,000 responses. If we add the requests we have received from the public, the total was over 152,000 in 1996-97. The parliamentary research branch produced 1,300 research works in 1983. Today they have more than doubled that figure, their benchmark being between 2,800 and 3,000 research works annually.

One thing for sure that hasn't changed since then is we continue to serve all senators and members of the House of Commons and their staff, and we respond to all of their requests with the best of our staff's abilities and knowledge.

At this point in time, Mr. Chairman, perhaps I would ask Mr. Finsten to make comments about his parliamentary research services.

[Translation]

Mr. Hugh Finsten: Thank you, Mr. Paré. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I will begin by giving you a brief overview of the Parliamentary Research Branch and describe for you the special services which the branch offers to parliamentarians. I will then focus on the main problem that the branch faces.

[English]

As you know, a basic rule of Parliament is its oversight function of the executive branch. As parliamentarians you review legislation and policies emanating from the executive and you review the operations and budgets of government departments. In addition, you propose modified or alternative measures to those presented by the executive. You draft legislation in the form of private members' bills. You develop your own policy proposals and make independent judgments and arguments in support of or contrary to the various issues that come before Parliament.

This work is done in Parliament, in committee, in caucus, in your constituencies, and in meetings with interest groups, lobbyists, and others. You are responsible for carrying out these oversight functions, yet the resources of the executive branch, as you well know, basically swamp those of the legislature.

Moreover, policy and legislation have become incredibly complex. As legislatures you are expected to understand and comment on everything that comes before you, whether it is tax legislation, environmental policy, the operations of the banking system or the Constitution. All of this requires information and the ability to synthesize and analyse it. Information sources, as you know, are vast, especially when you consider what is available on the Internet. Not only is there a lot of information, but it can be very complex and it is often not clear just how reliable it is. So basically, as you know, you need resources to find your way through this information maze.

• 1615

With that in mind, in 1965 Parliament established research services within the library. The advantage of a centralized service of professionals serving Parliament in an objective, non-partisan manner is that all members, all committees, have access to this pool of lawyers, economists, scientists, sociologists, government policy specialists, and others. It's a very cost-effective approach rather than each member, each committee, each parliamentary association having their own staff of such experts.

This leads me into the services that are provided by the parliamentary research branch.

[Translation]

The branch has a total of 55 research assistants working in four divisions: Economics, Law and Government, Political and Social Affairs, and Science and Technology. Our staff is highly qualified, with employees holding at least a master's decree.

We handle individual requests from parliamentarians and are the main source of professionals who staff parliamentary committees. We provide assistance to parliamentary associations and to delegations. Our publications program contains 1,200 studies prepared by our professionals and we design workshops for members and their staff.

Here are just a few of the services provided to parliamentarians. We prepare studies on policies and on statistical and economic analyses. We draft opinions, explanation, and professional interpretations and do comparative analyses of Canadian and foreign laws.

[English]

In terms of committees, currently there are approximately 30 standing committees in the two Houses. Usually by the end of the year, when you add in all the subcommittees of the standing committees and the special committees and of course the joint committees, we end up staffing approximately 55 committees. It's not a question of one of our staff; usually it's an interdisciplinary team. For example, on the environment committee we have a lawyer and a scientist. On the health committee in the House of Commons we have an economist, a health policy person, and at the present time also a lawyer. On the Senate banking committee we have an economist and a lawyer. We are also able to bring in outside specialists to supplement our own staff when necessary, that's provided we can charge back to that committee for the cost of the salary.

We also have our publications. We have something like 1,200 publications in our various lists. They include our current issue reviews, which are designed to be reasonably concise and updated. Very popular are our legislative summaries, which provide background information, analysis, and commentary on government bills. We also have more comprehensive backgrounders and short mini-reviews. We distribute about 15,000 to 20,000 copies of these publications each year to our clients on request.

In terms of associations, again we provide background material for the various associations, and from time to time we provide technical staff to travel with associations to their various meetings.

Finally, there are our seminars; we have various types. One is a public policy seminar that we present from time to time for members and staff. We also have a very popular series among staff providing practical information-type seminars on ideas on how to assist them in their various work roles.

I want to mention the one important issue of the branch. I mentioned that we're staffing almost every committee in the two Houses and by the end of the year that ends up being in total about 55 or 57 committees when you take into account the subcommittees and the special committees. That represents about 55% of the total work time of our professional staff. In addition to that, our staff also respond to the requests of any member in the House or the Senate. We also assist those seven parliamentary association delegations. We prepare the publications, and it's basically the same 55 officers we have doing all of these things.

