Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Canadian provincial and territorial archival legislation : a case study of the disjunction between theory.. 1989

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1990_A3 B79.pdf [ 7.09MB ]
UBC_1990_A3 B79.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0097988.json
JSON-LD: 1.0097988+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0097988.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0097988+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0097988+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0097988+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0097988.ris

Full Text

CANADIAN PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL ARCHIVAL LEGISLATION: A CASE STUDY OF THE DISJUNCTION BETWEEN THEORY AND LAW by V i c t o r i a Louise Bryans B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto, 1985 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHIVAL STUDIES In THE FACULTY OF ARTS School of L i b r a r y , A r c h i v a l and Information S t u d i e s We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 1989 @ V i c t o r i a Louise Bryans In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of QStJUf^ /fatf/MC M //Of&UJ/TPOh) Qf^/fJ' The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date DE-6 (2/88) i i ABSTRACT This thes is i s an inquiry into the nature of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in Canada. It provides an analys i s of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n as a form of writ ten communication and argues that the l e g i s l a t i o n suffers from the same de f i c i enc i e s inherent in other forms of communication as a re su l t of external s o c i a l influences on i t s meaning. Chapter one therefore traces the evolut ion of the l e g i s l a t i o n from 1790 to the present and shows how the meaning of current l e g i s l a t i v e texts emerged neither from object ive l ega l considerations nor a r c h i v a l theory, but as an ad hoc response to a v a r i e t y of s o c i a l inf luences . The remaining chapters are based on a de ta i l ed content analys i s of the three main components of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n : provis ions e s tab l i sh ing d e f i n i t i o n s of key terms, provis ions e s tab l i sh ing the scope and author i ty of adminis trat ive s tructures for a r c h i v a l programmes and provis ions e s tab l i sh ing programme elements. They elaborate on the argument advanced in chapter one that the s o c i a l production of meaning, a r i s i n g from the manner in which current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has developed, adversely af fects i t s a b i l i t y to promote the preservat ion of documents in two ways. F i r s t , th i s process i i i of development has meant that wording in l e g i s l a t i v e texts c a r r i e s overtones of outdated a t t i tudes and assumptions about arch ives . Second, i t has led to inconsistency, c o n f l i c t , vagueness and ambiguity in the meaning of the texts . These chapters also put forth p r e s c r i p t i v e ideas regarding how the adverse af fects of s o c i a l influences on the meaning of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n might be overcome. iv CONTENTS Abstract i i Table of Contents iv Acknowledgements v Dedication v i Introduction 1 1. The Development of Canadian 13 P r o v i n c i a l and T e r r i t o r i a l A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n 2. The Impact of the Dis junct ion 46 between Theory and Law on Def in i t ions of Key Terms 3. The Impact of the Dis junct ion 69 between Theory and Law on Administrat ive Structures 4. The Impact of the Dis junct ion 85 Between Theory and Law on Programme Elements Conclusion 113 Notes to Introduction 120 Notes to Chapter 1 123 Notes to Chapter 2 126 Notes to Chapter 3 128 Notes to Chapter 4 130 Bibl iography 133 Appendix A: L i s t of Current P r o v i n c i a l 143 and T e r r i t o r i a l A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n Appendix B: Datasheet 149 Appendix C: Chronological Synopsis of 162 P r o v i n c i a l and T e r r i t o r i a l A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to express my apprec iat ion to a l l p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s that responded to my i n i t i a l written inquiry about the i r current l e g i s l a t i v e framework. I would also l i k e to thank Bernice Chong and Anne Maclean, fe l low Masters of A r c h i v a l Studies students, for the ir assistance in t e s t ing the design of the content analys i s in th i s thes i s . I am p a r t i c u l a r l y g r a t e f u l , as we l l , to Terry Eastwood, my thes is supervisor , and David Leonard, Senior Government Records A r c h i v i s t at the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of Alberta for the ir useful suggestions and i n s i g h t f u l c r i t i c i s m s . F i n a l l y , I owe s p e c i a l thanks to my husband, Bret , for his help and understanding. 4 v l For Mom page 1 INTRODUCTION Almost as long as there has been writ ten communication, there has been some form of regulat ion by publ ic powers concerning the preservat ion of documents.*1 The f i r s t l e g i s l a t i o n governing the management and use of archives arose in 1794, when, during the French Revolut ion, the government of the new regime passed a decree regarding archives .*2 Most j u r i s d i c t i o n s have followed the French example and given l e g i s l a t i v e legi t imacy to the i r publ ic arch ives . In Canada, however, publ ic archives often existed h i s t o r i c a l l y before the i r existence was a c t u a l l y sanctioned in l e g i s l a t i o n . * 3 The National Archives of Canada, for example emerged long before an act was passed l e g a l l y e s tab l i sh ing i t , as did the Archives Nationales in Quebec. The Prov inc ia Archives of B r i t i s h Columbia s t i l l has no l e g i s l a t i v e author i ty for i t s existence. These cases might suggest that a r c h i v a l laws are perhaps useful but not necessary. This thes is springs from a deeply held convic t ion that a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n is e s sent ia l to any well-developed a r c h i v a l programme and is an important determinant of how page 2 well that programme can carry out the preservat ion o£ documents. Many years ago, few publ ic organizations had comprehensive l e g i s l a t i o n governing the adminis trat ion of personnel or f inances. A gradual increase in the complexity of these a c t i v i t i e s led to a need for a l e g i s l a t i v e framework within which these a c t i v i t i e s could be performed. S i m i l a r l y , archives adminis trat ion grows more complex. As the importance of recorded information to soc ie ty increases in the so - ca l l ed information age, the need for comprehensive l e g i s l a t i o n governing the care and management of information throughout i t s l i f e cycle w i l l become more evident . A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , i f properly designed, can provide a framework for a r c h i v a l a c t i v i t y by o u t l i n i n g the archives ' or a r c h i v i s t ' s funct ions . It can play a ro le in educating the publ ic and resource a l l o c a t o r s about the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of archives , and in doing so, make archives more accountable. As p o l i c y sanctioned at the highest l e v e l , l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l l eg i t imize the pos i t ion of the archives in the eyes of adminis trators , p o l i t i c i a n s , and the publ ic and encourage them to see a r c h i v a l work as a normal feature of t h e i r soc ie ty . F i n a l l y , because l e g i s l a t i o n is sanctioned by bodies that command ultimate p o l i t i c a l author i ty , i t can stimulate the preservat ion of documents by enshrining r igh t s and se t t ing down ob l iga t ions . Despite the necess i ty and usefulness of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , there is l i t t l e a r c h i v a l l i t e r a t u r e touching page 3 upon the subject . Lewis H. Thomas wrote a pioneer a r t i c l e on a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in 1962. John Archer's thes is on the h i s t o r y of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s in Canada, completed in 1969, provides the most comprehensive overview of the l e g i s l a t i v e framework of p r o v i n c i a l publ ic a r c h i v a l programmes to date.*4 Both of these sources are now obviously outdated. A more recent a r t i c l e by Jerome O'Br ien , e n t i t l e d "Archives and the Law: A B r i e f Look at the Canadian Scene", is unfortunately a l l too b r i e f . * 5 Like Brown and Archer before him, O'Brien does not discuss l e g i s l a t i o n in the t e r r i t o r i e s . Other than th i s recent general survey, there are only a few scattered accounts which touch upon the subject of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . * 6 It i s th i s gap in the l i t e r a t u r e that th i s study hopes to f i l l . This thes is w i l l describe the current status of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , evaluate i t s effect iveness and develop prescr ip t ive ideas about how i t might be improved in order to a s s i s t a r c h i v i s t s in reviewing and d r a f t i n g a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . It does not examine the implementation of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Rather, i t examines a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n on a t h e o r e t i c a l l eve l as a form of writ ten communication. As one j u r i s t expresses i t : As with human language, l ega l discourse is only a too l to express the thought of the speaker, in order that the l i s t ener may adequately comprehend the contents of his message. Since law is the r e s u l t of the conscious and premeditated a c t i v i t y page 4 of i t s author, he w i l l be deemed not only to have c a r e f u l l y formulated in his own mind the exact ru le he w i s h e s to e s t a b l i s h , but a l s o to have c h o s e n , with r e f l e c t i o n and premeditation, the words that best serve to express his ideas and in tent ion . Thus in construing an enactment we must f i r s t look at i t s wording.*7 To t h i s end, th i s thes is concentrates on the analys i s of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n as written text by focusing, in p a r t i c u l a r , on three main components of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n : provis ions e s tab l i sh ing d e f i n i t i o n s of important terms, provis ions e s tab l i sh ing the scope and author i ty of adminis trat ive s tructures for a r c h i v a l programmes and provis ions e s tab l i sh ing the basic elements of a r c h i v a l programmes. Chapter one discusses the development of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n from 1790 to the present. E s s e n t i a l l y , th i s chapter argues that the meaning of Canadian a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n ar i ses neither from object ive l ega l considerations nor from a r c h i v a l theory, but rather as a response to p o l i t i c a l , admini s tra t ive , and s o c i a l t r a d i t i o n s and condi t ions . Appendix C provides a chronologica l sysnopsis of th i s developmental process for each j u r i s d i c t i o n . The remaining chapters, based on a de ta i l ed content analys i s of the three main components of the l e g i s l a t i v e texts , elaborate on the argument advanced in chapter one that the manner in which the l e g i s l a t i o n has developed a d v e r s e l y affects i t s a b i l i t y to promote the preservat ion of documents page 5 in the present s o c i a l and technological context. These chapters also put for th prescr ip t ive ideas regarding how these adverse af fects might be overcome. A few words of explanation are needed about the content analys i s used in th i s t h e s i s . Content analys i s i t s e l f has been defined in several ways. Ole H o l s t i describes i t in his book on content analys i s for the s o c i a l sciences and humanities as "any technique for making inferences by o b j e c t i v e l y and sys temat ica l ly ident i fy ing spec i f i ed c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of messages."*8 H o l s t i presents content analys i s as a multipurpose research method developed s p e c i f i c a l l y for inves t igat ing any problem in which the content of communication serves as the basis of inference.*9 A d e f i n i t i o n by Berelson in 1952 states that "content analys i s i s a research technique for the object ive , systematic, and quant i tat ive descr ip t ion of the manifest content of communication."*10 Another writer on the subject , Klaus Krippendorff , defines i t as "a research technique for making r e p l i c a b l e and v a l i d inferences from data in t h e i r context."*11 The key factors in a l l three of these d e f i n i t i o n s are the a b i l i t y to draw inferences from the content o£ communications in a object ive , systematic and r e p l i c a b l e manner. The idea for conducting a content analys i s of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n came from a study of American state a r c h i v a l law done by George Bain in 1983.*12 page 6 However, while Bain's study of state a r c h i v a l law serves as a basic guide, the s tructure of th i s analys i s d i f f e r s from that c a r r i e d out by Bain in several ways. F i r s t of a l l , the grouping of content categories d i f f e r s from that of Bain . Bain's groupings consis t of three concept groups, l e g a l , admin i s tra t ive , and standard. Within each of his groups there are several categories as fol lows: GROUP 1: LEGAL Publ ic record Publ ic agencies Legal custodian Del ivery of records to successor Legal e v i d e n t i a l value Access Replevin Sanctions for v i o l a t i o n s Time/Privacy l i m i t a t i o n s State Archival /Records Management Agency GROUP 2: ADMINISTRATIVE Powers and duties of the State A r c h i v i s t Powers and duties of the State Records Manager Agency assistance State Records scheduling procedures V i t a l records GROUP 3: STANDARD Standards for materials F ireproof While the use of Bain's categories would have yie lded in teres t ing comparisons between a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n of the Canadian provinces and t e r r i t o r i e s and the American s ta tes , th i s study uses d i f f e r e n t groups of categories which correspond to e x i s t i n g Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l l e g i s l a t i v e texts . For the purposes of th i s study, the page 7 various categories of content elements were divided into three broad groups corresponding to the three basic components of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n : 1) provis ions e s tab l i sh ing d e f i n i t i o n s , 2) provis ions e s tab l i sh ing adminis trat ive s t ruc tures , and 3) provis ions concerned with programme elements. Another di f ference between the s tructure of Bain's analys i s and th i s analys i s is in the l eve l of d e t a i l . In Bain's a n a l y s i s , each category consis ts of components, which are used to define categories but are not themselves measured.