Evidence of meeting #7 for Library of Parliament in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was staff.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Heather Lank  Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament
Catherine MacLeod  Assistant Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament
Marcus Pistor  Senior Director, Economics and International Affairs Division
Manon Robert  Director, Finance, Materiel Management and Corporate Planning, Library of Parliament

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Joint Co-Chair Liberal Gagan Sikand

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.

12:05 p.m.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

We now go to the next slide.

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.

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.

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.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Joint Co-Chair Liberal 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.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

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?

12:10 p.m.

Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

Heather Lank

I will hand over that question to Catherine MacLeod, who is the head of all of our research services.

12:10 p.m.

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.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

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?

12:10 p.m.

Assistant Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

Catherine MacLeod

No, we don't do access to information requests.

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Why not?

12:10 p.m.

Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

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.

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Joint Chair Liberal Gagan Sikand

Do we have unanimous consent for that?

12:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

12:15 p.m.

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.

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

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?

12:15 p.m.

Senior Director, Economics and International Affairs Division

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.

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Thank you.

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Joint Chair Liberal Gagan Sikand

Mr. Eglinski.

May 2nd, 2019 / 12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB

I'll give my time to Mr. Sorenson, because my colleague across asked the question that I was going to.

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

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?

12:15 p.m.

Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

Heather Lank

The current number for this year, not including the guides, who are always set aside from that, would be 363 FTEs.

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

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?

12:15 p.m.

Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

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.

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

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?

12:15 p.m.

Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament

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.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB

So is this the kind of thing now—