• 1620

So, as I say, it's 55 officers, 55 committees, and the committees only represent half of our work.

In the last few years, as you're well aware, there have been cutbacks in terms of budgets for Parliament and also for the library. One of the results of the cutbacks for Parliament is they have cut back on some of the contracting of outside staff, and we're expected to take over this. In terms of increased committee work, that has meant that we are now fully staffing the foreign affairs and defence committees in the House, and in the Senate there's the finance and the foreign affairs committees that we weren't doing before— they were staffed by outside consultants. So our staff hasn't increased and we're now staffing those four committees. In terms of associations, two very active associations, Canada-Europe and Canada-U.S., are now being staffed by us as well.

So basically what happens is we take on those new responsibilities, and we should be taking on those responsibilities because with the combination of committee work, working for individual members, and working for associations, the work is all interrelated. What you learn in committee work and the sort of work you can do in committees is relevant to responding to requests for individual members and to working on the associations.

It's also relevant to something that's in the House and something that goes into the Senate. When the bill moves from the House to the Senate or vice versa, our staff are able to follow it and provide that particular information, advice, and expertise they have.

As I say, I think it's very important that we do those things, but unfortunately it does put a lot of extra pressure on our professional staff and it does stretch the resources through all those areas. As a result, the resources on the committees are stretched and the work for individual members and the work for the associations is stretched.

One other aspect of that is overtime. It's a situation in terms of library budget that we address every year, and that's very relevant. For example, last year 5,310 hours of compensatory time was worked, and most of that was because of committee work. Basically, when committees travel, when they're preparing a report, our staff put in a lot of overtime. It's the the same with associations, when associations are travelling.

To finish up, I feel the concept of a centralized service continues to be a very cost-effective and appropriate approach because it permits the best use of the resources of the professionals, rather than each member, each committee, each association having their separate staff of lawyers, economists, scientists. They're centralized, and they can be used where they are needed and used in other areas as need be.

I'm somewhat concerned that perhaps the quality of this very valuable service to Parliament is eroding somewhat.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Thank you.

Mr. LeMay.

Mr. François LeMay: Thank you, Mr. Co-Chairman and members of the committee.

What I would like to do in the next few minutes is provide you with a general overview of the services provided by the information and documentation branch. I hope through this presentation you will have a better understanding of how we try to provide you with services that assist you in the work and in your work as parliamentarians.

The mandate of the branch is the timely provision of excellent non-partisan information and reference services and pertinent collections to parliamentarians and authorized clients. The branch also provides special programs and information services on Parliament to the public.

To assist parliamentarians in their various duties, the branch offers on request information and documentation services. When Parliament is sitting, hundreds of inquiries are handled every day by librarians and support staff using the most modern methods.

The information and documentation branch's services are very different from reference services traditionally offered by the libraries. Rather than directing the client to the documentation, the staff provides the answers. Responses are given in the shortest possible time, often the same day and frequently immediately. I should point out that all requests are handled with complete confidentiality.

• 1625

Services are provided from the main library, which we visited a few minutes ago, and branch libraries in the Confederation, Wellington, and La Promenade buildings. We also maintain collections in the Senate reading room.

[Translation]

With respect to collections, the Library of Parliament continues to be Parliament's first resort for books, periodicals and government documents. Its holdings make up one of Canada's leading specialized collections.

The Library supplements its holdings in traditional formats with newer media such as CD-ROMs, audio and video cassettes, on- line databases, multimedia products and access to electronic networks.

[English]

The library collections emphasize areas Mr. Paré highlighted previously. It should be noted that not only do we have the collections in our library, but we also have the responsibility of ordering collections at the request of senators for material they need in their own areas.

We have a number of publications, so in addition to the reference and collections development services we regularly provide other services, such as Quorum, which is a publication I think all of you are familiar with. It is a selection of newspaper clippings from English and French daily newspapers across Canada, which is published daily and distributed to all parliamentarians during a session and bi-weekly during recess.

Mr. Paré mentioned “Articles”, which is the list produced from over 750 English and French periodicals. It is published weekly. It lists articles of which you can get full text. It seems to be a very popular item, since we get hundreds of requests for articles on a weekly basis.

