PDF
Gaston Bernier
Parliamentary and legislative libraries usually have a very pragmatic approach
to the documentary needs of elected representatives and their staffs. The
collections built up over the past 200 years devoted considerable room to
literary and scientific classics, alongside publications of governments
and assemblies themselves, as well as national, regional and local newspapers.
In many cases, legislative libraries, which appeared before so-called national
libraries and often before public libraries, acquired and conserved documents
in all possible disciplines and all fields of interest. However, thinking
about the documentary needs of national or local elected representatives
has been very limited, judging from the few publications on the subject
in the past 50 years. This article suggests we need to rethink the role
of libraries to serve the needs of legislators.
The documentary needs of elected representatives are based on the duties
that fall to them: legislation, monitoring of government action, liaison
between citizens and government, facilitation of society as a whole. The
necessary and desired documentation will differ with the member, type of
activity he or she favours and the members area of intervention (economy,
culture, social issues, public education and so on). In all cases, it will
be taken for granted that the library or documentation centre will have
and conserve as much data as possible, current and up to date, on the national
situation: publications of the government, government departments and agencies,
national and local newspapers, monographs on the country and its regions
and so on. This kind of collection will be of use to all members, regardless
of their chosen fields. Beyond that, the legislative specialist should
have suitable collections, the comptroller as well, and so on. It would
be interesting to see whether these assumptions can be verified and whether
assemblies can use them to derive guidelines for the immediate future and
the longer term. In the same line of thinking, an attempt could be made
to determine whether the information needs of parliamentarians are different
depending whether one views Parliament as a whole, committees, political
groups and parties and, lastly, parliamentarians taken individually.
In recent years, a significant convergence has been observed between research
services, independent and library services, and parliamentary committees.
Previously, the services provided at the request of committees represented
a small portion of the total number of hours worked. The support of research
department officers appears to be highly appreciated by parliamentarians
and committee management teams. In this area, collaboration does not go
so far as to include documentary information specialists in the strict
sense of that term. Should that possibility be considered, or can research
department officers continue acting in this capacityquestion
In attempting to determine the documentary requirements of the parliamentary
environment, other approaches can be used, with the emphasis on the types
of information that are desired or useful. The typologies presented in
a North American context could help determine a division between the contribution
of libraries and those of other bodies, because it must be observed that
libraries must rely on multiple sources of information and that politicians
do not hesitate to use the full range of sources. Consequently, the distinctions
between information (from raw data to their interpretation) and knowledge,
and between technical information and so-called political information could
help in determining documentary tasks and setting their limits or borders.
The quality and scope of services and the division of tasks between related
services (research departments, parliamentary committee secretariats, procedural
advisors) have been the subject of much discussion and observation. As
regards substance, information forwarded to elected representatives is
usually expected to come from various sources and to be complete and thorough,
exhaustive and qualified, sure and reliable, rigorous, specific and objective.
With respect to form, it should also be clear, condensed, summarized, concise
and brief. This list of characteristics shows that, above all, internal
information services have an obligation of means to their clients and correspondents.
It remains to be seen whether the conditions listed above will change over
the years or whether new ones will be added.
Organizing the Documentary Function
Organization of the documentary services of a parliamentary assembly presupposes
parliamentary funding, a hierarchical and physical location and an internal
structure.
Like all services made available to elected representatives, parliamentary
libraries must have sufficient funding. However, funding is not the whole
story: in a context where there is an obligation of means, very large amounts
of funding could be budgeted or requested, reliance on neighbourhood centres
could be disregarded as being one of the random aspects of collaboration
and communication, and an encyclopaedic collection could be put together
in a spirit of independence. The current technological context, communication
facilities and the diversification of documentary formats must be taken
into account. If that can be done, a parliamentary library should manage
to focus on a certain number of essential tasks and disregard others it
has previously taken on (conservation of national publications, coordination
of public libraries and so on). The extent of funding that should be granted
to it will depend to a large degree on the way in which responsibilities
are shared within the surrounding environment and the tasks assigned to
it. Funding levels observed in a number of libraries could constitute a
standard that can be used or proposed. Future allocations to the documentary
function will not be as high as they have been in the past. Documentary
information, which is becoming increasingly multipurpose in nature, is
no longer a monopoly of libraries, and, in many situations, can be short-circuited
or disregarded. The important thing is that elected representatives have
access to the information they need and that the library gets the necessary
resources that will enable it to meet the requests made of it.
Apart from necessary or desirable funding, another issue, or subject of
discussion, is the situation of documentary services in the administrative
hierarchy. In the administrative secretariats of assemblies, services that
are deemed to be of strategic importance are often placed in the immediate
neighbourhood or under the authority of the secretary general. In some
no doubt temporary situations, they have even reported to the speakers
themselves. New functions, or those that may potentially have significant
impact, are usually consolidated at the top of the hierarchy. However,
the increasing structuring of the administrative branches of parliamentary
assemblies reduces the number of exceptions. These days, parliamentary
library services have become traditional functions, their impact is well
known, and the monopoly or virtual monopoly that they may have held is
a thing of the past. Consequently, it is normal for a documentation centre
or library to be treated like the other administrative services of assemblies.
