CHER Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CANADIAN HERITAGE

COMITÉ PERMANENT DU PATRIMOINE CANADIEN

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, June 4, 1998

• 1128

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Clifford Lincoln (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.)): I would like to open the meeting of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), this is a consideration of a Canadian cultural policy.

[Translation]

We are continuing our consideration of Canadian culture. Our witnesses today are from the National Archives of Canada. We will be hearing Mrs. Françoise Houle, director general, Client services and Communications Branch and

[English]

Mr. Lee McDonald, assistant national archivist. From the National Library of Canada, we have Mr. Tom Delsey, director general, corporate policy and communications; and Dr. Marianne Scott, national librarian.

We're very pleased to welcome you here. Who would like to start off?

I would suggest that maybe, Dr. Scott, we take about 15 minutes for each presentation and then open the floor to questions.

Dr. Marianne Scott (National Librarian, National Library of Canada): That's fine; thank you.

The Chairman: So the floor is yours, Dr. Scott.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honourable members.

[Translation]

I appreciate, as always, the opportunity to meet with the Standing Committee to discuss matters of relevance to the National Library.

• 1130

I am particularly pleased to have the opportunity this morning to participate in the Committee's discussions on cultural policy. Hopefully the perspective I bring to the issues under consideration, both as the deputy head of a federal cultural agency, and as a representative of the wider community of libraries and library users in Canada, will assist the Committee in its efforts to understand more fully the issues that are of concern to those involved in cultural activities, and to establish overall direction for the development of Canadian cultural policy.

[English]

I must say at the outset that although I'm not surprised that the round-table discussions thus far have been very much centred on the marketplace for Canadian cultural products, I am somewhat concerned about the tendency to view cultural policy almost exclusively in terms relating to our cultural industries.

I have no hesitation in acknowledging the importance of the publishing, recording, film, video, and broadcasting industries to our cultural life and to the nurturing of Canadian authors, composers, artists, and performers. But I also believe that the thousands of institutions that operate to a large extent outside the commercial marketplace—the libraries, the archives, the museums, and the cultural centres, located in communities large and small right across the country—are also vitally important to the strength of our cultural life.

If the aim of cultural policy is ultimately to ensure the flourishing of Canadian culture and to enable Canadians to draw a sense of identity and pride from their cultural heritage, it is essential for Canada's cultural policy to encompass all dimensions of our cultural life and to support the aims of our public institutions as well as our cultural industries.

With that said by way of introduction, let me address more specifically a few of the questions highlighted in the work plan for the committee's study of cultural policy.

First is the question of what has worked well and not so well in the way of federal support measures for culture. As a spokesperson for just one of a number of federal cultural institutions, I would like to stress that federal government support for institutions such as the National Library has been and continues to be absolutely critical to the fulfilment of the shared goal of providing Canadians with a rich and varied resource through which they can study, understand, and appreciate our cultural heritage.

The federal government's investment in the National Library over the past 45 years has enabled us to build the most comprehensive collection of Canadian publications held anywhere in the country. The collection is unparalleled as a source for research in all fields of relevance to Canada's development as a nation—historical, political, social, economic, and cultural.

The federal government's investment has also enabled us to develop a wide range of services to assist Canadians from coast to coast to coast in accessing the millions of items housed in the National Library. In partnership with other public institutions and with the private sector, we have mounted exhibits and developed an active program of readings, lectures, musical events, and film presentations that showcase the Canadian talent reflected in our collection.

What has been achieved during the National Library's relatively short history is something we can all take pride in as Canadians. My hope is that future investment in the institution by the federal government will ensure the continued growth and protection of our heritage collections and that it will enable us to continue adapting our services to meet the challenges of a changing technological and social environment.

Institutions such as the National Library, in my view, play an absolutely essential role in preserving and promoting our cultural heritage. If we share that view, we also need to recognize that not only does investment in such institutions have to be sustained over the long term, but the protection of the cultural assets accumulated over time periodically requires renewed investment in their safe keeping.

Among the biggest challenges facing the National Library today is the urgent need for secure facilities to house the overflow of collections that cannot be accommodated in our main building and to give us room to grow over the next 15 years or so. We also need to address, on a larger scale than is currently possible, both preventive and remedial conservation of materials in the collections that are at risk of deterioration and in need of restorative treatment. Neither of these major challenges can be met without a commitment by the federal government to invest the funds needed to safeguard one of Canada's prime cultural assets.

• 1135

Let me now turn to a second question of major importance for the National Library and indeed all libraries—the impact of technology.

Over the past 15 years or more, technology has become an increasingly important factor in National Library operations and in the evolution of the services we provide to Canadians. We have become increasingly reliant on the application of computer technology to achieve the efficiencies and productivity gains that enable us to keep pace with workloads and service demands that continue to increase while staffing and budget levels decrease.

The National Library has, in many respects, been a pioneer in adapting new technologies to library applications, and that has benefited not only the National Library itself, but libraries throughout Canada and internationally. The software we developed for our bibliographic system AMICUS is being marketed internationally by our contractor, CGI, and has been selected by both the British Library and the National Library of Australia to serve as the core of major systems developments that they are undertaking.

In recent years, we have also positioned ourselves to take advantage of new communication technologies as the means of providing Canadians right across the country with more responsive and timely access to our services. Through the Internet and other data communication networks, hundreds of Canadian libraries and other information service providers have instantaneous access to our comprehensive bibliographic databases. Through the World Wide Web, Canadians can access the on-line catalogue of National Library holdings, as well as a number of finding aids and research tools that were once assessible only to on-site users.

Web technology has also made it possible for Canadians right across the country to “visit” exibits drawn from the National Library's collections that at one time could be seen only by those living in or visiting the National Capital Region. And we are increasing adding Canadian content to the Web through the digitization of materials drawn from our collections.

Technology is now beginning to have an even more far-reaching impact on National Library programs and services. In the last few years, we have begun to see an increasing use of digital technologies by the creators and producers of the publications, sound recordings and videos around which our collections are built. We are also beginning to see publishers and distributors make use of the Internet and the Web as an alternative means of delivering their products to the marketplace.

These trends have implications for the National Library that in many ways are much more significant than the use we ourselves have made of technology to streamline operations and improve service delivery. While in the past we have used new technologies largely as a means of facilitating the management of collections of publications in conventional formats, we are now having to deal with the management of collections that are themselves in digital formats.

This new environment brings with it a number of new challenges. One key issue we are dealing with currently is the question of the applicability of the provisions for legal deposit, as currently set out in the National Library Act, to publications that are disseminated exclusively through the Internet and the Web. Also to be determined, as the third phase of amendments to the Copyright Act unfolds over the next year or two, is the extent to which the National Library will be able to allow Canadians remote access to digital publications in its collection.