We also devote substantial energy and resources to ensuring that parliamentarians have access to information via electronic services such as Parlcat ParlCD and ParlInfo.

[Translation]

Let me briefly explain these acronyms to you. PARLCAT stands for the Library of Parliament's on-line catalogue which can be used to locate books, periodicals, and other articles in our collection. As mentioned earlier, parliamentarians can now access our catalogue holdings through the parliamentary Intranet. Previously, access was through a modem. Parliamentarians now have access to PARLCAT via the Intraparl network. They can access our database and consult works of interest to them.

PARLCD is the Library's CD-ROM network of bibliographic and full-text databases. This collection of newspapers, dictionaries, statutes and periodical indexes can be consulted easily from parliamentarians' Hill offices.

The branch also provides access to a wide variety of commercial and public on-line databases which it uses extensively in answering requests for information. In addition, branch staff regularly use the Internet for locating answers to questions.

You may be interested to know that the branch organizes Internet training sessions and is responsible for making the Library's publications available through the internal network.

[English]

A recent addition to our Parl services is the automated interactive touch-screen kiosk for visitors who would like information on the Parliament of Canada or biographical data on current or former parliamentarians. It is located in the visitors' welcome centre. It has short biographical profiles of senators and members of Parliament from the 27th Parliament to the 36th Parliament, and it provides the photographs of senators and MPs for the 36th Parliament. Ultimately, the library would like to offer ParlInfo on the Internet.

• 1630

I would like to say a few words about renovations. The library is included among the many conservation and renovation projects covered in the multi-year plan for the parliamentary precinct. In fact, the library is scheduled to close its doors in the fall of 1999 for a period of about three years. During this time, services will be offered from the old Bank of Nova Scotia building on Sparks Street next to La Promenade building. There will also be a branch in the centre block while the renovations are under way. It will be a very small branch compared to the services you now have.

Now I have a few words on the major impact on the library and our services that took place a couple of years ago with the transfer of the Public Information Office from the House of Commons. It took place in 1995. The parliamentary guides, the Public Information Office, and the souvenir boutique were all transferred to the information and documentation branch. The education and visitors' services were transferred some time later.

With this transfer we took on new initiatives. One that is widely known by parliamentarians is the Teachers' Institute on Canadian Parliamentary Democracy. The second Teachers' Institute on Canadian Parliamentary Democracy was held November 4 to 8, 1997. It was launched in 1996 by the Speaker of the House with the support of the Speaker of the Senate.

The institute is a professional development activity for teachers from all across Canada. They spend four days of intensive work in Ottawa learning the ins and outs of Parliament and reinforcing the importance of social studies as a discipline. By the way, the third institute is scheduled for November 3 to 7, 1998.

[Translation]

The Guide Program is another activity which was transferred to our branch. Guided tours are offered all year long, but the busiest time of the year is from Victoria Day to Labor Day when the parliamentary guides welcome hundreds of thousands of visitors to the Centre and East Blocks. The guides help the visitors gain a better understanding and appreciation of the history and activities of our country's federal legislature. Until this year, the recruiting process was funded by the House of Commons.

If the budget cuts continue, the interview process will have to change. Interviews will have to be held exclusively in the National Capital Region and we will no longer be able to pay travel expenses for students as we used to, which would make the program much less representative of Canada.

The program offers a reservation service for groups wishing to tour the Parliament Buildings and for individuals who would like access to the public galleries in the House of Commons.

As mentioned during previous meetings of the committee, the Boutique, a source of revenue for the Library of Parliament, sells Canadian-made souvenirs representative of the Parliament of Canada.

To give visitors a better impression and to offer more representative products, efforts have been made over the past year to enhance the Boutique's appearance and develop and/or buy products that represent Parliament. Only Canadian-made products are sold. It is important to underline that the profits ($203,000) are redistributed to finance projects for visitors or the Canadian public.

[English]

One final program we run is the Parliament Hill Players. In the centre block we have a theatre enabling visitors to have an unstructured encounter with figures from Canada's past. The cost of last summer's pilot projects were shared by the Senate, the House, and the library. In collaboration with the NCC, tours of the east block also involve encounters with historical figures who stroll around the hill and chat with visitors.