A library considered as any department of an assembly may be part of a
directorate or branch that has a certain degree of homogeneity or unity,
similar concerns and thus frequent exchanges or relations. It would be
entirely logical, at least at first glance, for a library to fall within
the hierarchical neighbourhood of archives, research departments, committees
and even, to name only a few examples, public information services or even
parliamentary documents distribution services. However, since horizontal
organization charts appear to be well suited to the administration of political
organizations, consolidations would be more secondary, on an equal footing
with lines of authority. It has been observed that the political environment
influences administrative operation: orders and commands are less important
than negotiations and consensus. In other words, then, well justified administrative
organization charts and consolidations would not have any decisive effect
on the operation or performance of the services concerned. However, the
subject is undoubtedly worthy of some attention and research.
In the same line of thinking, various administrative arrangements have
been adopted. William Robinson has identified at least four: integrated
services, articulated services, independent services and dispersed services.1
In some parliaments, documentary services are independent of each other,
while in others the library is used as a consolidating entity. Elsewhere,
the research service was established first and is responsible for the library.
The first arrangement is in effect at Frances National Assembly, the second
in British-style parliaments, and the third in Washington and Tokyo. Without
viewing any one of these arrangements as an administrative gamble, one
could examine the basis or philosophy, if there is one, of the three approaches
and determine which one might be suited to the new reality and to the future.
The internal administrative structure of a parliamentary library or documentation
centre is a different matter. Here, one gets the impression that dullness,
pragmatism and mimicry prevail. Every traditional library has its entry
and acquisitions service, its cataloguing and filing or processing service,
its reader service and its reference service. Peripheral services are sometimes
associated with them (research, citizen information, archives, etc.). There
is every reason to believe that the internal organization of tomorrow will
differ only slightly from current practices, despite technical improvements
in communications and information, although certain adjustments would be
desirable.
In addition to the internal organization of libraries and their position
in the organization charts of administrative secretariats, their physical
location and even surface area should also be considered. As libraries
appeared very early on, they usually inherited premises near the parliamentary
chambers and the offices of elected representatives. At the time, secretariats
and services were small organizations. Communications were not what they
are now, to say the least. Consequently, it was considered normal and even
logical for documentation and documentation specialists to be at the heart
or centre of parliamentary institutions. But will similar choices be made
in the future? Computer storage, retrieval and communication technologies
could obviate the need for readers, that is to say parliamentarians, their
immediate associates and public servants, to go to a library, and the physical
location of a parliamentary library could lose its strategic importance.
In some areas, experts and students are already better served by using
their computers than by going physically to the library, which does not
mean that the involvement of information officers would be superfluous.
The miniaturization and digitization of documents makes the search for
space less of an issue for parliamentary libraries, whose conservation
mission concerns only a portion of their collections.
Staff
The documentation world is constantly improving; it continues to rely on
increasingly powerful technologies and, at the same time, there is a need
for resource sharing and specialization. In addition, widespread electronic
access to certain collections and data bases means that readers can retrieve
and consult documents without going through a library. In that case, one
may well wonder whether the number of library employees will increase,
remain stable or decline, both in absolute terms and compared to other
parliamentary services. Some traditional library sectors are undergoing
significant changes: cataloguing, previously conducted independently, has
now become a shared undertaking; binding is losing importance with the
increase in the number of microfilms, microfiches and CD-ROMs; and consultation
of electronic rather than printed publications should reduce the importance
of shelving. What is more important will be the added efficiency of referencers
as a result of computerized search methods. Given all these and other changes,
choices must be made: maintain the level of services and reduce staff or
improve services and retain current positions, or assign the library new
responsibilities and functions.
In addition to influencing the number of library employees, and their number
as a percentage of parliamentary public service employees, current developments
in communication and information technologies will also mean changes in
training and requirements for new recruits and training and development
programs for current staff. The fundamental nature of documentary work
remains constant over time, and it would be easy to illustrate the continuum
that characterizes its evolution. However, the increase in data flows and
in the number of technologies and means currently available to librarians
and information officers are both new and out of all proportion to what
societies knew 50 years ago. It may therefore be taken for granted that
the documentation specialists recruited from now on will be knowledgeable
about modern computer devices and mechanisms and that they will be able
to use them effectively and to teach politicians and their assistants how
to use them. One may also hope that the information officers on staff will
have diversified training and fields of interest, given the universality
of the concerns of parliamentarians (and governments), and that they will
be able to shield them from the documentary deluge. Globalization should
also lead authorities to determine certain language requirements: it may
be supposed that a team of referencers could include individuals with a
passive or functional knowledge of the most important foreign languages
for a given political entity. They should also address certain concerns,
such as that of acting as filters and providing parliamentary readers with
only the essential substance of information, because too much documentation
is almost as bad as none at all. Lastly, the employees of tomorrow will
have to instantly take into consideration changes to the responsibilities
and centres of interest of individual parliamentarians.