In addition to issues emerging from the legal framework around digital publications, there are also many unanswered questions about the long-term preservation of digital media, and the feasibility of continuously migrating digital information through successive generations of hardware and software. Until we find solutions to those problems, we have no guarantee that the digital publications acquired for our collections will remain intact and intelligible to the user attempting to access them 20 or 30 years from now.

While the new technologies bring with them some very exciting opportunities for libraries to extend and improve access to the materials in their collections—whether the collections be physical or virtual—they also present significant challenges, particularly to an institution such as the National Library, which has a responsibility for collecting and preserving, on a comprehensive scale, publications, recordings, videos, and other materials released for public distribution in Canada.

Addressing those challenges will require a significant investment in the technological infrastructure needed to store, manage and access electronic documents on a very large scale. Again that will require a commitment by the federal government to invest the funds needed to position the National Library to serve as an effective repository for the digital publications that will serve to document cultural activity in this country in the next millennium.

• 1140

Let me conclude by coming back to the point I began with. Libraries are a vitally important part of Canada's cultural life. Our heritage is reflected not just in the collection of the National Library, but in thousands of collections held by libraries right across the country. Together those collections and the services provided by the libraries that hold them form a key part of our cultural infrastructure.

Federal government policy in the area of culture can play an important role in supporting libraries in their efforts to connect Canadians with their cultural heritage and in growing the audience for Canadian writers, composers, and performers. Copyright legislation, policy relating to the development of the information highway, programs like SchoolNet, LibraryNet, and the community access program, funding through the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and the Millennium Endowmnet Fund, all have potential for sustaining and strengthening the role that libraries play as part of our cultural infrastructure. In my view, it is essential therefore that libraries be involved in helping to shape public policy on culture, particularly as we make the transition to a digital environment, and that they be viewed as partners in the federal government's efforts to nurture and support the cultural dimension of our lives as Canadians.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Dr. Scott.

Mr. McDonald.

Mr. Lee McDonald (Assistant National Archivist, National Archives of Canada): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members.

[Translation]

I am very pleased to be here today with the National Archives Director General of Client Services and Communications Branch, Madame Françoise Houle, to participate in your examination of Canadian cultural policy.

The National Archives of Canada can contribute to a national cultural policy which encompasses heritage, which promotes the development of robust infrastructure and strong national institutions, which ensures the preservation of the treasures of our heritage, and ensures broad access by Canadians to their heritage.

[English]

The National Archives is one of the national heritage institutions that constitute the Canadian heritage portfolio. Within the portfolio's broad goal of protecting Canada's heritage, the archives takes pride in its specific mission to preserve the collective memory of the nation and of the Government of Canada, to contribute to the protection of rights and the enhancement of a sense of national identity.

The institution is mandated to acquire, preserve, and provide access to records of national significance, to facilitate the management of records of the federal government and ministerial records and to exercise leadership in the development of the Canadian archival community. To carry out this broad mandate, the National Archives has a budget of $45 million for 1998-99, which is essentially at the same level in current dollars as 1986-87.

To be a source of documentary evidence and information about the past, the archives protects the primary sources that support the activities of creators and producers of Canadian culture: artists, television and film producers, publishers, writers, historians, and many others. The archives has developed access strategies to better serve all citizens, including students, government researchers, and genealogists doing family history.

The archives makes available a wide range of information in all media, documenting different aspects of our heritage, buttressing our sense of identity and shared experience. During 1997 over 130,000 inquiries were received by the archives from Canadian citizens by telephone, fax, mail, and e-mail, and close to 15,000 in-person requests were handled by our reference staff.

[Translation]

The National Archives' priorities for the planning period up to the year 2000 focus on four key areas: encouraging an organizational cultural characterized by teamwork, empowerment and accountability; obtaining suitable facilities, for example the renovation of the West Memorial Building on Wellington Street; implementing an integrated electronic records program; and delivering quality services to Canadians.

• 1145

Today, my remarks will focus primarily on National Archives interaction with Canadians, but I will be happy to answer questions on any aspects of our program.

[English]

Since its establishment in 1872, the archives has housed the symbolic anchors of our collective memory, a tremendous archival richness that is carefully preserved and constantly augmented by new acquisitions. To offer a few examples, let me mention the project to acquire and organize the personal and political papers of four former prime ministers: John Turner, Joe Clark, Brian Mulroney, and Kim Campbell. These papers have now been fully described and organized, although we do anticipate that more material may arrive in the future.

These are but the latest addition to our rich holdings of prime ministers' records collected since Confederation. Other recent acquisitions are the Johnson papers relating to the British administration of Indian Affairs dating back to the 1700s; the Dominion Textile Inc. records, a valuable source of the study of Canadian economic development, social history, and labour relations; the papers of the world-renowned photographer, Yousuf Karsh, dating from 1930 right up to 1992, documenting his career and personal life; and the papers of the artist Franz Johnston, a founding member of the Group of Seven.

The number of requests to the National Archives from Canadians is also growing, because the archives, a repository for records from the past, preserves information that is alive and mobile, information that can be shaped into an infinite variety of cultural products. In an era when information and information technology are important assets, archives clearly become an integral part of the economic and social life of our history. In addition, the archives provides records used to ensure citizens' rights and entitlements and support the legal system by providing information that can be used as evidence. For example, the National Archives received in 1996 more formal access requests than any other government department.

The archives has developed a public access approach that includes a reference room at the National Archives, decentralized access sites across the country, and on-line services offered by the National Archives Internet site. Digital images and virtual exhibits are gradually enhancing that Internet site even as we speak. The public response has been very positive. In 1997-98, there were over nine million hits on the National Archives web site, an increase from six million the year before.

The two most popular databases on our web site are the index to the 1871 Ontario census and the attestation papers from the First World War, a portion of the military personnel files actually signed by those young 17- and 18-year-old boys as they enlisted in the Canadian Expeditionary Force back in 1914-18. It's been tremendously popular.

Today information technology presents us not only with new opportunities to better serve Canadians, but also with new challenges as traditional records are rapidly being replaced by their electronic counterparts. Increasingly, our economic, social, political, and cultural existence is recorded in digital formats whose use is highly dependent on hardware and software that quickly becomes obsolete. Archives which for thousands of years have preserved information and knowledge recorded in relatively simple format, such as paper and ink, must now find ways to preserve new forms of recorded knowledge, such as databases, electronic documents, and multimedia objects.

The records of our nation upon which our knowledge, our freedoms, our justice, and our civilization are based are today being stored on computer disks, magnetic tapes, CD-ROMs, and other electronic media with practical life expectancies of not more than five to ten years. The irreplaceable history of our country is in jeopardy because the task of identifying the electronic records of enduring value, routinely converting them to new media, as that technology evolves, and making them accessible to our citizens is enormous.