• 1635

It should be noted that the information and documentation branch is recognized internationally as a very highly qualified and specialized library service. Other countries have called upon the library to provide expertise. The Assemblée internationale des parlementaires de langue française has also made use of some of our expertise to assist in evaluating programs. I should probably mention that some of the countries that have benefited from some of our expertise include Russia, Jordan, Cuba, Haiti, and a number of others.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the information and documentation branch works for parliamentarians. Moreover, through its information services about Parliament and its special programs for the general public, it contributes to a better understanding of the Parliament of Canada.

Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): Thank you, Mr. LeMay.

Are there any questions from the members?

Mr. Richard Paré: Mr. Chairman, could you just give me one moment to summarize the challenges and issues we are facing?

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): Go ahead.

Mr. Richard Paré: Thank you.

One of the challenges we now have started many years ago, and it will continue for many years: to provide information and documentation from printed sources and electronic sources. I think all libraries are facing that challenge and we will continue to face it in the future.

Mr. LeMay mentioned another challenge that we will have to face, and that will be the forthcoming period of renovations to the building. Maintaining the same level of service to senators, members of the House, and their staffs in those circumstances is a challenge that we have to face within the next few years.

The third one is the last one I want to mention. Because of the renovation program on the hill, another challenge we are facing is to ensure the best possible services to visitors during the renovation of the centre block, stretching through the library, the House of Commons and the Senate.

The main issue we are facing now— and Mr. Finsten has underlined this —is the lack of enough resources to adequately assist all the committees, subcommittees, parliamentary associations and delegations that request our assistance. As he indicated, our staff is very stretched in terms of providing service, and the fear we have is that this will erode the quality of the service we provide to parliamentarians.

The last thing I want to mention is what we usually call the greying of our professional staff. Over the next few years, an increasing number of professional researchers and librarians will reach retirement age, which is the maximum for their pension without penalty. This will have to be addressed. We still have some time to address it now, but preliminary figures indicate that the problem will be acute between 2005 and 2011.

As you know, the joint committee has the mandate to advise the two Speakers on the direction of the library, but because we are a joint service for you and your colleagues, we look at you more as a kind of board of directors. We are therefore seeking your advice to help us better serve you and your colleagues of the Senate and the House.

Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): There is a question from Mr. Karygiannis.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: I notice with interest the comments you made, especially on the overtime. I understand you have 5,300-odd overtime hours from employees. I was just wondering if you wouldn't be able to better serve us by having those overtime funds available for extra staff. I know this may not be the case if somebody is an expert, of course: if you have a lawyer, you don't want to hire two lawyers. But I'm sure that if this was to be massaged and looked at— The 5,300 hours roughly equates to two and a half extra folks employed full-time. If you were to look at that in monetary terms, when you work overtime you usually get time and a half and sometimes double time. So 5,300 hours times one and a half, which translates to two and a half people per annum, is probably around another four or five people that you can hire full-time over the year.

• 1640

Wouldn't that be a better solution, versus stretching people and having them work overtime? Usually when you work overtime you're grouchy and you don't perform to your best capability.

Mr. Hugh Finsten: Most of the overtime is worked by staff who are on the committees, when they're travelling on weekends, when they're working in the evenings. When they're preparing a committee report they're often working in the evenings and working on weekends. So for most of that overtime, it really has to be those people working on the committee. You couldn't get any substitutes for them.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): Miss Grey.

Miss Deborah Grey: Thanks very much again for your presentation. I just want to say on the record again that in the years I've been here I've been very impressed with the speed and accuracy with which the library responds.

When you're addressing the overtime hours, etc., it seems to me that everything is of crisis proportion around here. You know, it just has to be done now; it's a matter of life and death. I'm not so sure about the crisis nature of everything. It puts you into a very awkward spot when you are the people to whom we say, “We need this right now”, and then you have to turn around and get a committee group together or whatever and say you need this by midnight, or whatever.

I'm not sure. Maybe we as parliamentarians need to rethink some of those things. Maybe it can wait until tomorrow morning, when most people are feeling normal after a night's sleep. That might be something we could look at in terms of direction. I know when we all get so caught up with the excitement of everything, it just has to be done, and I'm not sure about the wisdom of that, or the cost.

I'd like to ask you specifically, how does our parliamentary library stack up in comparison to some of the other libraries at legislatures around the world and some of the provincial legislatures here in terms of efficiency of services and cost-effectiveness? Have any studies been done on that? What's your sense of how we operate?

Mr. Richard Paré: If I compare us to our colleagues from the legislatures, I don't know if I should say it, but I think we are the best. I don't know if they would like to hear that. We are the biggest, of course, and we also serve two institutions, the Senate and the House. The legislatures serve only their legislatures. But Toronto has a major library with very significant, important research services, and Quebec also has a research service and library services.