*9 In th i s a n a l y s i s , categories were div ided into measurable components, subcomponents and choices , where necessary, as fol lows: A. GROUPS I Categories 1. Primary components of categories 1.1 Secondary components of categories 1.1.1 T e r t i a r y components of categories 1.1.1(1) Subcomponents of categories (where needed) (a) primary choices ( i ) secondary choices The content of l e g i s l a t i v e texts was searched to assess the rate of appearance for whichever unit or units formed the lowest l eve l in the s tructure of each category, for example, a subcomponent or a choice . Coverage of each of these categories in current page 8 p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n was assessed by searching a l l relevant l e g i s l a t i v e texts . This search included any p r o v i n c i a l s tatutes , t e r r i t o r i a l ordinances, regu la t ions , and o r d e r s - i n - c o u n c i l r e l a t i n g to the preservat ion of documents in a general sense. L e g i s l a t i o n which establ ishes an a r c h i v a l repos i tory and bestows powers upon a p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t is considered to be primary l e g i s l a t i o n . L e g i s l a t i o n concerned with the general care and management of publ ic records is considered to be secondary l e g i s l a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n , s tatutes , ordinances or regulat ions which l i m i t or otherwise d i r e c t l y a f fec t the a p p l i c a t i o n of a sect ion of a province's or t e r r i t o r y ' s primary or publ ic records l e g i s l a t i o n is considered secondary. In most cases, th i s l e g i s l a t i o n can be i d e n t i f i e d by the fact that i t re fers to the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t or archives , or is re ferred to in a j u r i s d i c t i o n ' s archives ac t . Access to information laws provide an example of a type of l e g i s l a t i o n that i s often al luded to in primary or publ ic records l e g i s l a t i o n . A complete l i s t i n g of the t i t l e s of a l l relevant texts appears as Appendix A of th i s thes i s . This study does not embrace l ega l instruments created to deal with a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n : for example, an o r d e r - i n - counc i l passed to permit the d isposa l of a group of records . In a d d i t i o n , d i r e c t i v e s and p o l i c y statements are purposely excluded because they are more concerned with the implementation of programmes than with the i r establishment. page 9 A disadvantage of excluding d i r e c t i v e s and p o l i c y statements i s that some j u r i s d i c t i o n s use them to enact provis ions that other j u r i s d i c t i o n s enact by statute or regu la t ion . Laws i n d i r e c t l y a f f ec t ing the work of a r c h i v i s t s , such as those that spec i fy retent ion periods of publ ic records, are excluded from th i s study.*13 This study excludes federal s ta tutes , such as the Copyright Act , as w e l l , s ince they are outside p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l l e g i s l a t i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n and af fec t p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l a c t i v i t y uni formly. The appearance of a category, or component, sub-component or choice , whichever was the lowest l eve l in the h i e r a r c h i c a l s tructure of each category, in primary l e g i s l a t i o n , secondary l e g i s l a t i o n or regulat ions was indicated by a "P", "S", or "R" re spec t ive ly . The use of these symbols revealed the type of l ega l instrument in which content elements appeared. Use of the l e t t e r symbols in th i s analys i s i s d i f f eren t from that of Bain in that i t provides quant i f iab le data about the form of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n over and above i t s content. Although the s tructure of the content analys i s provides a f a i r l y precise instrument of measurement, i t s accuracy large ly depends on the in terpre ta t ion of the l e g i s l a t i o n . In order to increase the l e v e l of consistency and r e l i a b i l i t y in assessing the lega l texts , th i s study r e l i e s on guidel ines for in terpre ta t ion loose ly based on rules for the in terpre ta t ion of s ta tutes . The same guidel ines apply to Quebec as to other page 10 j u r i s d i c t i o n s although, in r e a l i t y , there are di f ferences in Quebec as to the methods of dra f t ing and in terpre t ing s tatutory instruments. As a r e s u l t , Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n , which is not writ ten in the context of the common law l ega l system, does not s u i t e i ther the grammatical form of in t erpre ta t ion that th i s study uses or the s tructure of the content analys i s as well as l e g i s l a t i o n written in the context of a common law l ega l system. In th i s study, the fol lowing guidel ines apply: 1) The act , ordinance or regulat ion as a whole is to be read in i t s ent ire context meaning the law as expressly enacted by words and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the act and l e g i s l a t i o n in par i materia. Therefore, before coding each i n d i v i d u a l ac t , f i r s t read through a l l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n for a p a r t i c u l a r j u r i d i c t i o n to gain a sense of how the enactments re la te to one another. 2) Words in the act are to be read in the i r grammatical and ordinary sense in the l i g h t of the whole context unless some other d e f i n i t i o n is provided. 3) The same words in an act carry the same meaning unless otherwise s p e c i f i e d . 4) When technica l words appear in the ac t , they are to be read in the ir t echnica l sense. 5) If words are disharmonious within the act or l e g i s l a t i o n in par i materia then a less grammatical and ordinary meaning is to be given them. 6) If obscur i ty , ambiguity or disharmony cannot be resolved objec t ive ly by reference to the meaning of the act as expressly enacted by words or the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the act and l e g i s l a t i o n in par i materia, then comparisons with the a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in other j u r i s d i c t i o n s may be drawn for the purpose of c l a r i f i c a t i o n . * 1 4 In addi t ion to the above general i n s t r u c t i o n s , more de ta i l ed ins truct ions appear under each category where necessary (see page 11 Appendix B) . To further ensure the consistency and r e l i a b i l i t y of r e s u l t s , coding of l e g i s l a t i o n for the province of B r i t i s h Columbia was compared with coding of the same l e g i s l a t i o n done by two other i n d i v i d u a l s . There was an average 92 percent l e v e l of agreement between r e s u l t s . Where necessary, d e f i n i t i o n s were c l a r i f i e d or more s p e c i f i c ins truct ions provided in order to reduce ambiguity. A l l content data was also coded three times to assure consistency of re su l t s over time. Nevertheless, as with a l l forms of communication, where the in terpre ta t ion of l e g i s l a t i o n is involved there w i l l always remain a c e r t a i n l eve l of ambiguity. This analys i s a lso adopted a system of measurement which d i f f e r s from B a i n ' s . Bain based his method on ranking state laws comparatively from zero to three on how well they scored in each category. A zero ra t ing s i g n i f i e d no coverage of the category while three s i g n i f i e d de ta i l ed and e x p l i c i t coverage.*25 Bain's system of measurement required that he make value judgements about the d e t a i l or exp l i c i tnes s of coverage. Since these judgements could influence the r e s u l t s , th i s study employs a system of measurement based simply upon the appearance of the content elements in the l e g i s l a t i v e texts . The method of enumeration rests on a simple 0-1 p r i n c i p l e . If no l e t t e r symbols appeared next to a category, page 12 i t scored a zero. If a "P", "S", "R" or any combination of these symbols appeared, i t scored a one. No attempt was made to judge the r e l a t i v e merits of the three types of l ega l instruments by ass igning a range of values . Therefore, a l l symbols equal a score of one except in category C / I I / 3 . 3 , concerning the transfer of publ ic records , and category C / I I I / 2 , concerning the transfer or deposit of spec ia l c lasses of records , where l e t t e r symbols equal .5 under each type of document in order to avoid recording content a t t r ibute s twice. The data sheet for the content a n a l y s i s , showing scores by j u r i s d i c t i o n for a l l categor ies , appears as Appendix B. page 13 CHAPTER ONE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CANADIAN PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL ARCHIVAL LEGISLATION In l e g i s l a t i o n , as in a l l language, there is often a tension between the meaning l e g i s l a t o r s intend the words they choose to convey and the meaning those words a c t u a l l y convey to the reader. This tension ar i ses from the fact that the meaning of language, even when i t seems natural or obvious, i s subject to c u l t u r a l inf luences . As the l ega l theor i s t C. von Savigny expressed i t , "a people's law resides In i t s own pecul iar customs."*1 Savigny's statement points to the fact that the intended meaning of the law is derived from diverse l ega l p r i n c i p l e s , dominant s o c i a l a t t i tudes , human w i l l , and p o l i t i c a l circumstance. The language used In Canadian a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n conveys far more of these influences than of a r c h i v a l p r i n c i p l e . This thes is argues that the intended meaning of the l e g i s l a t i o n , a r i s i n g from the manner in which i t has developed, adversely a f fects i t s a b i l i t y to promote the preservat ion of documents In two fundamental ways. F i r s t , th i s process of development has meant that the words of l e g i s l a t i v e texts often carry overtones of outdated s o c i a l a t t i tudes and assumptions about archives , second, It page 14 has led to inconsistency, c o n f l i c t , vagueness, and ambiguity in the form of expression or use of p a r t i c u l a r words in the l e g i s l a t i v e texts . This chapter explores through h i s t o r i c a l ana lys i s the s o c i a l condit ions which gave r i s e to the meaning of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . It concludes by examining recent l e g i s l a t i o n in Quebec and arguing that only l e g i s l a t i o n developed by a methodical cons iderat ion of the p r i n c i p l e s and concepts of a r c h i v a l sc ience, not by purely pragmatic forces , w i l l avoid the problems found in those l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions with meanings that are e n t i r e l y s o c i a l l y produced. The use of key terminology, such as the words "public records" and "archives", is one of the primary factors contr ibut ing to the l e g i s l a t i o n ' s i n a b i l i t y to promote the preservat ion of documents. This problem l i e s in the very use of two separate words to describe what i s e s s e n t i a l l y one th ing . Publ ic records is the term general ly used in Canadian l e g i s l a t i o n to refer to the records accumulated by government agencies, while archives is the term appl ied to "those records of any publ ic or pr ivate i n s t i t u t i o n which are adjudged worthy of permanent preservat ion for reference and research purposes and which have been deposited or have been se lected for deposit in an a r c h i v a l Inst i tut ion."*2 E s s e n t i a l l y , the problem ar i ses from the fact that the use of two separate terms denies the constant nature of arch ives , or publ i c records , as documents accumulated and preserved by a natural process in the conduct of a f f a i r s of any k ind , page 15 whether publ ic or private, at any date. Thus, the two words, as they are used in much of the current l e g i s l a t i o n , carry overtones of outdated Ideas about the nature of archives and a r c h i v a l Ins t i tu t ions as purely h i s t o r i c a l and unrelated to the adminis trat ion of records creators . The impl icat ions for a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n of using separate terms w i l l be discussed in more d e t a i l in the fol lowing chapters. This chapter w i l l now examine how the two terms as they are commonly used In Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The schism evolved out of the circumstances shaping Canadian a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in the late-nineteenth and ear ly- twent ie th centur ies . At t h i s time, Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l archives emerged as repos i tor i e s for the raw mater ia l of h i s t o r y ; that i s , both publ ic and archives i l l u s t r a t i v e of nat ional and regional h i s t o r i c a l development. This view of archives as repos i tor i e s of a broad range of materials r e f l e c t i n g the growth and development of the nation was bound up with the r i s e of nat ional ism and a heightened h i s t o r i c a l consciousness culminating in notions of " s c i e n t i f i c " h i s t o r y . This movement led many h i s tor ians to c a l l for the creat ion of a r c h i v a l r epos i tor i e s to serve as "arsenals of h i s t o r y . " It was under these circumstances that there developed a perceived need for a separate term in Canadian law and the term archives came to refer to documents of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t , whether publ ic or p r i v a t e , deposited page 16 in an a r c h i v a l repos i tory , without reference to the precise nature or or ig ins of these documents.