Technology
All areas of parliamentary documentation are affected, improved or reinforced
by the new computer resources available. There is no comparison between
todays instantaneous communications and the relative slowness previously
observed. Just think of the time it took in nineteenth century America
to obtain a volume published in Europe or to get mail or newspapers. Think
of how hard it was to reproduce a document: it had to be copied by hand
or by copyists. Think of the isolation of libraries at the time and their
rudimentary, manual retrieval systems. And there was only one format at
the time, the printed document. Without providing an exhaustive list, one
can say that the changes have been numerous: CD-ROMs, microfilm and microfiche,
in addition to books and periodicals, electronic links to domestic and
international libraries, new means of reproduction (photocopying and digitization),
fast transmission channels and powerful and often universal retrieval tools.
Parliamentary libraries should be able to follow the general development
trend of national documentary communities in the area of communication
and information technology. While they are not technological laboratories,
they should be able to integrate rapidly technologies that have been adopted
in other countries and, ultimately, those recommended by specialized international
organizations so that collaboration and cooperation among them are easy
and natural.
New technologies are, if not a unique opportunity for parliamentary libraries,
at least incomparable instruments in a number of respects. Researchers
and information officers, parliamentarians and citizens currently have
direct access to North American and Western information. However, local
and national information for a vast majority of countries and parliaments,
is unretrievable, or at least difficult to retrieve, because indexes are
lacking, as, in some instances, are complete collections of newspapers
and major series of government or parliamentary publications. Here is a
field that should be occupied locally. Electronic formats, such as CD-ROMs,
and especially digital libraries, and the possibility of remote consulting
of the collections of a third political entity or of accessing them instantly
through document transmission systems (Ariel software in particular2),
will release foreign libraries from the need to keep those collections
on their shelves or in their data bases.3
In this
way, in the vast majority of cases, every library will be able to remove certain
collections for bibliographical processing and classification purposes, and
focus on local documentation. The contribution of computer technologies will
make it easier to provide parliamentarians with support and service by making it
easier to manage parliamentarians’ profiles and centres of interest and to
provide them with the right documentation at the right time, and to do so
rapidly.
Unfortunately, much remains to be clarified before the situation regarding
electronic documentation can be stablilized and rationalized. For the moment,
in the area of conservation, librarians do not know where to turn or who
is responsible for electronically conserving the documentation of their
own government, even less so that of foreign countries. In short, libraries
continue to duplicate and triplicate. Since it is not known whether an
interesting document made available on a Web site will be there for long,
and since we are not sure whether someone is responsible for conserving
it for the long term, we make a paper copy, bind it, catalogue it and make
it physically available to clients. This means that uncertainty and vague
practices are perpetuating obsolete models. There has to be a rationalization
effort, which need not necessarily come from parliamentary libraries. However,
they should at least raise the issue and make the appropriate authorities
aware of it.
Conclusion
Parliamentary libraries possess incomparable collections of their own.
They conserve historical treasures and consider it a duty to collect political
documents; they strive to prepare indexes and directories designed to facilitate
retrieval from immense bodies of information. Perhaps it is time for them
to take on official responsibility within the network of libraries of the
various countries, to become, as one former Australian parliamentary librarian
suggests, a kind of national library of the political life of a given territory.4
The changes outlined above, which will affect parliamentary libraries in
future, will occur without altering the underlying reality or major parameters.
However, libraries could become more a part of their documentary environment,
participate in the sharing of national documentary resources and, in that
capacity, stop conserving rarely consulted documents that can already be
accessed remotely.
One thing is certain, and that is that the libraries and documentation
centres of assemblies and parliaments will have to be designed, above all,
for elected representatives and their assistants. They must define themselves
as providing a service for legislators and parliamentarians of all kinds.
They must, one could say, operate on the basis of the activities of the
collective organizations of parliament, but also of parliamentarians individually.
Notes
1. Jean-François Le Men, Linformation du Parlement français, Notes et
études documentaries, 4758 (Paris: La Documentation française, 1984),
140 pp.
2. A library that has an Ariel station and up-to-date computer equipment
can digitize or scan documents and send pictures via the Internet to other
Ariel stations, where they can be printed. Recipients can receive documents
via e-mail. The process is quick and communication of digital picture files
makes it possible to retain quality levels. A presentation of the system
can be found at:
http://www.infotrieve.com/ariel/.
3. As Ms. Simone Signori, member of the National Assembly at the time, said:
libraries can now rely on each other for peripheral, secondary or foreign
collections, and will increasingly be able to do so in the coming years.
Bulletin de la Bibliothèque de lAssemblée nationale, Vol. 29, Nos. 3-4,
October 2000, pp. 7-8.
4. R.L. Cope, If special libraries are disappearing, why are parliamentary
libraries surviving? Contradictory currents and changing perceptions,
The Australian Library Journal, November 2000, pp. 307-326.
|