Miss Deborah Grey: What about other countries?

Mr. Richard Paré: Well, of course we cannot compare with the United States. We know the story about the elephant and the mouse.

My figures are that they have over 700 people working for the Congressional Research Service. We are 240 to 300 altogether, counting the part-time, so they are really the biggest one.

The other important ones are in London, in Westminster, and they have the same model we have. Perhaps they have a bit less staff than we have. They have two libraries; they have one for the Senate. Also, if I compare with Canberra, I would say it's the same type of model we have here.

We have a one-day seminar coming up on Thursday, which I think you are aware of. We have been able to bring librarians from Westminster, Canberra, and the Congressional Research Service. Certainly you are invited to the seminar; you just have to let us know if you want to come. We certainly will hear more about the type of services they have.

Miss Deborah Grey: Okay.

You have talked about some of the increased services— things that have gone on over the years. ParlInfo is something that again is an excellent service, which you will be moving with the renovations to the Bank of Nova Scotia. The Teachers' Institute and all of these things are going to cost money and time. It's going to take man-hours for the move. It's going to take longer to get stuff here from the Sparks Street Mall. There's going to be some pretty intensive capital involved in this, I think. The Parliament Hill Players— these are all wonderful things, again, but they cost money, of course, and when more and more is added to your schedule, to your services, to your overtime hours because we all demand too much—

• 1645

The only thing I see here that's revenue-generating is the boutique, and that's $200,000, which is pretty small change when you're looking at the estimates here— approximately $19 million, I think.

How do you feel that this “we want you to do this and this and this” —what falls off, then, to balance that in the meantime? You can only do so much with x amount of resources and staffing.

Mr. Richard Paré: In terms of the renovation and the move to the Bank of Nova Scotia, I must say that we have very good support from Public Works and Government Services Canada. They will help us pick up some of the cost, which certainly we may at one point need as something in the budget. We will be able to estimate that more precisely next year or the year after —in the next estimates.

The challenge for us, as I mentioned, will be to provide the same level of services during that period of three or four years.

Miss Deborah Grey: Yes.

My last question, Mr. Chairman. How is the morale of the library staff?

Mr. Richard Paré: The morale? I would say the morale is good. I must say, though, that we are entering into a period of negotiation. Our staff is unionized. We have four different unions representing our staff. The librarians have already started their negotiations, the research officers are starting almost at this time, I think, and we have the two coming up during the year.

But I think the morale is good. Yes. The perception I have— maybe my colleagues could give you more —is that in general the morale is good. We have a few problems, but that happens in any organization.

Miss Deborah Grey: Good. Thanks.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): Mr. Saada.

[Translation]

Mr. Jacques Saada (Brossard—La Prairie, Lib.): I too would like to thank you because I rely on your work every day and I infinitely appreciate your help.

If I may, I have two very brief questions.

First of all, when I look at the budget item on salary and wages, I note that for 1997-1998, the total was $12,378,000 whereas for 1998-1999, the total rises to $12,962,000. In other words, salaries and wages are increasing by just under five per cent.

When we compare the contributions to employee benefit plans for these two years, we note an increase of almost 20 percent. Could you explain this difference to me?

Perhaps I can put my second question to you immediately. This will give you enough time to answer. With respect to documentation, do you have some idea of the amount of documentation that exists in French as compared to that which is available in English?

Mr. Richard Paré: I will try to answer your second question, because it's a very good question. I can only give you an approximate percentage. I would have to say that approximately 70 per cent of the documentation is in English and 30 per cent in French.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I have two reasons for asking that question.

Mr. Richard Paré: It's a very good question. I've never been— I will certainly try to get that information.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I've two reasons for asking the question. First of all, of course, I would like some assurances that the two official languages are being equally respected. However, there's more to it than that. You talked about staff restrictions and this brings to mind the following question: if, in the course of their work, researchers are called upon to consult a document which is primarily in English, but you are required to provide service in French as well as in English, this could lead to enormous problems insofar as the translation is concerned.

Mr. Richard Paré: I see where you're going.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I was wondering if you have acquired more effective ways of limiting manpower costs, particularly insofar as translation is concerned.

Mr. Richard Paré: Documentation is available in French as well as in English to help researchers and staff to answer questions. We have the documentation we need for that purpose.