*3 Since the purpose of ear ly archives acts was to e s t a b l i s h a r c h i v a l r epos i tor i e s on a l ega l foot ing , a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n n a t u r a l l y strove to sanction the e x i s t i n g s i t u a t i o n with respect to those i n s t i t u t i o n s that were already es tab l i shed . Thus, e a r l y archives acts concentrated on l e g i t i m i z i n g an e x i s t i n g arch ives , appointing an a r c h i v i s t , and empowering the a r c h i v i s t to a c t . As a r e s u l t , the l e g i s l a t i o n had a highly i n s t i t u t i o n a l focus rather than one which emphasized the p r i n c i p l e s of managing a r c h i v a l records, or what w i l l be re ferred to in chapter four as "programme elements." The use of two separate terms in the l e g i s l a t i o n has created two s o l i t u d e s , the one for act ive and semi-active documents held by the creat ing agency and the other for inact ive records of h i s t o r i c a l value held by the a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n . The r e s u l t of these two so l i tudes has been the passage of separate and loose ly re la ted enactments concerning the management and d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records and concerning the establishment of a r c h i v a l r e s p o s i t o r i e s , such as one f inds in Nova Scot ia and New Brunswick. In other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , one f inds enactments that both e s tab l i sh an a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n and provide for the care and management of publ i c records . Enactments serving t h i s dual purpose came to pass because the des ire to e s tab l i sh archives on a legal foot ing has, by i t s e l f , not so frequently led to the passage of l e g i s l a t i o n . More often than not, l e g i s l a t i o n only came page 17 to pass for adminis trat ive reasons, when the government perceived a need to regulate the care and management of vast quant i t i es of publ ic records . Such enactments i n i t i a l l y paid l i t t l e a t tent ion to the ro le of the archives or a r c h i v i s t in the care and management of records or to the broader purposes of archives in serving adminis trat ion or the p u b l i c , since archives were, by d e f i n i t i o n , concerned only with outdated records . Thus, in ear ly enactments, the archives ' or a r c h i v i s t s ' s l ink with records creators was n e g l i b i b l e . In la ter enactments the process of publ ic records management and the archives ' a c q u i s i t i o n mandate met awkwardly at the time of d i s p o s i t i o n . Only since the ear ly 1970s have events forced a c loser l ink between the ro le of the archives and the care and management of current publ ic records . This trend c l e a r l y emerges when one examines the h i s t o r i c a l development of c e r t a i n p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . In Ontario , passage of an act l e g a l l y e s tab l i sh ing the archives was deferred, despite the h i s t o r i a n s ' lobby, u n t i l Colonel Alexander Fraser , the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t , came to the r e a l i z a t i o n that he had very l i t t l e contro l over the transfer and des truct ion of material from government departments and the courts . Even his contro l over records already transferred to the care of the archives was tenuous; he was once forced to return minutes of the General sessions for the United Counties of Leeds and G r e n v i l l e af ter they had page 18 already been transferred to the Archives . In order to "remove any doubts in the minds of Deputy Minis ters and Heads of Branches . . .as to t h e i r r i g h t to transfer material to Archives . . . " , Fraser began to campaign for an archives act in A p r i l of 1922.*4 While the impetus for an archives act came from the des ire to contro l the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records, many diverse interes ts supported the adoption of l e g i s l a t i o n . W.C. Ca in , Deputy Minis ter for the Department of Lands and Fores t s , f e l t that the archives required l e g i s l a t i o n to e s t a b l i s h i t s permanency beyond "paradventure." F . V . Johns of the Ass i s tant P r o v i n c i a l Secretary's Off ice bel ieved an archives act would st imulate publ ic t rus t in the Archives and lead to acqu i s i t i ons of valuable pr ivate papers. G.M Wrong, founder of the Department of His tory at the U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto, argued that l e g i s l a t i o n , by providing sources for the study of Ontario h i s t o r y , would prevent the exodus of students to the United States for study.*5 It i s poss ible that the United Farmers of Ontario Party saw in the Archives Act an opportunity to introduce uncontrovers ia l and r e l a t i v e l y popular l e g i s l a t i o n at a time when confidence in t h e i r government was f a l t e r i n g . * 6 The marriage of these diverse interes ts resul ted in a b i l l which passed into law on 27 March, 1923. In addi t ion to e s tab l i sh ing the archives ' ro le in c o l l e c t i n g h i s t o r i c a l records and prescr ib ing the powers of page 19 the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t , who was made a Deputy Minis ter as in the 1912 Publ ic Archives of Canada Act , the act spec i f i ed that " a l l o r i g i n a l documents, parchments, manuscripts, papers, records and other matters in the executive and adminis trat ive departments of the Government . . . s h a l l be de l ivered to the [archives] for safekeeping and custody within twenty years from the date on which such matters cease to be in current use."*7 This prov i s ion was vague owing to the lack of any d e f i n i t i o n in the act for such terms as records or documents. The meaning of the word archives a lso was not defined in the act ; but, i m p l i c i t l y , i t c a r r i e d the t r a d i t i o n a l meaning. Determination of when the current value of records expired resided with government departments, for the archives was seen only as a storehouse for documentary sources about the past that had long since ceased to be of value to the creator of the records . As a r e s u l t , government departments made no l o g i c a l connection between the records in t h e i r o f f i ces and those in the archives . Consequently, transfers to the Archives under th i s system remained sporadic . Nevertheless, i t i m p l i c i t l y allowed the A r c h i v i s t to intervene to preserve publ ic records by spec i fy ing that departments possessing publ ic records which they wished removed or disposed of must inform the A r c h i v i s t and obtain his approval . The Ontario Archives Act of 1923 establ ished a c loser r e l a t i o n s h i p between government departments and the Archives than had previous ly existed in the province. The r e l a t i o n s h i p was far from perfect , however, as the Act , l i k e page 20 a l l p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n u n t i l the ear ly 1970s, focussed on the archives* ro le as a repos i tory for outdated h i s t o r i c a l records, but d id not provide for a formal means of ensuring that these records would be r e g u l a r l y transferred from government departments to the arch ives . Nor d id i t promote an act ive ro le for the archives in managing the systematic d i s p o s i t i o n and regular i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of permanently valuable records . In Saskatchewan and Alberta i n i t i a l acts governing publ ic records , establ ished in 1920 and 1925 re spec t ive ly , d id not bring archives and government adminis trat ion c loser together for the simple reason that neither province had an a r c h i v a l programme. As in Ontar io , Alberta and Saskatchewan demonstrated no strong publ ic support for l e g i s l a t i o n which would serve as a means of a s s i s t i n g the archives to acquire records of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t . Consequently, both pieces of l e g i s l a t i o n were developed from the point of view of government admini s tra t ion , which was more interested in purging o f f i ces of accumulations of documents than in f a c i l i t a t i n g a r c h i v a l a c q u i s i t i o n s . Both of these acts provided that documents could be transferred to the nonexistent archives or destroyed ten years af ter t h e i r creat ion by order of the Lieutenant Governor in C o u n c i l . In one way i t might appear that th i s prov i s ion improved upon Ontar io ' s Archives Act in that a l l records were "scheduled" for des truct ion or preservat ion in ten years rather than page 21 twenty years af ter an undetermined date o£ exp irat ion of current use.*8 However, without an archives and a process by which h i s t o r i c a l l y important material might be i d e n t i f i e d , the time l i m i t proved to be a r b i t r a r y and encouraged Irresponsible des truc t ion . From the time that Saskatchewan Implemented i t s Act In 1920 to Its repeal In 1948, the government issued 78 orders for des truct ion as against two for transfer to the Archives , which was establ ished in 1937.*9 The B r i t i s h Columbia Document Disposal Act of 1936, which c l o s e l y resembled l e g i s l a t i o n in Saskatchewan and A l b e r t a , a lso d id not e s tab l i sh a formal r e l a t i o n s h i p in law between government agencies and the Archives . Yet, the province had had a nascent a r c h i v a l programme in the 1890s, appointed an a r c h i v i s t in 1908, and had by 1919 a well es tabl i shed archives department in the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y . Again, the l e g i s l a t i o n was drafted to meet adminis trat ive needs with no apparent contr ibut ion from the Archives . At a meeting of the Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc ia t ion ' s Archives Committee, W.K. Lamb, P r o v i n c i a l L i b r a r i a n and A r c h i v i s t , remarked that , as a re su l t of the l e g i s l a t i o n : It [the A r c h i v e s ] . . . c a n n o t be regarded at present as a f u l l - f l e d g e d Publ ic Records O f f i c e , as there are no regulat ions in e f fect requ ir ing the government departments to forward t h e i r non-current f i l e s to the arch ives . Some departments have transferred t h e i r records with some r e g u l a r i t y , others have not. One department has destroyed almost everything. At present, des truct ion of Publ ic Records is permitted only with the approval of the P r i n t i n g Committee of the page 22 L e g i s l a t u r e , the meetings of which the P r o v i n c i a l L i b r a r i a n is p r i v i l e g e d to attend. This checks wholesale destruct ion.*10 Thus, the Provincial Librarian and Archivist was left to compensate for de f i c i enc i e s in the l e g i s l a t i o n by f a c i l i t a t i n g the se l ec t ion and transfer of publ ic records to the archives through informal means. In 1938 the Chairman of B r i t i s h Columbia's Select Standing Committee on P r i n t i n g proposed regulat ions to formalize the Archives ' ro le in the des truct ion and se l ec t ion for preservat ion of publ ic records . He suggested that no document be destroyed without the writ ten author i ty of the a r c h i v i s t and that the a r c h i v i s t have author i ty to c la im and preserve any documents. The S o l i c i t o r for the Attorney General 's Department, however, f e l t that t h i s might "unduly hamper" the des truct ion of documents.*11 As a r e s u l t , changes in the law d id not t ransp ire u n t i l much l a t e r , in 1953. Although the circumstances surrounding the emergence of ear ly enactments concerning the care and management of publ ic records meant that l i t t l e a t tent ion was paid to spec i fy ing the archives ' or a r c h i v i s t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y in th i s process, the post-World War Two increase in the amount of records being produced by government agencies led to the need for change. Older a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n which scheduled a l l documents for retent ion in government agencies for set time periods was too i n f l e x i b l e to meet the needs of page 23 administrators whose storage rooms were f i l l e d . From the a r c h i v i s t ' s perspect ive , i t was increas ing ly d i f f i c u l t to separate valuable records for transfer to the archives from those that could be destroyed. Consequently, changes were needed in the l e g i s l a t i v e framework governing the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records . Saskatchewan was the f i r s t province to adopt l e g i s l a t i o n that responded to the post-war s i t u a t i o n . This landmark enactment of 1949 was a c t u a l l y the province's second archives ac t , succeeding one passed in 1945. The enactment read: (a) that any publ ic document or any c lass or ser ies of publ ic documents. . . be t rans ferred . . . forthwith or upon the exp irat ion of such periods af ter the dates at which they were created as are spec i f i ed in the order; (b) that any publ i c document or any c lass or ser ies of publ ic documents. . . be destroyed forthwith or upon the exp ira t ion of such periods after the dates at which they were created as are spec i f i ed in the order; and (c) that any publ ic document or any c lass or ser ies of publ ic documents. . . be destroyed or transferred forthwith or upon the exp irat ion of such periods af ter the dates at which they were created as are spec i f i ed in the order.*12 With these provis ions there was no longer a r i g i d time frame for the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records . The Lieutenant Governor in Counci l could order that d i f f e r e n t records be disposed or transferred to the Archives at d i f f e r e n t times; however, a separate order was s t i l l required for each d i s p o s a l . These prov i s ions , being the most f l e x i b l e mechanism for handling the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ i c records at page 24 the time, were widely copied by other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , such as B r i t i s h Columbia and Prince Edward Is land. The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the a r c h i v i s t in the appra i sa l o£ publ i c records came to be formally recognized by t h i s date as w e l l . In the 1945 Saskatchewan Archives Ac t , there was a prov i s ion s ta t ing that no document could be destroyed without the recommendation of the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t and the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r i a n . However, the 1949 Ac t , by c a l l i n g for the a d d i t i o n a l recommendations of an o f f i c i a l of the Attorney General 's Department, re f l ec ted the fact that decis ions about the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records were being made much sooner af ter the creat ion of the records . Thus, not only were t h e i r a r c h i v a l values in quest ion, but a l so the i r admin i s tra t ive , f i s c a l and l ega l values . A subsequent amendment to the Saskatchewan Archives Act in 1951 formalized the 1949 arrangement by e s tab l i sh ing a Publ ic Documents Committee.