Specifically, the National Archives is striving to implement an electronic records program, which will include new techniques, standards, and practices, the recruitment and training of archivists with additional technical expertise, and the identification of the financial resources required to develop and maintain the equipment and tools necessary to preserve electronic records.

To have knowledge accessible at the fingertip to disseminate information in an effective manner, we have to digitize finding aids in selected archival records. Within the framework of a new cultural policy, financial partnerships for the digitization of heritage materials and other information held by government departments could be facilitated within the bounds of copyright provisions. Incentives could be offered to Canadian enterprises to encourage partnerships with heritage institutions in the creation of databases and cultural products. This approach may favour the exploitation of Canadian content by Canadian interests.

• 1150

Adequate accommodation is essential if the National Archives is to preserve and make available Canada's documentary heritage. Just one year ago this week, the National Archives opened the Gatineau preservation centre. This centre, dedicated to the preservation of historical documents, has generated considerable media and public interest, partly because of its architecture but also because of its contents.

But to make this heritage accessible directly to the Canadian public, the archives must also have a building where people can come and learn, find information, discover their origins and touch their history.

A few weeks ago on Parliament Hill, the archives exhibited documents about the foundation of Canadian democracy, the creation of responsible government due to the Baldwin-Lafontaine alliance in the 1800s. Further, the National Archives recently mounted another exhibition to commemorate the assassination of D'Arcy McGee. Several of these documents had never before been displayed for the public.

The National Archives needs a specific space where it can display, even more accessibly, important historical documents with which the public can identify. In the United States, Washington has its well-situated, well-designed building for the display of historical documents such as the Declaration of Independence. And every school bus that enters the city drops by. Students are sure to visit it.

[Translation]

Now that the Gatineau Preservation Centre is open, the second important facet of the archives' long-term accommodation strategy is the renovation of the West Memorial Building.

This year, the National Archives, working with architects and its government partners, has almost completed the design for the West Memorial Building on Wellington Street. A request for approval of the construction phase will follow. The West Memorial Project will require considerable reallocation of staff and resources during the planning period. The renovation of this building, scheduled to take place form 1999 to 2002, will allow the National Archives to broaden Canadians' access to their incomparable archival heritage.

[English]

The renovated West Memorial Building, serving as a symbol of access and openness to all Canadians, will provide choice space for public programs for the delivery of the mission of the National Archives. I've listed two examples for you. One would be the archival discovery centre, targeted at young people between the ages of 9 and 14, which would bring these young people close to the archival records that document Canada's history. It will encourage involvement and interaction, allowing participants to discover interesting things about archives and about Canadian culture. It will enhance the familiarity with the events and people that have shaped the country's development and will give participants an opportunity to explore their Canadian identity.

Secondly, with more than half of our clients conducting family research, the National Archives will provide more comprehensive and automated services in the Canadian family history centre. This genealogical centre will contain a digitized version of National Archives collections related to theme of families, such as nineteenth century censuses, manuscripts, passenger lists obtained by immigration officials at ports of entry, and other early twentieth century immigration records, as well as orientation guides and research tools to help those who've not yet done research in an archives, which is a forbidding place to enter for the first time.

One role of the federal government is to promote and protect Canadian culture. Heritage institutions not only permit the survival of human knowledge, but speak to Canadians about themselves and heighten their awareness of their common past.

The new archives in the West Memorial Building will be both a symbolic and a concrete manifestation of the role of the National Archives in nurturing Canadian heritage and culture, a physical presence in the national capital region, where the paths of the past and the future intersect.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

We will now open the meeting to questions. Mrs. Lill.

Ms. Wendy Lill (Dartmouth, NDP): Thank you very much for coming to see us. I haven't had the opportunity to tour the National Archives, I'm ashamed to say, but I have toured the library, and it was a wonderful experience.

I'm interested in a couple of things.

Marianne, you started by talking about the fact that there seems to be this enormous preoccupation with cultural industries instead of looking particularly at the bedrock of culture, which is the libraries and the museums. I have spoken with different people working in other bedrock cultural institutions who have said that the actual working environment has become rather industrial as well. There is now this new model that sort of works against the actual goals of the place.

• 1155

I'm not trying to be too obscure here. I'm trying to get at what the cuts to the library and the archives have meant to the staff, and to their jobs—the demands put on staff to actually carry out the same amount of work. I'd like you to just address that, maybe—what stresses we're looking at now with carrying on the same high quality of service, if we are still carrying on the high quality of service.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Thank you. I think certainly in what we're doing, it is high quality, because the National Library has had a long history and pride in what it's doing. But there's no question that the amount of publications has not decreased at all, so with the budget cuts over the last three or four years, we've had to make some very serious and tough choices. We're getting as many publications in as we did in previous years, but we've had to make choices about how we handle them and make them known to the public, which is sad. It means that the national bibliography is not as comprehensively in-depth as it once was—less material is given full treatment—which means we're less of a support to the libraries out there that use those bibliographic records.

Tragically, we've had to cease buying a second copy of foreign Canadiana. Our collection contains not only material published in Canada, but material by a Canadian, or about Canada, anywhere in the world. This is sad, but as I said, we just don't have the money to put it out.

Our movement towards dealing with the digital environment, particularly in the investment area, is slower than it should be. We all know that technology will gobble up an awful lot of money, and we've tried to be extremely careful about not being out in front, but we spend a lot of time cutting our cloth and trying to, if I may say so, pinch pennies.

As for the staff themselves, I would say that there is becoming a fairly high level of stress, particularly in the senior management levels. Everybody is working longer hours than they ever did before, and yet there is that goal, that need, that desire to make sure this material is acquired, because if we don't acquire it now, it will be gone. Publishers are now even issuing shorter print runs than they did before, so we have to get the material in. And acquiring the new electronic material is very time-consuming.

I don't know whether that answers your question. It's just that we're spending a lot of time, as I said, trying to pinch pennies. And we're doing less for the libraries out in the country, which is sad. Our staff are very much in demand to go and speak at provincial conferences, particularly in some of the smaller regions of the country where they don't have money for travelling to major conferences. They have their local one, but the important thing is to bring in the experts, and we're having to be more selective about what we're doing there.

We're less able to support cooperative initiatives in the country. If an issue arose, we would bring a group of people into Ottawa to meet from all parts of the country and discuss it and come up with recommendations and solutions. Now, when we want to have a group like that meet, we have to go and find people who can afford to pay their own way, which is not always the best way, because there are people who come from far in this country, and perhaps have a good input to make, and you need to have them there. That's where it was important before for the library, through the government, to have money to bring some people in.