Obviously, the Research Branch must have certain papers translated because they are to be used by committees. Background papers prepared for committees must be produced in both languages. It also depends on the request and on the specialist who is doing the work.

Our staff is fairly bilingual and can work in both languages. I have some figures that I could give you. For example, of our 214 permanent employees, 97 claim English as their first language, while 117 claim French. Overall, 67 anglophones and 116 francophones profess to be bilingual, bringing the total number of bilingual employees to 183 out of a staff of 214 employees.

• 1650

As you can see, we are quite capable of handling requests in both languages. However, you are correct in saying that we provide documentation in both official languages.

The lower percentage can be explained by the fact that earlier collections were perhaps more readily available in English, but these were consulted less frequently, comparatively speaking.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I don't want to pursue this too far, but I ask the question simply for my own information. There's no doubt that the bilingual staff of the Research Branch can field telephone requests. They can also provide consultative services, but when it comes to drafting background papers and so forth, this is not necessarily a given. My question wasn't about the performance of your employees, which I'm convinced is excellent, but more about the tools available to them to handle requests in both languages.

Mr. Richard Paré: The Research Branch has two professional editors on staff to revise texts and to ensure that they are drafted properly in either language. This helps a great deal.

As for your second question, it's somewhat more complicated. The figures you referred to are found on page 3. Am I right?

Mr. Jacques Saada: Yes, at the top of page 3. I compared salaries and wages for 1997-1998 versus the coming year, 1998-1999.

Mr. Richard Paré: The budget increases from $12.3 million to $12.9 million, a difference of $600,000.

Mr. Jacques Saada: That's correct. The difference is slightly less than five per cent, whereas in terms of employee benefits, the next line, under Contributions to Employee Benefit Plans, the increase is much more substantial, in the order of 20 per cent.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, this is something that Treasury Board has imposed on us. We have no control over increases requested under Contributions to Employee Benefit Plans. Each year, Treasury Board sets the rates and we must adjust our budget accordingly.

Mr. Jacques Saada: Does this mean that these rates must correspond to a change in benefit status, or are we talking about lump sum payments?

Mr. Richard Paré: It may be related to costs, whether insurance or employee benefits. It's likely due to—

Mr. Jacques Saada: Then it has nothing to do with—

Mr. Richard Paré: —cost increases. That's what I think, but I'm not an expert in this area. However, I know that we have no choice in this matter. This is what is known as a statutory expenditure, meaning that we are informed of the amount and are required to add it to our operating costs.

Mr. Jacques Saada: Thank you.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Malhi): Thank you.

Madam Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa West—Nepean, Lib.): I hate acronyms because you always have to figure out what they mean. I'm trying to figure out the difference between what you call professional employees and technical employees.

Mr. Richard Paré: On what page?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Page 8, for example.

Mr. Richard Paré: You mean the difference in their work? Professionals are librarians. That means they have a master's degree in library science. Technicians are those who come from a community college. They have a diploma or certificate in library techniques. These are the differences between the two groups.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: So I can presume that librarians are paid substantially better than the technical people, yes or no.

Mr. François LeMay: Not substantially more. The difference is basically that our technicians have a lot of experience and they're now at their maximum. We have a lot of librarians who are not at the maximum.

The salary differentials between the negotiated settlements are not all that great, based on the fact that librarians reach basically a level two and technicians go to a level four.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Is there some reason I should know as to why in the professional category it's fairly even between men and women but in the technical one there are almost three times as many women as men?

Mr. Richard Paré: The figures provided here are for males and females.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Yes, and it's then broken down by professional, technical, and support staff.

Mr. Richard Paré: Oh yes, I see what you mean.

• 1655

Mr. François LeMay: I would suggest that the library tech course is basically the same as with librarians, where more females do attend these courses.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I'd presume that more of them attend librarian courses—

Mr. François LeMay: But when you look at the definitions above, when they talk about librarians and the professional staff, by definition in the professionals we also include the research officers and other categories. So it's not just librarians. With the librarians it's basically the same thing. There are more females going to library courses and graduating. It's one of those professions where the majority are female.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Apart from your librarians then, among the professionals you're telling me that men dominate among your research officers and so on. Is that—

Mr. Hugh Finsten: I don't have the figures, but we certainly have a lot of females working for us, so I'm not sure the males would dominate.