*13 Other j u r i s d i c t i o n s soon borrowed th i s idea from Saskatchewan. Publ ic records continued to increase both in number and in complexity in the 1960s and 1970s. A r c h i v i s t s , who wanted to se lec t records of value from masses of ava i lab le documentation in an array of media, and adminis trators , who wanted e f f i c i e n t and cos t - e f f ec t ive means of disposing of inact ive records , soon r e a l i z e d that the method of seeking a one-time approval to dispose of publ i c records as the need arose was no longer p r a c t i c a l . They required planned page 25 disposition o£ public records on a continuing bas i s . Planned d i spos i t i ons of publ ic records c l e a r l y emerged as a goal by the late 1960s. For Instance, one of the c r i t i c i s m s l e v e l l e d against the Alberta Archives Act of 1966, leading up to the enactment of new l e g i s l a t i o n , was that the wording of c e r t a i n of i t s provis ions cast doubt on the Publ ic Document Committee's author i ty to formulate cont inuing , as opposed to one-time, au thor i t i e s for the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records . A new Publ ic Documents Act , which gave the Pub l i c Documents Committee the a d d i t i o n a l powers i t f e l t i t lacked under the e a r l i e r Act , was passed in 1970.*14 The development of A l b e r t a ' s a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n a lso provides an example of the d i f f i c u l t i e s a r i s i n g from the use of the separate terms archives and publ ic records , which carry in t h e i r meaning the l i n g e r i n g perception that the care and management of publ ic records and archives were d i s t i n c t and f u n c t i o n a l l y unrelated a c t i v i t i e s . Departmental reorganizat ions frequently necessitated an a l t e r a t i o n in the content and form of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . When the 1966 Archives Act was replaced in 1970, because the government was phasing out the Department of the P r o v i n c i a l Secretary, a new Alberta Heritage Act provided the l e g i s l a t i v e foundation for the p r o v i n c i a l archives ; however, i t d id not provide for the preservat ion and d i s p o s i t i o n of publ i c records which was deal t with in a separate enactment. Yet another change took place in the l e g i s l a t i o n in 1973, when provis ions page 26 e s tab l i sh ing the archives were once again united with provis ions regulat ing publ ic records . This union d id not l a s t long as another departmental shuff le took place in 1975, r e s u l t i n g in a d i v i s i o n of a r c h i v a l and records management funct ions . R e s p o n s i b i l i t y for records management went to the Department of Government Services , while provis ions concerning the functions of the Archives remained under the Alberta Heritage Act.*15 Hence, the l e g i s l a t i o n author iz ing the establishment of A l b e r t a ' s p r o v i n c i a l archives , because i t deals e x c l u s i v e l y with the c u l t u r a l ro le of the arch ives , bui lds a b a r r i e r between the care and management of records in the archives and the care and management of records in government departments. In the ear ly 1970s a new goal emerged. Records management had by th i s date become a we11-developed f i e l d with i t s own methodologies for the systematic contro l of ac t ive and semi-active publ ic records . Systematic contro l of publ ic records in the e a r l i e r stages of t h e i r l i f e cycle meant that the ir d i s p o s i t i o n could be more e f f e c t i v e l y planned. Thus, the Alberta Heritage Act of 1973, which reunited archives and records management funct ions , contained provis ions that broadened the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the Publ ic Records Committee from overseeing the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records to overseeing the management of act ive and semi- act ive publ ic records.*16 The methodologies which records managers had developed page 27 for managing ac t ive and semi-active records were increas ing ly t echnica l and subject to change. This led l e g i s l a t i v e draftsmen to place provis ions concerning the operation of records management programmes in regulat ions rather than statutes in order to permit frequent amendments. As a r e s u l t , s ta tutory provis ions concerning regulatory power had to be expanded. Such was the case in the 1973 Alberta Heritage Act where a prov i s ion concerning regulatory powers allowed the Lieutenant Governor in Counci l to make regulat ions concerning the documents to be considered publ ic records , the preservat ion and destruct ion of publ ic records , the designation of publ ic bodies required to preserve the i r records , and access to publ ic records.*17 Over the course of several decades, recent ly enacted or amended l e g i s l a t i o n has exhibited a trend towards a gradual increase in the archives ' r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s for the care and management of publ ic records , despite the l i n g e r i n g a f fec t s of the use of the separate words archives and publ ic records on the meaning of the l e g i s l a t i o n . In Newfoundland, for example, the archives is an a c t i v e , even c o n t r o l l i n g agent, in the care and management of publ ic records . In j u r i s d i c t i o n s with older enactments, such as Ontar io , the focus remains on the a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n as passive r e c i p i e n t of records of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t . The trend towards c loser l i n k s between the archives and the creators of records is l i k e l y to continue into the future page 28 because of the changes brought on by the information age. In p a r t i c u l a r , the r i s e of e l e c t r o n i c records has compressed the l i f e cyc le of the document. Whereas before, documents proceeded through t h e i r c r e a t i o n , use, storage and d i sposa l in an o r d e r l y , step-by-step fashion, documents now are created and recreated almost simultaneously through Information processing technologies . This has lead a r c h i v i s t Jay Atherton to suggest that a r c h i v i s t s do away with the l i f e cycle concept altogether and adopt the idea of a continuum as a paradigm.*18 Atherton's approach suggests that a r c h i v i s t s w i l l be expected to r e l i n q u i s h the ro le of passive r e c i p i e n t of records and adopt a more act ive stance in the i r a c q u i s i t i o n s trateg ies l es t valuable records be l o s t . This w i l l br ing a r c h i v i s t s into d i r e c t contact , perhaps c o n f l i c t , with systems analys t s , the new information profess ionals and with records managers. It i s not only the information processing c a p a b i l i t i e s of computers that has given r i s e to the need for c loser l i n k s between archives and the i r sponsoring agencies, but the fact that the new medium of storage i s so unstable compared to what has been deal t with in the past . Minute p a r t i c l e s of dust can render en t i re archives of data stored in e l e c t r o n i c form i r r e t r i e v a b l e in moments. No one is c e r t a i n of the l i f e span of technology such as o p t i c a l d i s k s . The problem of the i n s t a b i l i t y of the medium is compounded by the rapid rate of technological obsolescence. Even i f an o p t i c a l disk surv ives , there i s no guarantee that twenty years from now the data w i l l be page 29 access ib le given that new versions of software are often unable to read f i l e s created using e a r l i e r versions and given the lack of standards for hardware. Computers have a lso lead to an increase in the a b i l i t y to c o l l e c t and process Intrusive Information which, in the past , was regarded as pr ivate and t o t a l l y inacces s ib l e . Managing the ent ire l i f e cycle of publ ic records as a key object ive of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in the l a s t decade has been l inked to the asser t ion of publ ic r igh t s of access to information and the protect ion of personal pr ivacy and to the passage of l e g i s l a t i o n enshrining these r i g h t s . The archives has become the agency charged with r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the care and contro l of publ ic records throughout the ir l i f e cycle in order that access to information and privacy l e g i s l a t i o n can be implemented. For example, in the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , the Access to Information Act came into force on 3 November 1983. Implementation of the access law, p a r t i c u l a r l y the preparat ion of an access r e g i s t e r , required that the j u r i s d i c t i o n have adequate contro l over i t s a c t i v e , semi-active and inact ive publ ic records; thus, the Yukon T e r r i t o r i a l government passed a new records management regulat ion in 1985.*19 These developments, point ing to the need for c loser l inks between a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and the ir sponsoring agencies, only serve to i l l u s t r a t e the weakness of l e g i s l a t i o n which by the use of the two separate terms publ ic page 30 records and archives inherently distances archival institutions from the creators of the records they hold. Even on its own, the term public records adversely affects the legislation owing to the vagueness and ambiguity surrounding its meaning. This is a direct result of the manner in which it has evolved over time in response to changing social Influences, as an examination of the history of its development reveals. The desire to establish and protect public rights has traditionally been a strong impetus for preservation of the records of government. This impetus lay behind the establishment of Canada's first enactment concerning the preservation of documents. The enactment, passed in 1790, was entitled an Act or Ordinance for the Better Preservation and Due Distribution of the Ancient French Records.*20 Its passage came on the heels of a war between France and Britain that ended in the British conquest of New France. These events saw elements of old French law replaced with English law pursuant to the Proclamation Act of 1763.*21 English law did not entirely replace French law, however, as the Governors of the new British colony feared alienating the French population if they insisted on its adoption. They even restored old French law with the passage of the Quebec Act in 1774. The English population in the colony was against this reinstatement, having been promised the adoption of the common law, and, from 1774 to 1791, continually page 31 pressured the government to once again Impose Engl i sh law. It i s a measure of both the i r success in lobbying the government and the extent to which the Engl i sh dominated the colony's adminis trat ion that the 1790 act concerning the ancient French records bore the marks of Eng l i sh law In Its use of the terms "public" and "records."*22 The act spec i f i ed that the Governor or Commander-in- Chief could make orders "touching the arrangement, removal, d iges t ing , p r i n t i n g , publ i sh ing , d i s t r i b u t i n g , preserving and disposing of papers, manuscripts and records."*23 It used the word records in one of i t s e a r l i e s t common law forms by def in ing the word f u n c t i o n a l l y in terms of the act of recording or "memorializing" an event. Such memorials were customarily entered on a r o l l or a reg i s t er thus making them true records . Conversely, unregistered papers or manuscripts were not considered to be records . At th i s time, the word "public" usual ly meant "publ i c ly access ib le" , an ear ly common law usage. The act stated that "there are several hundred volumes of papers, manuscripts and records , very in teres t ing to such of the inhabitants of th i s Province . . . which ought to be disposed of as to give a cheap and easy access to them."*24 Further on in the enactment th i s same material was re ferred to as "public papers, manuscripts and records."*25 Thus, one may assume that the intent ion of the act was to make records, papers and manuscripts p u b l i c l y access ib le for the purpose of page 32 e s tab l i sh ing the r igh t s of the French populat ion. The o r i g i n a l Engl i sh common law concept of publ ic records as p u b l i c l y access ib le o f f i c i a l memorials of transact ions documenting r ights and p r i v i l e g e s of the c i t i z e n s has not been s t a t i c . By 1861, when the Publ ic Records Act of Nova Scot ia came into existence, the meaning of the term had been a l t e r e d . In t h i s act one f inds the f i r s t evidence of the slow evolut ion of the notion of publ ic records as access ib le memorials documenting r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s into the notion that publ ic records are documents owned by the crown and created in the course of publ ic admin i s tra t ion . Section one of Nova Scot ia ' s act re ferred to records "kept by or in the custody of any p r o v i n c i a l or municipal o f f i c e r in pursuance of his duties as such o f f i c e r . . . vested in Her Majesty the Queen and her successors."*26 This d e f i n i t i o n re f l ec ted the c o l o n i a l s i t u a t i o n where executive power rested with the sovereign and where a c c e s s i b i l i t y to the records of executive adminis trat ion was a roya l prerogative exercised by the governor. By the 1920s, the meaning of publ ic records had undergone further transformation in response to changing s o c i e t a l circumstances. By t h i s date, there was a need to dispose of or preserve a growing volume of records by some regulated means. The term publ ic records , therefore , came to refer to a l l manner of documentary mater ia l created in page 33 the adminis trat ion o£ publ ic a f f a i r s in order that a broad range of adminis trat ive records might be disposed of . Saskatchewan's 1920 act concerning publ ic documents d i sposa l i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of t h i s development. It defined the term publ i c documents as " c e r t i f i c a t e s under the Great Seal of the province , l ega l documents, s e c u r i t i e s issued by the province under any Saskatchewan Loans Act , vouchers, cheques and accounting records and a l l other documents created in the adminis trat ion of the publ ic a f f a i r s of Saskatchewan."