Mr. Lee McDonald: From the National Archives perspective, the staff has reduced from approximately 800 people down to about 600 over the last four years.

The requirement, then, is to focus what we need to do more tightly on the most important tasks that need to be accomplished. That has included, for example, reducing the amount of private sector acquisition, deferring some of the acquisition from government departments to a later period of time, and changing the way in which we relate to other government departments in terms of the funding mechanisms.

• 1200

That kind of change and transition sometimes does not happen as quickly as the change in the staff, and I think there has been a very real sense of stress at all levels of the institution in trying to deal with that change and make sure we are accomplishing the very best we can in the areas where we're still active.

Ms. Wendy Lill: As this committee tries to develop a Canadian cultural policy, we keep hearing over and over again that the cracks are just showing everywhere in the infrastructure. Everybody is so committed and they work so very, very hard to maintain their vision of what should be there, but at some point—

I think about your two areas, where we're looking at books and records that in fact do break down, and they're priceless. Once they're gone, they're gone. Do you think we've cut too far? Have the cuts been too deep now? Are your collections being compromised and are they going to be further compromised?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I believe so. As I said, in the acquisition of the collection, the very fact that we're not being as comprehensive in getting foreign Canadiana— As one part of the government spends money promoting Canadian studies abroad and promoting and supporting associations of Canadian studies the world around, we are not able to benefit by getting the research these people do. So it's a little odd.

Ms. Wendy Lill: And on the issue of protection of collections?

Dr. Marianne Scott: Yes, protection. I knew there was another point. Thank you.

Preservation is quite critical. Until the government adopted the policy of acid-free paper for its publications—and we promoted it and it trickled through to publishers—books in this country were published on very acidic paper. So all of the material we have, up to about the 1990s, is very acidic. We have the only totally functioning mass de-acidification system that is really production-oriented in the world. It's a test one and it was built that way, but it still is able to do about 30,000 items a year.

For a number of years we had money for three shifts, and it's interesting, because you get economies of scale, and on those three shifts, we were doing about 150,000 items a year. Now with the budget cuts we've come back down. We went down to two, down to one, and we're now hardly able to support one full shift. So the materials in our collections, which should be de-acidified to protect them for the long term— We're just not doing hardly any of the retrospective.

We calculate that there are something like three million items in our collection—original Canadiana—that should be de-acidified for long-term preservation. When paper gets brittle, you can't make it stronger, but by taking out the acid, you stop it from going any farther. That is one of the things we have been able to do with the mass de-acidification system.

Ms. Wendy Lill: And if that doesn't happen for these three million items, what will happen?

Dr. Marianne Scott: Well, you go into some libraries—I've heard stories recently about some newspapers in some of the smaller libraries in the country—and you start to use them, and when you open them up, they crumble. You're the last person to see that page. That is the impact of acidic conditions on published material—paper.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mrs. Lill.

Mr. Muise.

Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to start by thanking our guests. It's very interesting.

In our role of studying culture and heritage, I think we all recognize the importance of why you're here. I've made the comment on a couple of occasions that it's important to have a balanced budget and a country that's sound economically, but we also have to preserve the past provided to us, because that is what will help shape our future and show others what we are and what we were. So I appreciated the comments you made regarding funding and those things, and of course it affects everyone, so it's something that needs to be taken into consideration.

• 1205

In our study of cultural policy for Canada, what would you want to see in there, vis-à-vis where you're coming from and what both of your institutions provide? Can you tell us what should be in there that would help your institutions?

Mr. Lee McDonald: I think one of the key elements in that kind of cultural policy would be first recognizing the role of heritage in Canadian culture and the role of institutions, such as the library and the archives, as a source for those people who create new works as part of the growing culture. It's not only a question of looking back and having a sense of what was done in the past; it's not just the repository. Building that infrastructure and having those institutions in place can help the authors, artists, and television and film producers of today generate the kinds of works you want to encourage.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Building on what Lee has said, I think talking about using the past to build and create the future is critical. One of the things that must come out of the cultural policy is how we are going to deal with the next phase of copyright. This is a very difficult issue, and when you bring cultural industries and the users together you get a bit of a clash.

I couldn't be a higher or stronger supporter of our creators in this country. However, I think there must be a balance of interest between the owners and the users of copyright. Some of the things that are happening internationally, such as the WIPO treaty, are very worrying signs, particularly as we move into the digital environment. It's interesting, because those who hold the copyright I think have the feeling that now is the opportunity to suddenly get every penny they possibly can. I think they're forgetting that these artistic works are created because they have an information commons, as I call libraries, where collectively society gathered material together so people could go and use it. It wasn't just the wealthy who could buy books; anybody—the poorest person—could go and roam the shelves. It's that kind of browsing and serendipity that has resulted in a great deal of creativity in the world and in Canada. I think it's very important that in the next phases we recognize this balance between the owners and the users.

Certainly there should be more recognition for the role libraries play, because culture is not all high level. We have to remember that people come from all different parts and approach it in different ways. Certainly libraries have done more than their share and will continue to do so in encouraging people to read. Children's libraries, supporting libraries, and school libraries are critical to bringing people into this world of appreciating the written word—the visual. I would like more recognition of the role these institutions play in these activities.

Mr. Mark Muise: Thank you.

You raised another interesting point, and it's the new digital environment. I have a couple of questions. One pertains more to the practical point of view. I think it was you, Mr. McDonald, who made reference to the fact that we have mediums now that collect this information and they have a life span of maybe five or so years. We have a problem with acidic paper, but it's still there and there's protection against that. But if you have some other documentation that's on cassettes, CDs, or CD-ROMs, it creates another problem in a sense, because you have them collected, but if their shelf life is only five years, you have to retranscribe them. Is there a system in place where you could store something once well and continue because it's an ongoing—

Mr. Lee McDonald: We have been collecting that kind of electronic record for twenty years, starting with a trickle, and now certainly much more heavily than we have in the past. We're authorizing the destruction of paper files in some cases, where the database has been identified for retention. When we bring those records in at this point, we need to put them on a consistent medium and sometimes on two.

• 1210

The short answer is we cannot do what you've just suggested. The technology will change. The ideal model we would like to work toward is having the digital information on two media and being able to leapfrog them ahead just a little more each time so we don't lose one or the other, and neither one is too close to the cutting, leading edge of technology.

Dr. Marianne Scott: This is an incredible problem. National libraries and agencies around the world are looking at how we're going to preserve multimedia in the long term, because there's no safe answer. With just the very downloading and transferring from one to the other and losing it, after a while you're not sure you have it all. I might scare you to suggest that if you've had a CD around for ten years, try playing it and you might find it doesn't play so well. Even with the tangible electronic products, there's no safe way of securing them. I think the government should take a little more proactive role in investigating these issues.