Mr. Richard Paré: It would not be by much.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: No, but I just heard that there is the same proportion, that about 2:1 among librarians are female, which means among the other professional positions it's more like 2:1 are males, compared to females.

They're your figures, not mine.

Mr. Richard Paré: No, that's the situation. Yes, you have a good point.

Mr. Hugh Finsten: If you'd like us to break it down, we could certainly provide that to you.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes, we could provide this.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I want to touch on another particular question. This is a fairly flat-line budget, except in salaries. I presume that's just estimated at this point, with one exception. Operating and maintenance seems to be going up by about 28%. Is there a reason for that, when everything else looks quite flat line?

Mr. Richard Paré: You're on page 3?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Yes, page 3.

Mr. Richard Paré: So you're talking about the “other operating and maintenance” figures—

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Yes. That seems to be going up by about 28% from last year, unless I did my math wrong here.

Mr. Richard Paré: And you said it's 30%?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I think 28%, yes.

Mr. Richard Paré: Between $1.3 million and $1.6 million?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Yes.

I notice my colleague and I have both been sitting here doing the math, so it might be nice to give us percentages next year.

Mr. Richard Paré: I can certainly tell you what the other operating costs are. Our budget is still very centralized in the sense that we have the collection budget and we have all the other items, which include contracts, communications rentals, operating and maintenance. To give you the details on what are the increases, there is certainly some increase in— I think it's communication.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I looked through the details, but I really couldn't see what would account for this increasing more than your collections budget, say.

Mr. Richard Paré: We tried to maintain the collection budget at the same level, and we don't want to increase it too much. As I said, we transferred collections from print and electronic, and we tried to maintain the same levels. We have to keep in mind that it's maybe reflecting a bit of a decrease, because the cost of—

Ms. Marlene Catterall: No. I think you're missing my point. The collections budget stays about the same.

Mr. Richard Paré: Yes.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Exactly the same. It's in the next line under that, operating and maintenance.

• 1700

Mr. Richard Paré: Twenty-five percent.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Look, maybe we can leave it and you can get back to me on that.

Mr. Richard Paré: Certainly I could. I'll ask our chief of finance to look into it and provide you with the details. I know this is all the other operating costs. This is where the increase is, but I cannot pinpoint exactly where the increase was.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: What's the cap?

Senator Eymard G. Corbin (Grand-Sault, P.C.): Pardon me, but I think one of your officials is prepared to answer it, if I may suggest.

Mr. Richard Paré: She may have the answer. She is here. If you want her to answer—

Senator Eymard Corbin: I saw her certain expression of eagerness.

Mr. Richard Paré: She's Ms. Monique Boutin, our director of finance.

Ms. Monique Boutin (Director, Finance and Materiel Management, Library of Parliament): If you look at page 5, item 1(b), most of it is to get the collection access to Internet or to ParlInfo. We need to buy licences and things like that. That's why it has increased. Most of the $300,000 comes from those licences.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: So it's information technology primarily?

Ms. Monique Boutin: Yes.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: What's the capital expenditure this year?

Ms. Monique Boutin: For the next five years Treasury Board has allowed us $475,000, so we can get all the computers at the same level as the House of Commons. That's where we spent most of the money. The rest of it is for a little bit of furniture and things like that.

Mr. Richard Paré: If I could further specify that, in the $322,000, it's not the equipment as such. It's more for the digitization of the collection that we're looking at, especially the clipping collections before we move. That's an important cost. It's not related to equipment directly. We have some equipment to digitize. This is the difference between the two. I think, as you said, you had capital. We have money for equipment, but this is also for the technological improvements. It's not the equipment as such.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Like the Reform member, I want to express my concern about hearing more about the morale situation, because you can't continue to give people more work and fewer resources without having a substantial problem. Perhaps it's just my exposure, but I certainly see it particularly among your research staff.

Along that line, I'd really like to know what the prospects are for that research bureau. I think it's an essential component of the institutional memory of this place. Are you looking at things like your overall research staff? Maybe the question should be, to Mr. Finsten, who is due to retire? What is the overall health of that unit? I think that is important for the health of this institution.

Mr. Richard Paré: I will ask him to give the precise answer, but I would like to say that we have made recommendations for an increase in the budget. This increase was not retained, so we will certainly come back. We will ask again next year and we will make a point. Maybe we haven't developed our argument enough, and this is what we will do.

Perhaps Mr. Finsten would like to be more specific.