*27 Rather than r e f e r r i n g to crown custody, th i s d e f i n i t i o n rested on the notion of publ ic records as those records created in the course of government business. The r i s i n g volume of documentation in the post-World War Two period led to the f i n a l s h i f t in the meaning of the term publ ic records from the notion of a c c e s s i b i l i t y to that of creat ion in the course of publ ic admin i s tra t ion . With the establishment of modern records management programmes to contro l the mass of records held by government agencies, the s e l ec t ion of valuable records for transfer to the archives began e a r l i e r in the l i f e cycle of those documents. As the age of the records being transferred to the archives decreased, concern about publ ic access to them increased. Consequently, a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n began to place l i m i t s on the general r i g h t of access to publ ic records held in a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . The 1959 Newfoundland H i s t o r i c Objects , S i tes and Records Act , for instance, was the f i r s t piece of l e g i s l a t i o n to page 34 al low for the l i m i t a t i o n of access to publ ic records in the p r o v i n c i a l archives , in a prov i s ion which s a i d : "Public documents and court records . . . are subject to such r e s t r i c t i o n s respect ing t h e i r subsequent use as the Lieutenant-Governor in C o u n c i l , upon the recommendation of the Minis ter having j u r i s d i c t i o n over the department concerned, may by order prescribe."*28 A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n had abandoned older notions of a c c e s s i b i l i t y inherent in the word p u b l i c . As i t is now used in archives laws, the term publ i c re fers s t r i c t l y to the provenance of the records as being created in the course of government business, not a c c e s s i b i l i t y . In conjunction with c l a r i f i c a t i o n of the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records, the question of the a c c e s s i b i l i t y of publ ic records has been transformed to encompass a l l records created by government, not just a se lec t few documents t rans ferred to the arch ives . This change has taken place as a re su l t of the need to protect i n d i v i d u a l s ' r ight s to personal pr ivacy and soc i e ty ' s demand for the r ight to have access to publ ic documents in order to make governments more accountable. The growth of the publ i c sec tor ' s ro le in soc ie ty , the growth of an educated c i t i z e n r y with the s k i l l s to exercise t h e i r r i g h t s , and the growth of computerization to compile personal information about c i t i z e n s , have led to the emergence of notions of the r i g h t to pr ivacy and access.*29 page 35 The term publ ic record as i t is used in p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has, therefore , gradual ly been broadened to encompass a l l manner of documentary forms created and accumulated in the course of the government's adminis trat ion of publ ic business. The actual statement of t h i s broad d e f i n i t i o n in l e g i s l a t i o n often provides l i t t l e ins ight into the purpose of publ ic records and is therefore vague. Moreover, although the l e g i s l a t i v e d e f i n i t i o n of the term does not imply a c c e s s i b i l i t y , common law d e f i n i t i o n s of the term s t i l l ex i s t which do imply t h i s . The layers of meaning of the term publ ic records found in both l e g i s l a t i o n and common law can p o t e n t i a l l y lead to inconsistency, misconceptions and mis interpreta t ion of the l e g i s l a t i o n . There i s an a d d i t i o n a l problem with the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records as i t is used in most current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , and th i s i s that i t has become a catalogue of types of m a t e r i a l . Such c a t c h a l l d e f i n i t i o n s have a tendency to become qu ick ly outdated. In a d d i t i o n , in a r c h i v a l doctr ine and for the p r a c t i c a l purposes of deal ing with records in the information age, the form of the record is increas ing ly immaterial . It is i t s nature as a documentary source of information created by an agency or person as a natural course of carry ing out business that i s fundamental to the effect iveness of the l e g i s l a t i o n . page 36 Again the or ig ins of t h i s problem l i e in the manner in which the term evolved in response to various broad c u l t u r a l inf luences . The s h i f t from a funct ional d e f i n i t i o n of the term record as o f f i c i a l memorials of transact ions documenting r ight s and p r i v i l e g e s of c i t i z e n s to a descr ip t ive catalogue of types of documents created in the course of carry ing out publ ic adminis trat ion began in the 1920s with the need to dispose of accumulations of records created by government. The term records , therefore , was broadened to permit the d i sposa l of s p e c i f i c types of documents. One may assume that i t was to ensure that government bureaucrats knew which documents were subject to the l e g i s l a t i o n that l e g i s l a t o r s l i s t e d the various types in the o r i g i n a l publ ic d i s p o s i t i o n laws of Saskatchewan and Alberta of the 1920s. Such descr ip t ive d e f i n i t i o n s of the term record or document were in constant need of r e v i s i o n . For example, when p r o v i n c i a l governments found they needed l e g i s l a t i o n to deal with the d i s p o s i t i o n of masses of records that had emerged as a r e s u l t of adminis trat ive a c t i v i t y during the Second World War and the period immediately thereaf ter , they broadened the term record to include maps and photographs.*30 By th i s date, the meaning of the term records had become so inc lus ive and the documents in government agencies so voluminous, c h i e f l y because of modern reprographic technology, that many provinces needed page 37 to exclude c e r t a i n c lasses of material from the formal d i s p o s i t i o n process. The term record was therefore narrowed. Saskatchewan, for example, excluded materia l such as surplus copies of mimeographed, m u l t l l i t h e d , pr inted or processed c i r c u l a r s and memoranda.*31 A l t e r n a t i v e l y , new forms of record material continued to emerge throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Once a l l - encompassing d e f i n i t i o n s required the addi t ion of phrases such as "machine readable records" or "computer cards."*32 The pragmatic pract ice of l i s t i n g types of material in d e f i n i t i o n s of the term record or document to inform bureaucrats of which material is subject to publ ic records l e g i s l a t i o n can be misleading, even when the l i s t s are used to i l l u s t r a t e a broader statement that records include a l l documents created in the adminis trat ion of publ i c a f f a i r s , now that information and the medium upon which i t i s recorded are not inseparate ly l i n k e d . Today, more so than ever, the form of the information i s not as important as the information i t s e l f . The conceptual problems in a l l areas of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n a r i s i n g from the s o c i a l l y produced meaning of c e r t a i n key terms adversely a f fects the l e g i s l a t i o n of most j u r i s d i c t i o n s . In addi t ion to these general problems, an examination of the s p e c i f i c provis ions of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n reveals p a r t i c u l a r p e c u l i a r i t i e s of expression i l l u s t r a t i v e of how these page 38 enactments arose as p r a c t i c a l so lut ions to l o c a l problems rather than as statements of a r c h i v a l p r i n c i p l e . Indiv idual w i l l , adminis trat ive p r a c t i c a l i t y , l o c a l condit ions and past pract ices concerning the preservat ion of documents of enduring value helped shape the various provis ions of the l e g i s l a t i o n . Today, however, these provis ions are often anachronisms which, at best , are i r re l evant and, at worst, lead to misconceptions. A number of examples of t h i s phenomenon can be found. In the Ontario Archives Act of 1923, provis ions o u t l i n i n g the archives ' mandate re f l ec ted the interes ts of the f i r s t P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t , Colonel Alexander Fraser . As Donald Macleod observes in an a r t i c l e on ear ly p r i o r i t i e s in c o l l e c t i n g the Ontario a r c h i v a l record: far more ind ica t ive of F r a s e r ' s interests than a c q u i s i t i o n s r e l a t i n g , for instance, to contemporary s o c i a l movements [ s l c l were m i l i t i a l i s t s dat ing from 1812, a p a t r i o t i c h i s t o r y of Fenian Raids, p r i n t s and photos of leading Six Nations Indians, a pamphlet for mil i t iamen employed in suppressing the r e b e l l i o n s , and a town plan for Niagara-on-the-Lake containing 'de ta i l ed ou t l ines ' of f o r t i f i c a t i o n s . * 3 3 Consequently, the Ontario Act empowered the Archives to c o l l e c t and preserve "pamphlets, maps, char t s , manuscripts, papers, regimental muster r o l l s and other matters of general or l o c a l in teres t h i s t o r i c a l l y in Ontario" and conduct research "with a view to preserving page 39 the memory of pioneer explo i t s and the part taken by them in opening up and developing the Province."*34 Thus, F r a s e r ' S own interes t s seem to have leant a p a r t i c u l a r cast to the law. Several decades l a t e r , in 1971, when the Yukon T e r r i t o r y enacted an archives ordinance, the law resembled the Ontario Archives Act almost word for word, except that provis ions o u t l i n i n g the Archives* mandate were s l i g h t l y modified to r e f l e c t the Archives ' s e t t ing in a northern resource community. For example, subsection (g) of sect ion 6 of the Yukon Archives Ordinance included mining in the l i s t of subjects about which information on the ear ly s e t t l e r s could be c o l l e c t e d . S i m i l a r l y , subsection ( i ) stated that one of the Archives ' functions was "the conducting of research with a view to preserving the memory of the indigenous peoples in the T e r r i t o r y and the ir mode of l i v i n g and customs."*35 The s p e c i f i c circumstances under which Nova Scot ia ' s Archives Act came into existence also affected i t s content. Premier E . N . Rhodes persuaded a wealthy benefactor, one W. H. Chase of W o l f v i l l e , to present the province with an archives b u i l d i n g . Once Chase had agreed to construct what would become the f i r s t p r o v i n c i a l archives b u i l d i n g in Canada, the government then introduced l e g i s l a t i o n to place Nova Scot ia ' s publ i c a r c h i v a l programme, and the proposed archives b u i l d i n g , on f irm l ega l ground.*36 As the page 40 government required a s i t e on which to construct the new archives b u i l d i n g , i t included a prov i s ion in the 1929 Publ ic Archives Act which stated that "the Board [of Trustees of the Publ i c Archives of Nova Soc t ia l may acquire a s i t e in the c i t y of Hal i fax and erect thereon a Publ i c Archives b u i l d i n g or bui ld ings . . ."*37 Dalhousie U n i v e r s i t y la ter donated the land upon which the b u i l d i n g was constructed. The des ire to protect the province's archives from the v i s s l tudes of party p o l i t i c s may have motivated the establishment of a Board of Trustees for the Publ ic Archives of Nova S c o t i a . In an e f f o r t to s t r i k e a balance in the composition of the Board between important publ i c o f f i c i a l s and those most Interested in the h i s t o r y of the province , the act as amended in 1930 and 1931 made the Chief J u s t i c e , the President of Dalhousie U n i v e r s i t y , the Premier and Leader of the Opposi t ion, and the President of the Nova Scot ia H i s t o r i c a l Society a l l ex o f f i c i o members of the Board.*38 Local r i v a l r i e s played a part in shaping Saskatchewan's l e g i s l a t i o n , enacted on March 30 1945. The Archives Act set up two repos i tor i e s for a r c h i v a l records under the supervis ion of i t s Archives Board. The underlying reason for e s tab l i sh ing two repos i tor i e s was, as George Simpson, former P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t of Saskatchewan explained: In Saskatchewan the s i t u a t i o n was somewhat t s i c l unique. The c a p i t a l of the Province is Regina. The p r o v i n c i a l u n i v e r s i t y i s in page 41 Saskatoon about two hundred miles to the north-west. The chief source of publ ic records i s at the seat of government, the ch ie f in teres t in t h e i r permanent preservat ion and study was at the seat of l earn ing . It was decided therefore in 1945 when a comprehensive Archives Act was passed to set up an Archives Board which would be composed of respresentat ives of the Government and representat ives of the u n i v e r s i t y . The P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t was to be appointed by the Un ivers i ty with the approval of the Archives Board.*39 During second reading, some members of the l e g i s l a t u r e charged that the government was seeking to c e n t r a l i z e the programme in Regina and demanded the programme be centred in Saskatoon. A compromise was reached. The f i n a l b i l l s p e c i f i e d that the Archives Board would cons is t of two members appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in C o u n c i l , two members appointed by the Board of Governors of the U n i v e r s i t y of Sasktachewan, and the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r i a n . L a t e r , o f f i ces of the Board or P r o v i n c i a l Archives were establ ished in Regina and Saskatoon.