I was fortunate enough to co-chair the government's task force on digitization. One of the recommendations we made in that was on the whole issue of examining how we preserve the digital format for a long time, because the question hasn't been answered.

The Chairman: We'll now move to Mr. O'Brien, followed by Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Pat O'Brien (London—Fanshawe, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank our guests for attending today and sharing their experiences.

I guess it's been my experience, unfortunately, that Canadians are shockingly ignorant of their history. That's a generalization, but unfortunately it's all too true. It's a great concern I have that we just don't seem, as a people, to appreciate or know our history nearly as well as we should. That concerns me for a number of reasons. I'm sure it concerns most parliamentarians and Canadians who realize that's the fact. So I'm very supportive of both your institutions and of the work you do.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the people at the National Archives, in particular Madam Houle, who played a big part in putting on the commemoration of the 130th anniversary of D'Arcy McGee's assassination, which the Prime Minister spoke at, as well as Ireland's ambassador, Mr. Dempsey, and Minister Copps. I think you did excellent work on that occasion. The displays were very good of McGee's writings and some very fascinating pictures. I helped organize that, so I wanted to thank you very much for your efforts in that regard.

The Prime Minister very quickly saw the relevance of that event not going unrecognized. But there were others, even parliamentarians, who really didn't understand who this guy was and why he was important. That reinforced my concern about the fact that we need to know and celebrate our history more as a people.

You've both spoken about the need for new buildings. I imagine we're talking about some significant dollars. I'd like you each, if you would, to detail briefly whether you have project projections for the buildings you're talking about. Do you have guestimates or estimates for the cost of those buildings? Until we loosen up those purse strings, what are your interim plans?

I'd like to hear from both witnesses, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Marianne Scott: As I suggested, we're very much into an urgent short-term need situation and we'll probably be in rental space. We're desperate to get some additional space to move our newspapers out of a warehouse that is unbelievable. There's no humidity, and on those hot days a week or so ago, the temperature was around 100 degrees. That is absolutely making that material deteriorate even faster. We're getting to the point where we don't have space for our incoming material.

For the long term, which I guess is the most serious one, we've been working for some time now to develop detailed estimates and plans, with both Treasury Board and Public Works. I guess the way I could describe it is we want perhaps a slightly smaller version of what the archives have in Gatineau. We need about 23,000 square metres of space. We desperately need a place that has adequate humidity and temperature controls, and particularly for storing things like our multimedia.

• 1215

As I said, what we want to do is take our preservation copy, which is the second copy we get on legal deposit, and get it out of the present building and into an area where the temperature control and humidity control will then enhance its life length.

At the moment, we don't have estimates of cost, but if you ballpark it— And by the way, I'm sorry that I did not introduce Tom Delsey, who is the director general of our policy and communications division, who is obviously—as you can well imagine, a right-hand support for me. Tom has been very involved in that, and I am sure he could give you some more information. I don't know; it's maybe $50 million or something in that neighbourhood.

The Chairman: If I may interject a minute to ask you, Dr. Scott, you talked about long term. What is long term? Is it five years, ten years, fifteen years?

Dr. Marianne Scott: No. We're thinking that facility would take us to about 2015.

The Chairman: Also, in France, when they moved the national library to the new premises, it was a massive undertaking and a massive cost for a temperature-sound building.

Dr. Marianne Scott: I don't have La Très Grande Bibliothèque in mind. I can assure you I'd settle for something a little less grand. I really want it functional; I want the humidity. I think Gatineau is a perfect example of a very efficient and effective preservation storage facility. I don't want to be on the Seine; I just want a building.

Tragically enough, for the money they've spent, they've had to build a storage facility outside of Paris, so La Très Grande Bibliothèque is not going to house the whole collection. They're having a—

Mr. Lee McDonald: From the National Archives' perspective, the current building, the Gatineau preservation centre, opened just one year ago. It was designed for archival material, which of course, by definition, means there's only one. The one copy of all those World War I personnel files is in that centre at this time. That was designed to meet our needs until about the year 2004. It's an excellent site for holding records, and it has the conservation laboratories on the top, employing about 70 people.

The downtown building, of course, was built originally for the National Library at 395 Wellington Street. We've shared that building with them since 1967.

In recent years the Government of Canada decided on the two-pronged approach: to build the preservation centre first, for the archival records; and then to build a facility for the National Archives downtown.

Over the last year, the architects have put in place the detailed plans to put the public face and the operational side of the archives on Wellington Street in the renovated West Memorial Building. It will be looking for its final approvals this year, and when that's accomplished—it's anticipated it would take five years—we would move out of the current building and leave the rest of that building for the use of the National Library.

That would certainly be a start, because certainly the most important approach to preserving records on the massive scale we're talking about is to make sure they're inside proper accommodation. It's the cheapest way to deal with it, at the front end of the problem, rather than trying to do remedial care afterwards.

In terms of accommodation, therefore, we very much hope we're on the right track right now, not only to solving a big part of the National Archives' problem but to releasing space that could be used by the National Library.

In both institutions, of course, by definition, Canada is a growing country, and we have growing amounts of material. There's always going to be something more to put in the collections, no matter how careful those collection management schemes may be. For that reason, there will be a need over the next century for a certain amount of new space.

At some point, presumably, the digital record will overtake some of the paper record, and the actual need for physical space may be diminished. The cost, however, of maintaining the digital record, as Mr. Muise was mentioning, does not reduce, because you do have to keep moving that forward from generation to generation.

Dr. Marianne Scott: One thing I might add, if I may, when my dear colleague to the right does move out of 395 Wellington Street, there will be some renovation required for that building, because it will permit us to bring two-thirds of our staff back from rental facilities, which is again an expense. When you don't have the bulk of your staff in one building, it is a more costly activity. So we're looking forward to that.

• 1220

Mr. Pat O'Brien: I didn't hear from the archives folks a cost estimate on the newest building there.

Mr. Lee McDonald: Funds were set aside when the two-pronged approach was set up so that Gatineau could be completed. Dollars were set aside then for that renovated facility downtown. At that time they were estimating it would be around $80 million.

Mr. Pat O'Brien: Okay. So that money is not sitting somewhere. That's additional capital moneys you would need.

Mr. Lee McDonald: They were identified within the Treasury Board Secretariat at that time. The exercise this fall is to go back and see exactly how firmly they were identified.

Mr. Pat O'Brien: I see.

I understand that problem, Mr. Chairman. As a matter of fact, I'm going to have to excuse myself for a meeting with the man who holds those purse strings.

The Chairman: Pass the message along.

Mr. Pat O'Brien: Yes, I'll try to pass this message along.

Thank you very much.

The Chairman: Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.): I have a technical question to start with. When you digitize a collection or something, how much of the original do you keep? Is there a ratio, a percentage?