Mr. Hugh Finsten: As I mentioned in my presentation, we are stretched very thin. There comes a point when you as parliamentarians are not getting the types of resources you should have from our service.

As I mentioned, our service is really one of those that are there to provide you with the types of objective information and analysis you need in order to do your job. When these resources are being stretched that thinly, there is a lot of stress on our staff. Sometimes— many times —they feel they can't do as good a quality job as they would like to do for the committee or for the individual request that comes in, just because they have too many things on their plate.

• 1705

I think in terms of the overall situation, in terms of their own— You mentioned morale and their health. We do try to make sure they get their holidays on time. Certainly when Parliament's not sitting they have extra benefits in terms of the hours they work. They're less than when Parliament is sitting. So we try to make sure our staff is at a healthy level.

As I say, in the overall picture I am personally very concerned about something of a deterioration in the service we are offering. I put it to you as parliamentarians that it means that service we are providing on committees and for you as individual members is deteriorating. We can't do as many publications. We can't keep you as up-to-date on a lot of these issues, and that's where the problem comes in.

Mr. Paré mentioned that we would hope you would see yourselves as sort of a board of directors and that we can work together. I certainly second that, and I hope you can help us in those areas.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I have one final question. Where in these estimates will I find how much you're spending on contract employees or term employees?

Mr. Hugh Finsten: If I could just respond from the research branch, our term employees are usually occupying an indeterminate position; in other words, if somebody has gone off on maternity leave or on a secondment. So we're filling all of our positions. We have very little contract moneys, basically, for our seminar program. When we contract out, it's usually for a committee, as I mentioned, and we charge back the cost of the salary to the committee. That's in terms of the research branch.

Mr. François LeMay: To build on this issue, it's also within the library services that we find this stress that is going on. We got a nice letter the other day about someone saying they had received something within 12 minutes while they were doing a speech in the House, and it was something they needed to finish their speech.

We were talking earlier about the urgency of the demands. Staff do their best to provide the services, but they feel the stress because it is always urgent and must be delivered. We are expected to maintain all the services we were providing before, and more, really without additional resources.

I should say, by the way, that my concern is more in terms of burn-out that is showing on many faces. This is why, when we have a long recess, it does help people.

One of the things where we've tried to make a clear distinction is within the services offered to the public and the services offered to parliamentarians. The money that was transferred from the House with the services that were transferred from the Public Information Office are essentially kept separate so that we don't take the money from the parliamentarians, if you want, to provide more services to the public.

That is why we're trying to increase our revenues in the boutique, so that we can provide services like the new theatrical productions or the Teachers' Institute, to maintain the funding. It's from the boutique and not from the money that comes from the regular budget.

But we are seeing from the staff, both professionals, technical and support, that there is stress with the number of demands we are putting on them.

Mr. Richard Paré: But to complete the answer on your question about the contract money, in this branch it's the same. We use the contract just to replace term for indeterminate positions, except as you mentioned, perhaps for services to visitors and the public, where we sometimes have to contract out.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Thank you.

Mr. Saada.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I have a very quick question, just for my own information.

If I refer to page 5, there is a very small program under number 1(d), Program to assist new democracies. I am of the understanding that CIDA is doing a number of things in terms of democratic development, for instance, assisting in Vietnam for the institution, and so on and so forth, and I think Haiti too.

It's a very small amount. I would like to know what it encompasses. What do you do that CIDA couldn't do within its own parameters?

Mr. François LeMay: You're right, $20,000 doesn't take us very far. Essentially, it's if we get requests from new developing countries or new democracies for small collections, parliamentary material that could be useful in their parliament. We would finally have some funding that we can use instead of taking it from the collections budget of the library. We now have some $20,000 set aside. It could be to send copies of the Canadian Parliamentary Guide or Beauchesne's or other types of documents of that nature, but basically it's just a token assistance so that Canada does show that Parliament is doing something for them.

• 1710

Mr. Jacques Saada: So it's just not to say no, right?

Mr. François LeMay: Oui.

Mr. Richard Paré: And it would be more parliamentary in receipt of documents than—

Mr. Jacques Saada: Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Thank you.

LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT

Library of Parliament

Vote 10—Program Expenditures $16,417,000

(Vote 10 agreed to)

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Shall I report to the House the main estimates under the Library of Parliament for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1999?

A voice: Of both houses.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Of both houses.

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): Thank you very much.

Mr. Richard Paré: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Gurbax Singh Malhi): The meeting is adjourned.