*40 As the above examples show, current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n Is frought with problems a r i s i n g from the pragmatic manner in which i t has developed. The resu l t has been that key terms convey outdated and inappropriate a t t i tudes about the nature of archives and a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s in the i r meaning and that many of the l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions are i r r e l e v a n t , ambiguous, vague or inconsis tent making i t impossible for the l e g i s l a t i o n to promote a g lobal page 4 2 approach to the care and management o£ publ ic records and arch ives , even when th i s may have been i t s l e g i s l a t i v e in tent . In contrast to the other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , Quebec stands out as a province with l e g i s l a t i o n that does not suffer from the problems i d e n t i f i e d above. Its l e g i s l a t i o n does promote a g lobal approach to the care and management of publ i c records or arch ives . The broad c u l t u r a l influences leading up to the adoption of new l e g i s l a t i o n are not what sets Quebec apart from the other j u r i s d i c t i o n s . In Quebec, as in the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , passage of access to information and pr ivacy l e g i s l a t i o n in 1983 had a profound af fec t on a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n when i t became apparent to the p r o v i n c i a l government that the r ight to access was meaningless without the too ls to manage government documents throughout the ir l i f e c y c l e . Consequently, Quebec drafted new a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n which i t intended to be a too l for the e f f ec t ive management of "les archives quebecoise ac tue l l e et a v e n i r , et a en f a c l l i t e r l 'acess et 1 'u t i l i za t ion ."*41 This enactment became law on 21 December 1983. What set Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n apart from l e g i s l a t i o n in other j u r i s d i c t i o n s was the searching c r i t i c i s m s i t received in the ear ly stages of i t s page 43 d r a f t i n g from the a r c h i v a l community in Quebec. These c r i t i c i s m s eventual ly led to the l e g i s l a t i o n ' s reformulation on the basis of European a r c h i v a l theory. It was the fact that l e g i s l a t o r s , l i s t e n i n g to the a r c h i v a l community, d id not simply re-enact the outdated concepts inherent in the provis ions of past laws but developed completely new provis ions based on the p r i n c i p l e s of modern a r c h i v a l science that has led to the such a strong piece of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . I n i t i a l l y , the b i l l included a d e f i n i t i o n of archives based e s s e n t i a l l y on the notion of publ ic records as i t appeared in l e g i s l a t i o n elsewhere in Canada. However, several Quebec a r c h i v i s t s c r i t i c i z e d the b i l l ' s l imi ted v i s i o n of archives.*42 As a r e s u l t of the i r c r i t i c i s m , the government revised the b i l l so that the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic archives included not just inact ive documents of h i s t o r i c a l i n t e r e s t , but also act ive and semi-active documents. The Act defines publ ic archives f u n c t i o n a l l y as a "body of documents of a l l k inds , regardless of date, created or received by a person or body in meeting requirements or carry ing on a c t i v i t i e s . . . ."*43 Quebec's use of the term publ ic arch ives , as opposed to publ ic records , makes no d i s t i n c t i o n between the government documents in the archives and those in publ ic agencies, and l i n k s l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions concerning the care and management of records in the archives with those page 44 concerning the care and management of records held by publ ic agencies. Moreover, the Act defines the term document as "any medium of information, inc luding the data on i t , l e g i b l e d i r e c t l y or by machine."*14 This d e f i n i t i o n d i f f e r s from other d e f i n i t i o n s found in current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in that i t i s constructed i rrespec t ive of the form or medium of record and therefore does not require constant updating when new forms of material emerge. The conclusion that can be reached from the Quebec example is that the p r i n c i p l e s and concepts of a r c h i v a l science need to be c l e a r l y enshrined in l e g i s l a t i o n to overcome the adverse a f fects that external s o c i a l influences have had on the meaning in current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . However, i t i s h igh ly u n l i k e l y that new l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions w i l l be based on a r c h i v a l theory unless the a r c h i v a l community understands the l i m i t a t i o n s of current l e g i s l a t i o n , develops a t h e o r e t i c a l base from which to draw upon, and i n i t i a t e s change by taking an act ive part in the l e g i s l a t i v e process. It is to providing a greater understanding of the adverse a f fects of the s o c i a l production of meaning on provis ions def in ing key terms, provis ions e s tab l i sh ing the scope and author i ty of adminis trat ive s tructures for a r c h i v a l programmes, and provis ions o u t l i n i n g the basic elements of a r c h i v a l page 45 programmes that t h i s thes is now turns . page 46 CHAPTER TWO THE IMPACT OF THE DISJUNCTION BETWEEN THEORY AND LAW ON DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS Some of the most important provis ions found in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n are those which define key terminology, such as publ ic records or archives . It i s from these d e f i n i t i o n s that a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n derives the boundaries of i t s a p p l i c a t i o n and that i t s other provis ions derive t h e i r meaning. Yet, d e f i n i t i o n s found in current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n have the po tent ia l to severely l i m i t the a b i l i t y of the archives to r e a l i z e the main object ive of the l e g i s l a t i o n , the preservat ion of documents. This chapter examines how and why these l i m i t a t i o n s occur. Given the importance of the term record or document to l e g i s l a t i o n which has as i t s basic goal the care and management of publ ic records , one would expect a l l current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n to include a d e f i n i t i o n of one or the other term. This i s not the case. Ontar io ' s Archives Act lacks a d e f i n i t i o n of e i ther term, although the word document i s used several times throughout. Ontar io ' s f a i l u r e to define a term so basic to in terpre t ing the provis ions of i t s Archives Act causes an inherent ambiguity in i t s l e g i s l a t i o n . Such an omission must be seen as a page 47 serious flaw in any a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . A l l other j u r i s d i c t i o n s have a d e f i n i t i o n of e i ther the term record or the term document. Most include such a d e f i n i t i o n as part of a broader d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records . On the other hand, B r i t i s h Columbia, Quebec, and Newfoundland provide d e f i n i t i o n s which are independent of the broader term. Independent d e f i n i t i o n s of records or documents have an advantage over those that are subsumed in the term publ ic records , since they may be used to interpret provis ions in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n respect ing both publ ic records and records of pr ivate o r i g i n . The content analys i s reveals great v a r i e t y in the type of enactment in which d e f i n i t i o n s of the term record or document appear. B r i t i s h Columbia's l e g i s l a t i o n includes a d e f i n i t i o n in secondary l e g i s l a t i o n , the province's Interpretat ion Act . In New Brunswick's l e g i s l a t i o n , part of the d e f i n i t i o n appears in primary l e g i s l a t i o n , the Archives Act , and part appears in secondary l e g i s l a t i o n , the Publ ic Records Act . Only in Alberta does the d e f i n i t i o n of th i s important term appear in a regula t ion; although, a port ion of the operative d e f i n i t i o n in Quebec appears in a regu la t ion . The majority of j u r i s d i c t i o n s , therefore , define the term record or document in primary l e g i s l a t i o n . Given that the terms are e s sent ia l for the in terpre ta t ion of a l l s ta tutes , regulat ions and other l ega l Instruments concerned with the care and management of publ ic records, page 48 primary l e g i s l a t i o n is a more su i table locus for such a d e f i n i t i o n than any other lega l instrument. Regulations, which are intended to give e f fect to the broad brush strokes s tatutory prov i s ions , are a much less su i table place for def in ing such basic terminology. Chapter one discussed the development of new forms of record material and the consequent adaptation of the terms record and document. The newest media are those upon which e l e c t r o n i c data are s tored . The content analys i s shows that B r i t i s h Columbia, Prince Edward Is land, A l b e r t a , New Brunswick, the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , Quebec and Newfoundland have attempted to adapt the ir d e f i n i t i o n s to the new media by the addi t ion of the phrase "machine readable records". Nevertheless, the majority have u l t imate ly f a i l e d to come to gr ips with the r e a l nature of the changes brought on by computerization. The current descr ip t ive d e f i n i t i o n s are adequate as long as information, which is what the l e g i s l a t i o n must r e a l l y seek to protect , and the medium upon which i t i s recorded are inseparably l i n k e d . Now, however, information can e a s i l y be switched from one medium to another. Laws with media-based descr ip t ive l i s t s for d e f i n i t i o n s are c l e a r l y inadequate, as they refer only to the medium of information, not the information i t s e l f . Prince Edward Is land's d e f i n i t i o n of a record, which page 49 was enacted in 1975, serves as an example- o£ the inadequacies o£ media-based d e f i n i t i o n s . The d e f i n i t i o n includes magnetic tapes, d i s c s , microforms and a l l other documents and machine-readable records.*1 Prince Edward Is land's d e f i n i t i o n , and a l l those in other j u r i s d i c t i o n s that are s i m i l a r to i t , could conceivably al low a government agency to schedule i t s tapes and d iscs without a c t u a l l y scheduling the data stored thereon. Even the d e f i n i t i o n of a record in the new National Archives Act does not offer a model. This act defines a record as any correspondence, memorandum, book, p lan , map, drawing, diagram, p i c t o r i a l or graphic work, photograph, f i l m , microform, sound recording , videotape, machine- readable record and any other documentary material regardless of phys ica l form or c h a r a c t e r i s t i c and any copy thereof."*2 E l e c t r o n i c records demand that old approaches to def in ing records and documents be rethought. Arch iva l l e g i s l a t i o n requires d e f i n i t i o n s capable of al lowing for the scheduling of both t r a d i t i o n a l and n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l media. Such a d e f i n i t i o n must pay equal a t tent ion to the medium of the information and the information i t s e l f . It must go beyond mere descr ip t ion to explain the purpose for which a record e x i s t s . The d e f i n i t i o n of a document in Quebec's Archives Act serves as an example of what is required under the present page 50 circumstances. It defines a document as "any medium of information, inc luding the data on i t , l e g i b l e d i r e c t l y or i by machine."*3 Thus, computer tapes and d i s c s , as well as the information recorded thereon, f a l l within the purview of the law. A d e f i n i t i o n of a record or document such as Quebec's, which expla ins , rather than descr ibes , w i l l out las t a descr ip t ive l i s t because while new media may emerge, the e s sent ia l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a record or document w i l l remain constant. As discussed in chapter one, the gradual widening of the term record and document to include d i f f e r e n t forms of mater ia l l e d , i r o n i c a l l y , to the need to exclude c e r t a i n types of material from the d e f i n i t i o n . Without these l i m i t a t i o n s l e g i s l a t i o n can become d i f f i c u l t to implement. For instance, in B r i t i s h Columbia's Document Disposal Act , a document i s defined as inc luding "books, documents, maps, drawings, photographs, l e t t e r s , vouchers, papers and any other thing on which information is recorded or stored by any means whether graphic , e l e c t r o n i c , mechanic, or otherwise."*4 Thus, the d e f i n i t i o n includes worthless dupl icate photocopies and computer pr in tout s . If the province's m i n i s t r i e s abided by the l e t t e r of the law with respect to every document they would e i ther submerge themselves in dupl icate copies or cause the province's d i s p o s i t i o n process to grind to a h a l t . Most j u r i s d i c t i o n ' s have l imi ted the i r d e f i n i t i o n s , page 51 although t h e i r approaches have d i f f e r e d . The content analys i s shows that Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Is land, New Brunswick, Quebec and Newfoundland e x p l i c i t l y speci fy in the i r l e g i s l a t i o n that c e r t a i n classes of mater ia l are not considered to be records or documents, and therefore are not subject to provis ions concerning the d i s p o s i t i o n of records or documents. There are drawbacks to th i s approach to l i m i t i n g the scope of the term. Government agencies can in terpret the exemptions too broadly and use them as a j u s t i f i c a t i o n to avoid scheduling records . It can be d i f f i c u l t to r e c t i f y the improper use of such exemption c lauses , for i t must be done by an amendment to the l e g i s l a t i o n . A s l i g h t l y more f l e x i b l e approach to l i m i t i n g the scope of the term record or document is used in A l b e r t a , which exempts c e r t a i n types of record mater ia l , such as dupl icate copies of unaltered documents, ca l cu la t ions or draf ts of completed documents, p r i n t e r ' s proofs of pr inted documents, and l e t t e r s or memos of an ephemeral nature, from the standard d i s p o s i t i o n process in i t s publ ic records regu la t ion . This approach, too, has i t s drawbacks, since changes to regulat ions are s t i l l subject to a f a i r l y complex and time consuming approval process.