You said you destroy certain files. I'm just curious to see the rapport that exists between the two of them.

Mr. Lee McDonald: When we are digitizing records within the National Archives, generally speaking we're able to digitize such a small proportion that they are the very most important ones, and need to be diffused elsewhere, and often have an intrinsic value themselves. Within that kind of approach, the original and the copy are both maintained.

The savings come, of course, when the Government of Canada, for example, begins using and operating with the digital version. If they're making decisions on a regular basis from a database, then we may be identifying that database, or its key information, for retention, and bringing it in only its digital form and never even bringing into the archives the case files that might have been coming in during previous years.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Okay.

Dr. Marianne Scott: For the National Library, basically the digitization we do is in several forms. As I said, we are digitizing unique materials that we would keep. If we were digitizing a fragile, heavily used item, we would certainly keep it. Again, we want to make sure we always have a copy of everything published in Canada.

As well, in exhibits we're putting material together, so we don't destroy.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Do you need to be a rat-packer?

Dr. Marianne Scott: Yes. There's no question about it. I hope I'm a cute little mouse or rat, but there's no question.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I have a second question. I've listened very carefully to the questions and the answers, to the way they're answered and the sequence in which they're answered. I would like to put this question to you. Would you agree that there are more similarities between your two institutions than differences?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I think there are certainly broad similarities in the sense of—

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I know you're sensing a trap here, but no.

Voices: Oh, oh.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Walk carefully. I tell you, he talked about mice and rat packs and then about the trap.

I guess one of the things is, again, the way in which we deal with materials. The libraries—and I think archives are going more that way—certainly have been people's institutions, where we have material, we have the people in, there's a lot of training that goes on about how to use the collection, how to do research, and how to access the material.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Would you agree that there are more similarities than differences?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I think there are more similarities, yes, than between, for example, the National Library and the National Film Board. Yes, there are more similarities between the National Library and the National Archives.

Mr. Lee McDonald: I think from the National Archives' perspective, I'd have to agree that in terms of the client, the citizen, coming in to use their institutions, there are tremendous similarities. There's a real plus in having the two institutions as close together as they have been in recent years, and as they will be, just across the street from each other, because the researcher needs access to what's previously been published, and sometimes in relatively unique form, as well as to the archival records.

The big difference, of course, are the communities with whom we deal to bring those records in. While the library may try to have a comprehensive collection of everything published in Canada, the decision-making at the National Archives is to select from the federal government the 3% to 5% that should be kept, destroying the rest.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: So you agree as well that there are more similarities than differences.

Mr. Lee McDonald: I'm agreeing with the front half, the client side. The big difference is in the provenance, where the records come from.

• 1225

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: The next question—and you're expecting it, so I might as well ask it—is why are there two institutions? Why is there not just the one?

Mr. Lee McDonald: I would think for the reason I was coming toward. The public face of the institution is very similar, but on the other side, the place those records come from, is quite different. We never deal with publishers in the archives. We're dealing with the sources of the records in the government departments.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: That would justify a separate existence, in your mind?

Mr. Lee McDonald: In the sense that we have a different clientele, we're doing different work, and making selection decisions. Therefore, we're hiring, at this point, primarily people who have a history background and very few people who have a library background.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I understand that what I'm suggesting here is difficult. The natural human reaction, human nature being what it is, would be to resist even contemplating such a profanity. I understand that. But I ask you very sincerely, would perhaps there not be more advantages to having one institution than two? I'm talking about your two institutions being together—as they are, physically.

Mr. Lee McDonald: The minister announced a study of exactly that issue a few weeks back and had asked Dr. John English, a former member of Parliament, to undertake that study between now and the end of September, with a report by November, to examine the mandates of the institutions and in particular, the impact of the electronic record on those two institutions in the next century.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I find it strange you didn't mention it in your presentation here. Is there resistance to that on the part of your institutions?

Dr. Marianne Scott: To the study? No.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: No, to its possible conclusion that the two be one.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Well, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. One of the questions really is, what is it going to gain? We know it's not going to save any money. As you know, we sort of spawned out of the archives. For 15 years the national archivist—the dominion archivist, as he was then known—was also the national librarian, but there came a point when it was clear that the amount of involvement and the types of communities he was dealing with was more than one person could deal with.

We still have common services, so we have managed to coordinate where there are things we can share, such as personnel and finance and mail services and that type of thing, but I think our communities are quite different. I think in terms of the leadership role the National Library plays, nationally and internationally—and I'm sure it's the same for the archives—if it were a merged and a blurred picture I don't think it would be as strong. Certainly both communities feel strongly that they want clearly identifiable library and archives.

If you follow what's happening internationally, it is very hard to find even one country that has in fact merged its national archives and national library. They are two separate institutions in terms of the way in which we deal with the community, and our networking.

As I say, I guess I would like to know what you would gain.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: We'll let Mr. English do his work and then we'll see, won't we?

Dr. Marianne Scott: Exactly.

Mr. Lee McDonald: There was indeed a very positive response to parts of that announcement of the study, especially because it focused on the electronic record and the way in which the two institutions are going to be part of the solution of dealing with that kind of record and document in the next century.

I think for the archives, at least, which has been struggling away from that dusty image for a long time, it was tremendously refreshing to see a study couched almost entirely in terms of the electronic record and the way in which the institution can be a part of the next century.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you.

The Chairman: Mr. Bonwick.

Mr. Paul Bonwick (Simcoe—Grey, Lib.): I'd like to touch on Mr. Bélanger's comments as well in that I could draw a parallel, I think, between the Ministry of Fisheries and Ministry of Transport. They have completely separate mandates, they deliver their services in completely separate ways, and their customer base is completely separate as well. However, although they used to function out of two completely separate buildings in Sarnia, the government forced both parties to come together and operate out of one building and provide services out of one building.

Although their mandates are likely never to be the same—and in terms of the study of the mandates, I don't know that your mandates are going to be the same—their needs, their structural needs and their infrastructure needs, are very similar.

I hope when they're comparing, they're not simply comparing whether the mandates are ever going to be the same. When Mr. English is doing his study I hope he's actually doing a comparison on whether there are cost savings from an infrastructure standpoint if there were a combination of the two. That's more for a comment than a question, but you're certainly welcome to address that later on.

• 1230

You made comments, as have most of the witnesses when they've come forward, dealing with the maintenance of culture, history, and our heritage that funding cutbacks have been in large part the most significant deterrent to them being able to carry out their role, which is the role that Canadians demand. But that's sort of obvious.

I'm just wondering if you could maybe offer some suggestions, if there are any in fact, on how government might support or resolve some of these problems you're experiencing, other than simply taking out a cheque and handing over $80 million. Are there other more creative ways we could possibly assist through, I don't know, taxation? I look to you for the answer.