*5 A more f l e x i b l e approach to q u a l i f y i n g the d e f i n i t i o n o£ records or documents is to pass a general schedule au thor i z ing , on a continuing bas i s , the des truct ion of page 52 c e r t a i n c lasses of records af ter they have become superceded or obsolete. B r i t i s h Columbia has adopted th i s approach and now has a general schedule for both "transi tory" hardcopy and e l e c t r o n i c records.*6 The advantage of the general schedule i s that i t i s more e a s i l y amended than a statute or regu la t ion . This kind of f l e x i b i l i t y is des irable now that computers are changing t r a d i t i o n a l concepts of what const i tutes record and non-record m a t e r i a l . An add i t i ona l advantage of the general schedule is that i t may be appl ied s e l e c t i v e l y to those agencies that are not l i k e l y to use i t improperly. There i s one further considerat ion concerning the d e f i n i t i o n of a record or document. In the past , recorded information was d i r e c t l y access ib le ; now, however, information must often be made access ib le by computer software and hardware. Future d e f i n i t i o n s of the terms record or document w i l l have to take into cons iderat ion that random bytes of data are of no use without the means of making them i n t e l l i g i b l e . The d e f i n i t i o n of a record used in the Manitoba Freedom of information Act addresses t h i s i ssue. It s tates that a record includes a t r a n s c r i p t of the explanation of a record where the record cannot be understood on i t s own.*7 Thus, d e f i n i t i o n s of the future might encompass both the record and a means of making i t i n t e l l i g i b l e , such as software documentation and computer ind ices . Computer hardware should not be included, however, page 53 as t h i s would turn archives into museums, instead, provis ions should require that the data be in a "transferable" form. The d e f i n i t i o n of the term archives i s a lso of centra l importance to understanding and implementing a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Yet, the resu l t s of the content a n a l y s i s , which reveal that only f ive of twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s have any kind of d e f i n i t i o n of the term, leave the opposite impression. Why do so few j u r i s d i c t i o n s include a d e f i n i t i o n of what should be the most important term in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n ? The answer to th i s question l i e s in the o r i g i n of the f i r s t archives acts in Canada and in the entry of the word archives into Canadian law. As discussed in chapter one, the f i r s t archives acts were enacted to e s tab l i sh a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s which would house records valuable as sources of evidence of the past . Def in i t ions of arch ives , meaning i n s t i t u t i o n s , were not e s sent ia l because such i n s t i t u t i o n s were usua l ly described in the course of o u t l i n i n g the i r mandate to c o l l e c t h i s t o r i c a l records . Nor were d e f i n i t i o n s of arch ives , meaning records, necessary, since i t was understood that they were simply the records found in a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s or under the care of the a r c h i v i s t . A prov i s ion in the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s ' Archives Ordinance, however, states th i s implied meaning more e x p l i c i t l y ; i t reads: the "Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s Archives . . . s h a l l cons is t page 5 4 of a l l publ ic records and other documentary material under the care , custody, and contro l of the a r c h i v i s t . " * 8 This d e f i n i t i o n of archives has become inadequate. Def in i t ions of archives in most current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , whether e x p l i c i t or i m p l i c i t , c o n f l i c t with the intent ion of l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions concerning the care and management of publ ic records in that the meaning of the term suggests a view of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s as concerned s o l e l y with the a c q u i s i t i o n and preservat ion of h i s t o r i c a l records and not in any way l inked to the creator of the records i t preserves through i t s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the management of act ive and semi-active records . Archives can no longer af ford to be, and are no longer, passive rec ip i ent s of inact ive records as th i s d e f i n i t i o n impl ies . In many j u r i s d i c t i o n s , l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions e s t a b l i s h the archives as an act ive agent in the care and management of publ ic records . In three j u r i s d i c t i o n s the archives has d i r e c t l e g i s l a t i v e author i ty over the management of act ive and semi-active records , with the ef fects of computerization on a r c h i v a l a c t i v i t y , archives w i l l continue to become more a c t i v e l y involved in the care and management of records throughout the ir l i f e cycle. However, the implementation of a coordinated p o l i c y for managing records throughout the ir l i f e cycle becomes d i f f i c u l t i f l e g i s l a t i o n uses the word archives in i t s conventional sense, in focussing on a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s rather than on a r c h i v a l records, the t r a d i t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n page 55 of archives creates an a r t i f i c i a l d i s t i n c t i o n between records of enduring value stored in a r c h i v a l repos i tor i e s and those same records at an e a r l i e r stage of t h e i r l i f e cycle as records created and maintained by an agency to f u l f i l l i t s own adminis trat ive requirements. Hence, the l ink between a r c h i v a l records and the ir administrat ive or ig ins i s severed, as i s the v i t a l connection between a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and the ir sponsoring agencies. Not only does such a d e f i n i t i o n marginalize the ro le of arch ives , i t a lso marginalizes the l e g i s l a t i o n which establ i shes them. Consequently, a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n is seen as unrelated to the care and management of records throughout t h e i r l i f e cycle despite the fact that archives acts now provide for both the establishment of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and for the care and management of publ ic records in seven out of twelve provinces and t e r r i t o r i e s . A 1986 j u d i c i a l dec i s ion involv ing Manitoba's a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n demonstrates how the t r a d i t i o n a l meaning of archives can marginalize and render ine f fec t ive both archives and a r c h i v a l enactments. In th i s case, a Manitoba Court of Appeal Judge ruled that the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act was "nothing more than an A r c h i v i s t ' s Act", and denied that i t had any a p p l i c a t i o n to current records despite the fact that Part II of the act appl ies to the care and management of publ ic records s t i l l held by government departments. The case involved an attempt by Canadian Newspapers Company page 56 Limi ted , the owner of the Winnipeg Free Press r to obtain copies of offers of compensation to landowners whose land was being appropriated for redevelopment by the p r o v i n c i a l government. The lawyer for Canadian Newspapers Company Limited argued that the of fers of compensation should be made p u b l i c l y access ib le because the Manitoba L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act defines them as publ ic records and publ ic records are , by l ega l custom, open to the p u b l i c . I n i t i a l l y , a Manitoba Queen's Bench Judge decided in favour of granting access; however, the Court of appeal l a ter reversed th i s d e c i s i o n . In the opinion of Chief Just ice Monnin, "the offers were current records tand therefore] the Manitoba L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act had no appl icat ion ."*9 The Chief Just ice reasoned that , owing to the d e f i n i t i o n of archives given in the ac t , the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records appl ied only to records transferred to the Archives and Publ ic Records Branch, even though several of the ac t ' s provis ions deal with the care and management of current records . In the words of one a r c h i v i s t , " i t was c l e a r l y apparent from his a t t i tude . . . that we a r c h i v i s t s have not concluded our bat t le with the perception of archives being the dump at the end of the l ine."*10 Quebec's d e f i n i t i o n , however, i s unique in Canada in that i t encompasses documents at a l l stages of the ir l i f e c y c l e . The province defines archives "as the body of documents of a l l k inds , regardless of date, created or page 57 received by a person or body in meeting requirements or carry ing on a c t i v i t i e s , preserved for the i r general informational value."*11 I r o n i c a l l y , th i s d e f i n i t i o n , which comes from European a r c h i v a l sc ience, is a d e f i n i t i o n widely used by North American a r c h i v i s t s to describe "fonds"; yet , i t i s not a d e f i n i t i o n found in the l e g i s l a t i o n which forms the s t r u c t u r a l basis of a r c h i v a l work. The value of t h i s d e f i n i t i o n l i e s in the fact that as long as documents are created or received in meeting adminis trat ive requirements and preserved for t h e i r informational value, they are arch ives , whether they are p h y s i c a l l y held by the creat ing agency or have been transferred to an a r c h i v a l repos i tory . This d e f i n i t i o n focuses on the funct ional l ink between the records in an a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n and the i r adminis trat ive o r i g i n s , as well as that between the a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n and i t s sponsoring agency. Since arch ives , by Quebec's d e f i n i t i o n , are not necessar i ly inact ive records or s i tuated in an a r c h i v a l repos i tory , i t s Archives Act is less l i k e l y to be narrowly interpreted as l e g i s l a t i o n concerned s o l e l y with the care and management of non-current records, as was the Manitoba L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act . The Manitoba L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y case not only demonstrates how a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n can be marginalized by i t s own d e f i n i t i o n of archives , but a lso reveals confusion surrounding the meaning of the term publ ic records . The lawyer for Canadian Newspapers company Limited based his argument on a meaning of the term, derived from the common page 58 law, as any records which are p u b l i c l y acces s ib le . Current l e g i s l a t i o n defines the term with reference to the ir ownership or custody. The content analys i s reveals that the l e g i s l a t i o n of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Is land, Newfoundland and Nova Scot ia define the term as records which are vested in Her Majesty. Quite often, l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l define publ ic records as records created i n , or received by, a publ ic o f f i c e r in the course of carry ing out his o f f i c i a l dut i e s , as in the case of the l e g i s l a t i o n of Nova Sco t ia , Saskatchewan, Manitoba, A l b e r t a , the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and Newfoundland. As chapter one has shown, layers of meaning have been b u i l t up over the decades. It should a lso be noted that although these d e f i n i t i o n s have gradual ly drawn c loser to the European idea of archives expressed in Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n as natural accumulations of records , they s t i l l d i f f e r in conception from Quebec's d e f i n i t i o n of archives in that they do not include the a d d i t i o n a l notion of the preservat ion of records of any age for general informational value . Thus, the term publ ic record continues to be used in reference to act ive or semi- act ive documents and the term archives to refer to inact ive documents preserved in an archives . Given the confusion surrounding the meaning of the term publ ic records, one must question the usefulness of using i t in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n at a l l . Why do ten out of twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s include a d e f i n i t i o n of the term in the ir page 59 l e g i s l a t i o n ? In most cases they do so because spec ia l r igh t s inhere in publ ic records which a s s i s t in the preservat ion of these records; that i s , the i r i n a l i e n a b i l i t y and i m p r e s c r i b i l i t y . I n a l i e n a b i l i t y i s the q u a l i t y of publ ic records derived from the i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to the sovereignty of the government and establ i shes that they may not be removed, abandoned or a l ienated in any way from government. I m p r e s c r i b i l i t y i s the idea that , owing to the i r i n a l i e n a b i l i t y , government has the r ight to recover publ ic records that have gone astray , a process known as replevin.*12 It i s not always necessary to use the term publ ic records in l e g i s l a t i o n to e s tab l i sh the i r i n a l i e n a b i l i t y and i m p r e s c r i b i l i t y . The same r ight s may be establ ished by a prov i s ion in a s tatute; for example, in some j u r i s d i c t i o n s a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n includes provis ions to p r o h i b i t the des truct ion and a l i e n a t i o n of publ ic records . The content ana lys i s reveals that Nova Sco t ia , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , New Brunswick, Quebec and Newfoundland a l l have provis ions in t h e i r l e g i s l a t i o n to authorize rep lev in and, with the exception of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , set out procedures for the recovery of records . If these types of provis ions ex i s t in the l e g i s l a t i o n , then there is no compelling need to use the term publ ic records . Given the fact that there i s no compelling need to use the term publ ic records , i t might be discarded In favour of page 60 an encompassing d e f i n i t i o n of arch ives , such as that found in Quebec. Such a d e f i n i t i o n would el iminate the inherent vagueness of some of the l e g i s l a t i o n caused by the term publ ic records , over la id as i t i s with several meanings rooted in the common law and l e g i s l a t i o n , and would e s t a b l i s h a des irable funct ional l ink between records held by creat ing agencies and records preserved in a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . U l t imate ly , t h i s d e f i n i t i o n would lead to less s p l i n t e r i n g of t r a d i t i o n a l a r c h i v a l and records management funct ions , which would become the s ingle funct ion of archives management, and less s p l i n t e r i n g of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n into enactments which e s tab l i sh a r c h i v a l repos i tor i e s for the preservat ion of h i s t o r i c a l records and those which concern the care and management of publ ic records . The use of Quebec's funct ional d e f i n i t i o n of archives would a lso bring Canada into l i n e with most other western countr ies , inc luding Belgium, France, I t a l y , the Netherlands and Spain.