That was the first question, I would certainly be interested in having both of you comment on that.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Certainly one thing that will help is if we manage to get our staff back in one building. We'll cut down on some administrative costs and that type of thing.

I don't know how a lot of it can be done without money, to be blunt. One of the things that we certainly need is investment in our infrastructure to permit us to deal with the new electronic environment. I can't think of any way of getting it, unless one could persuade some major systems company to donate free time to build a system. But that's not going to happen. You need new equipment and you need that new technology, and that's going to cost money.

There are a couple of things that could help. We're trying to, as I said, wrestle with the issue of a legal deposit for electronic material. We have one legal opinion that the present interpretation of a book within the National Library Act for legal deposit does not and will not cover dynamic, on-line electronic information. So certainly, as we sort this out and try to find out how the legislation is changed, if the government will move swiftly and change it for us, then we will be able to get this material without additional costs. So that would be one way.

Certainly I think the copyright legislation is another area where, as I said, maintaining that balance between the user and the creator will be an important thing.

Those are two ways that might help. But I think bluntly that dollars are going to be needed at some point.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: And obviously, creative ways—

Mr. Lee McDonald: One of the elements that touches the archives most immediately is the connection we have to the Government of Canada and the amount of records that come from that sector. We've identified for a number of years within the institution that the more that can be fixed early in the system, the better the archival record will be once it's selected and coming to us.

That's particularly important with the electronic record. For that reason, one of the responses to your question would be to endorse and emphasize the kind of information management policy and legislation that underpins the information structure within the federal government. The kind of infrastructure that supports access to information legislation makes it possible to find those records for those purposes, but just as importantly, it allows government to find those records through their own work, and ultimately then keeps 5% of the records that we keep in very good shape as well.

So an investment not necessarily of money, but in approaches, structure, and policy at the front end of information management may be useful.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: Mr. McDonald, understanding the time constraints here, that's a very valid point. I wonder if you might address a letter in detail outlining how that mechanism might work and send it to the chair. He would circulate it and give us an opportunity to research it as a committee in terms of how we might support something like that.

Mr. Lee McDonald: I'd be pleased to do that.

The Chairman: If you address it to the clerk of the committee, we'll see that it's distributed.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: I have two short questions.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: These are to Dr. Scott and certainly to Mr. McDonald as well.

One of the things I would like to encourage, if it's not taking place, is some more formal research or strategy sessions being done on other solutions. In the ideal world, it would be nice to be able to say that here's $80 million for a new building, but that's not necessarily going to take place.

• 1235

It would be nice to see investigations into other possible solutions where there's partnering and sometimes opportunities for private sector government or whatever, I don't know. If there were some significant investigations done in that area, it would be nice to be able to come back with some alternatives other than simply saying here's how much we need.

Last, this question is more for assistance for us. We can get this through the clerk if you don't have the information. When the committee is putting forth a recommendation, part of it obviously will be dealing with funding for how to support organizations like yours. Do you have any idea how we compare to other developed nations in regard to funding, as a percentage of GDP, organizations or institutions like yours?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I don't think I can give you that off the top of my head, but we will certainly get back to you.

Mr. Lee McDonald: For that as a percentage of GDP, we'll get back to you.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Bonwick.

Ms. Lill.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Actually I was going to ask you that as well, because I'd like to get an idea of how we stack up with other countries in terms of our commitments to our cultural institutions.

Dr. Marianne Scott: I think we can say without giving exact figures that we know how we stack up against France. The billions that were spent—

Mr. Paul Bonwick: This should be a comparison as a percentage of GDP.

I'm sorry for interrupting.

Dr. Marianne Scott: I haven't got the figures, but we know how many billion francs were spent on the whole new structure.

Ms. Wendy Lill: I know we really slid way down in the pack in terms of public broadcasting and in many other areas, so I'd like to see how far in fact we've slid down in terms of the library and the archives.

I just have one other question, and it's an obvious one. No one has asked it yet. What about the year 2000 bug. What impact is that going to have on our library and archives? Are you working on it?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I can answer that. Certainly, the major application supporting operations in the National Library of Canada are ready for Y2K. That is our major system, AMICUS. It was built in the last five years, and we planned for it. One of the systems, an off-the-shelf system we use for circulation, Dynix, is ready. We have established dates with vendors of operating systems that support some of our activities for Y2K upgrades.

The system that really has a problem is our e-mail system. It had been scheduled to be upgraded this year, so that will happen in the fall. We've tested all our hardware, and we're now scheduling the replacement of non-compliant terminals, because we have quite a few of those, but there's a plan for that.

The last thing is that we're awaiting dates from suppliers of telecommunication software for upgrades to the telecom closets and switches for the backbone of the communications structure.

By and large, we're in reasonably good shape. I think on the government scale, we're sort of in the middle. We're not totally ready, but we're up there. We're certainly not at the bottom.

The Chairman: Will you be ready?

Dr. Marianne Scott: We will be ready.

Mr. Lee McDonald: Within the National Archives of Canada, we will be ready for 2000. There are a couple of systems which need to be addressed. There are others of which we are accelerating the modernization. We'll make sure those are in place by 2000.

The issues we are challenged by will be those departments of government that take a non-compliant system, replace it with something else, and perhaps leave behind information or data that may have some value. Rather than just letting that die on the vine, we want to make sure that we're there to look at those systems and see whether there's important data that needs to be taken off that non-compliant software and preserved as hard information in our systems. That will be a bit of a challenge between now and 2000, and we're in the process of talking with departments about that initiative.

The Chairman: Mr. Muise, do you have a question?

Mr. Mark Muise: I just have a short question, Mr. Chairman.

You talked about funding earlier. This is directed more to the archives. Do you get all of your funding from the federal government, or are there some services that you provide that you collect a fee for?

I was thinking about what Mr. Bonwick was speaking about earlier when he spoke of some partnering. I noticed in your presentation that, for example, you talked about Dominion Textile and textiles. I was wondering if there could be a partnering there.

Say you have a company who has some interest in preserving some of their heritage and history. Instead of them just plunking it down and saying here it is, take care of it, you could say, well, yes, we'd be more than happy to, but we would like some help in defraying the cost for this. You would then be providing a service but also doing something for a company that's for profit. One could help the other, just as you've done in—

• 1240

Mr. Lee McDonald: In that specific instance, there was a set of records for a company that was going bankrupt. The records were at risk, so in effect it was more of a rescue operation.

Your committee may wish to explore encouraging companies, through the tax structure, to preserve their own history and to maintain their own archives rather than trying to give them away. The Hudson's Bay Company in Winnipeg, for example, with its very rich history going back centuries, has accomplished a tremendous coup in turning over the records and also a trust fund to the archives to take care of their records, just as you have suggested. That's not possible when we have a company that's going under.

There are charges that we make within the institution. Perhaps I'll ask Madame Houle to address some of the fund-raising initiatives that we've undertaken.

Ms. Françoise Houle (Director General, Client Services and Communications Branch, National Archives of Canada): Of course we charge for some special services under the user fee policy, but most of this revenue is for copies of documents. The amount we are receiving is not that big and it's going to the consolidated revenue fund.

The other part of that which has been tried with some success is to develop interest in companies and private foundations in regard to giving money or supporting some initiatives, but we have to realize, I think, that there is a kind of utopia in thinking that the private sector can finance or fund heritage institutions. They can finance or fund a special project, like the opening of an exhibition, because for them it is publicity, and of course they are asking something in exchange for it. And we can certainly receive a gift of equipment which is used by the public because there the public would see the name of the company and the gift.

But we have enormous needs behind that which have been funded until now by the government. And we are, I would say, in a paradoxical situation now. There are new means which could permit archives, for instance, to make their documents available, to make them known, but up front we need to have the tools to get the access to the documents.

For instance, we need to have those tools that we call “finding aids” digitized, so that they can be used in an automated format and not only in our reference room here in Ottawa, not only in our decentralized access sites which are in five areas of Canada, but also through the Internet in the offices or in the homes of people. It takes money to do that.

The new and immense opportunity, I think, is the presence of the interest of the networks in history, and the appetite, if I may say, for historical material, but this material— We have the raw material. We have the audio-visual material, the photographic material and the manuscript material, but of course you need to have the tools to find it in the archives. We have twenty million photos in the archives, so we cannot say, “just dig and search”. You need to have tools in order to be able to find and identify your material.

So we are open to the networks, but they have to hire their own researchers to do that kind of very precise minutia sort of work.

• 1245

There could be, I think, enormous work done in order to do what Mr. O'Brien was saying, to make the history and the identity of Canada more known by and closer to the people of Canada. That's why we also hope to have a centre for young Canadians in our renovated West Memorial Building, so that young Canadians can learn what the archives are, what it means to be un personnage historique and what it means to do research in archives. We think that by making them interested we will have a new generation who will, after learning that, understand better and feel better.

The Chairman: Do you want to add something, Dr. Scott?

Dr. Marianne Scott: I agree with everything that the archives representatives have said here. Our user fees also go to the consolidated revenue fund and we do a lot of sponsorship, raising small amounts of money to support our public programming, because as part of our downsizing we cut out a major part of our staff. So what we're doing in public programming is coming from sponsorship.

I just want to underline the point that Françoise made. There seems to be an impression that there's a huge amount of private sector money out there that is waiting to come and support federal cultural institutions. I think this is not correct.

First of all, a lot of these people ask why they should be giving money to a government institution. They say they're prepared to give money to a small museum or a small library that is not the federal government's, but they do ask why they should be giving money to the National Library of Canada.

So it's a lot of very hard work to try to raise this kind of money. For example, at the present moment, we're trying to raise money for our major exhibition to commemorate the 75th birthday of Oscar Peterson. It's a lot of work to try to raise money to have a major exhibition, particularly if you want it to travel so that people will see it.

I'm just saying that we work work very hard at it, but I'm not sure that the return equals the amount of effort that we put in, simply because I don't think the money is there for us.

The Chairman: Mr. Bélanger.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Dr. Scott, in English your title is national librarian. Is the French equivalent "bibliothécaire nationale"?

Dr. Marianne Scott: No, it is "administrateur général".

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: I think that should be changed. It isn't poetic at all. So I will call you the "bibliothécaire nationale".

Let me ask you one question. It may not be your role to give us that suggestion and maybe you will refuse to do it, but I would like to ask you, as national librarian, to give us, parliamentarians, some ideas for summer reading: a good French book and a good English book. You don't have to answer immediately. You can send it to us later. Thank you.

[English]

Dr. Marianne Scott: My pleasure.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[English]

Dr. Marianne Scott: In fact, you know, we do have a publication called Read Up On It. We distribute about 15,000 to 20,000 copies of this publication across Canada to schools and libraries. Every year we have a theme. This coming year, next September, it will be a mystery theme. We provide a reading list and bookmarks and things like that.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Think about it. As national librarian you could suggest some summer readings to Canadian parliamentarians. They probably will feel obligated to read the book you recommend. You could thereby influence national policy. Don't miss this opportunity.

Dr. Marianne Scott: —

[Editor's Note: Inaudible]— summer.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: One last question from Mr. Bonwick.

[English]

Mr. Paul Bonwick: Just for clarification, Mr. Chairman, in regard to a comment of Dr. Scott's, I can only speak for myself, but I think the rest of the committee would agree that there's not an assumption that huge pools of capital are out there waiting to go into the national archives or the national library—or into any national institution, for that matter. I certainly wasn't trying to put that suggestion on the floor.

What I was suggesting was that perhaps there are ways the government could help stimulate pools of capital from the private sector, and I was looking to you to provide some suggestions on how we might do that, how we might create that interest, either through taxation breaks or incentives. And a couple of suggestions were made.

So it certainly wasn't my intent to suggest that there are hundreds of millions of dollars—

Dr. Marianne Scott: That would be offloading.

Mr. Paul Bonwick: —ready to be dumped into anything.

Dr. Marianne Scott: One dreams though, sometimes.

The Chairman: Ms. Bulte.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte (Parkdale—High Park, Lib.): One of the things the U.K. is doing—and this is unfortunately not something the federal government can do on its own—for its arts and cultural industries is the millennium fund for the arts and culture, which is for infrastructure, just what you were speaking about.

• 1250

Dr. Marianne Scott: Yes.

Ms. Sarmite Bulte: It was how many billion of pounds? I think it was 1.3 billion pounds that was raised from the lottery. If we could get the provinces to work together with us, so that it's not just those federal— I think it might be well worth looking into, because it certainly raised a lot of new money, which is exactly what we need.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Yes—just what we're after.

The Chairman: Thank you very much, Dr. Scott, Mr. McDonald, Madame Houle, and Mr. Delsey, for appearing before us today.

You could hear from the questions of the members that we are extremely interested in seeing that the input you have into our cultural milieu should continue and be enhanced. What we want to find out is how we are going to do this—this is really the purpose of our study—and you have brought many facts to our attention.

Mr. McDonald, you're going to be writing to us. And we have our new researcher here, Mr. Blais, who has been taking notes. Certainly we'll take into account, in our consideration of the study, what you brought to us today. Thank you very much for coming.

Dr. Marianne Scott: Thank you. It's been a pleasure to be here.

The Chairman: The meeting is adjourned.