*13 It would a lso br ing a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n into l ine with accepted a r c h i v a l theory. Adopting a d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic archives such as Quebec's would be a dramatic departure from t r a d i t i o n for most j u r i s d i c t i o n s . Thus, other means of e l iminat ing the confusion surrounding the meaning of publ ic records should be taken into cons iderat ion . Most j u r i s d i c t i o n s use the term publ ic records in the i r l e g i s l a t i o n to refer to the records held by government agencies. The same meaning could be conveyed with the combined use of the terms "record", page 61 "government agency", and "held". This approach has been adopted at the Federal l e v e l where the National Archives Act avoids the often problematic term publ ic records in favour of the phrase "records of government i n s t i t u t i o n s . " The l e g i s l a t i o n defines both the term record and government ins t i tu t ions .*14 The only ambiguity that remains in the federal approach is that i t i s not abso lute ly c lear what the word "of" means in the phrase "the records of government i n s t i t u t i o n s . " It could mean a l l records created by government i n s t i t u t i o n s , but could poss ib ly include those received by them as w e l l . A d e f i n i t i o n of the word "of" or some other su i table term, such as "held", would reduce the l e v e l of ambiguity. For example, B r i t i s h Columbia's Document Disposal Act provides a d e f i n i t i o n of "deposit" which "includes f i l e d , r eg i s t ered , recorded and kept."*15 The 1984 Engl i sh Data Protect ion Act takes a s i m i l a r approach, where, in sect ion 1(5), "data user" is defined as a person who holds data , and a person "holds" data i f : (a) the data form part of a c o l l e c t i o n of data processed or intended to be processed by or on behalf of that p e r s o n . . . (b) that person (either alone or j o i n t l y or in common with other persons) controls the contents and use of the data comprised in the c o l l e c t i o n ; and (c) the data are in the form in which they have been or are intended to be processed as mentioned in paragraph (a) above or (though not for the time being in that form) in a form into which they have been converted page 62 af ter being further so processed on a subsequent occassion.*16 The approach taken in th i s act i s s i m i l a r to that taken in B r i t i s h Colubmia's Document Disposal Act; however, the language used Is more in keeping with the manner in which records , p a r t i c u l a r l y e l e c t r o n i c records , are now handled. Thus, three simple components: a d e f i n i t i o n of a record , a d e f i n i t i o n of government agencies, and a d e f i n i t i o n of the term he ld , would help el iminate the ambiguity in a r c h i v a l enactments r e s u l t i n g from use of the term publ i c records . A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n must provide a d e f i n i t i o n of government agencies to give the term publ ic records meaning, s ince current d e f i n i t i o n s of publ ic records in Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n are based on provenance, or the or ig ins of the records . The content ana lys i s indicates that , in p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , these d e f i n i t i o n s tend to be l i s t s of categories of government agencies. The analys i s indicates that a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n s include the adminis trat ive branch of p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l government, such as departments. Also common in these l i s t s of agencies are boards and commissions that are not part of a department and which are establ ished e i ther by an act of the l e g i s l a t u r e or by order in c o u n c i l . L e g i s l a t i o n in several of the provinces , but neither of the t e r r i t o r i e s , includes the j u d i c i a l branch of government in l i s t s of agencies whose records are subject to l e g i s l a t i v e prov i s ions . Ontario (access to information and page 63 privacy l e g i s l a t i o n on ly ) , Manitoba, the Yukon Territory, A l b e r t a , New Brunswick, Quebec and Newfoundland include crown corporations in the l i s t . The l e g i s l a t i v e branch of government i s less often included; i t i s l i s t e d in only Ontar io , Nova Scot ia (access to information and privacy l e g i s l a t i o n on ly ) , New Brunswick, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and Quebec. In a d d i t i o n , several j u r i s d i c t i o n s mention p r o v i n c i a l government agencies not found in the l e g i s l a t i o n of other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , such as assoc iat ions or persons appointed by an act of the l e g i s l a t u r e , by order in c o u n c i l , or who are d i r e c t l y responsible to the crown. Beyond the records created by p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l government agencies, d e f i n i t i o n s of publ ic agencies in Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n sometimes include the records of other leve ls of government. This i s the case in Nova Sco t ia , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , New Brunswick and Quebec where d e f i n i t i o n s encompass municipal government records . Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n has the broadest scope, as i t a lso includes school boards, u n i v e r s i t i e s , and health care f a c i l i t i e s . In a l l other j u r i s d i c t i o n s the status of these records is unclear, although they might be subject to s p e c i a l l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions concerning t h e i r care and management. The content analys i s shows a d i v e r s i t y of d e f i n i t i o n s of publ ic agencies In current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l page 64 a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Quebec's d e f i n i t i o n , however, of fers a model. Its breadth provides for the care and management of records from many agencies; although, c r i t i c s may argue that such a broad d e f i n i t i o n places a s t r a i n on the resources of arch ives . Nevertheless, there are means of surmounting t h i s d i f f i c u l t y . One of the ways in which th i s d i f f i c u l t y may be overcome is by enumerating, in regu la t ion , those publ ic agencies which f a l l within the compass of the law. This is an improvement over def in ing publ ic agencies in a s ta tute , s ince regulat ions are more e a s i l y amended. Another means of a l l e v i a t i n g the demands on an a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n ' s resources i s by al lowing for designated repos i tor i e s in l e g i s l a t i o n , as, for example, in the Engl i sh Publ i c Record Act . In t h i s Act , the Lord Chancellor may appoint a place outside the Publ ic Records Off ice as a place of deposit i f i t "affords su i table f a c i l i t i e s for the safekeeping and preservat ion of records and the i r inspect ion by the public ."*17 Thus, rather than having only one o f f i c i a l repos i tory , England has several repos i tor i e s conforming to o f f i c i a l standards. The Quebec Archives Act of fers another, very Innovative, so lu t ion to the d i f f i c u l t i e s posed by d e f i n i t i o n s of publ ic agencies. The various publ ic bodies are grouped into seven classes l i s t e d in a schedule to the ac t . The publ ic archives of each c lass of bodies are subject to varying degrees of contro l over the i r care and management. For example, the Minis ter of C u l t u r a l A f f a i r s must adopt a management p o l i c y for the page 65 act ive and semi-active documents of the Conse l l execut l f f the Conse i l du t r e s o r , and the government departments and bodies to which the government appoints a majority of members. On the other hand, m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , school boards, and health and s o c i a l services counci l s must take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the management of the i r own act ive and semi-active documents, although the Keeper of the Archives Nationales may advise them on pol icy .*18 Quebec's use of what may be re ferred to as a t i e red approach is a f l e x i b l e , yet p r a c t i c a l , means of accommodating a broad range of agencies within i t s d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic bodies. It a lso recognizes the need of some publ ic bodies for integrated archives management programmes of t h e i r own while promoting the development of such programmes within a province-wide framework for the care and management of records throughout t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . The re su l t s of the content analys i s reveal that in Ontario and Nova Scot ia l i s t s of publ ic agencies in access to information and pr ivacy l e g i s l a t i o n do not always correspond to those in primary a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . To argue that the d e f i n i t i o n s in these acts must match word for word would be to deny the d i f f eren t purposes for which they are created. Nevertheless, each of the acts af fects the implementation of the other. Thus, the e f fect of a d e f i n i t i o n used in one enactment upon the provis ions of other re lated enactments must be taken into cons iderat ion . I d e a l l y , d e f i n i t i o n s in access to information and privacy page 66 acts and other a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n should not c o n f l i c t with one another and should agree in scope; that i s , agencies that are encompassed in the d e f i n i t i o n s of publ ic records in archives acts should a lso be encompassed in the d e f i n i t i o n s found in access l e g i s l a t i o n . Frequently , however, these acts are drafted without regard for how they w i l l function together. If the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic agencies, or the scope of the archives ac t , i s narrower than that of the access to information and pr ivacy acts , i t can become d i f f i c u l t to implement the provis ions of the access and pr ivacy law, since adequate contro l cannot be establ ished over the records of agencies not mentioned in the archives ac t . Access to information and privacy l e g i s l a t i o n af fects the funct ioning of provis ions in archives acts as we l l . This l e g i s l a t i o n can have impl icat ions for the a c c e s s i b i l i t y of mater ia l held in a p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l archives i f the archives f a l l s within the l e g i s l a t i o n ' s d e f i n i t i o n of a publ ic agency. For example, the d e f i n i t i o n used in the province of New Brunswick's Access to Information Act includes the records of the p r o v i n c i a l arch ives , which would encompass both the records the archives creates to meet adminis trat ive and operat ional r e s p o n s i b i l t i e s , and those i t receives from both publ ic and private sources. There was some uncertainty about the status of the archives ' holdings p r i o r to the passage of an amendment to the page 67 Archives Act which states that " a l l publ ic records transferred to the Archives and in the possession, care , custody and contro l of the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t are ava i lab le for publ ic inspect ion", with c e r t a i n exceptions. This prov i s ion had the e f fect of excluding pr ivate material held by the archives from the provis ions of the access and pr ivacy l eg i s l a t i on .*19 In Manitoba, rather than passing an amendment to the province's archives ac t , the government included a prov i s ion in i t s Access to Information Act which s p e c i f i c a l l y exempts material of pr ivate o r i g i n owned by the government.*20 The analys i s of provis ions e s tab l i sh ing d e f i n i t i o n s for such key terms as record or document, arch ives , publ ic records and publ ic agencies upholds the c la im that these provis ions place l i m i t a t i o n s and even thwart the a b i l i t y of archives to achieve the object ives of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n ; that i s , the preservat ion of documents. The problem with these d e f i n i t i o n s i s twofold. One the one hand, the d e f i n i t i o n s r e f l e c t an ideo log ica l perspective on archives that , although accurate at the time these d e f i n i t i o n s entered into Canadian a r c h i v a l law, is now outdated and u n r e a l i s t i c in the present s o c i a l and technologica l context. On the other hand, the inexactness of the d e f i n i t i o n s , or in some cases the lack of a d e f i n i t i o n , causes i n f l e x i b i l i t y , vagueness and inconsistency in the l e g i s l a t i v e prov i s ions . These inherent flaws can, in t u r n , be a t t r ibuted to the inherent de f i c i enc i e s of a l l language a r i s i n g from the page 68 ef fect of external s o c i a l influences on the meaning of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . This s o c i a l production of meaning creates a contrad ic t ion between the intent ion of the l e g i s l a t i o n , or what i t means to say, and what the l e g i s l a t i o n is a c t u a l l y capable of achiev ing , or what i t a c t u a l l y says. With an understanding of the adverse af fects that the s o c i a l l y produced meaning of these key terms can have upon the a b i l i t y of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n to operate e f f e c t i v e l y , a r c h i v i s t s are in a much better pos i t ion to correct these de f i c i enc i e s by becoming a c t i v e l y involved in the l e g i s l a t i v e process and ensuring that new l e g i s l a t i o n includes d e f i n i t i o n s derived from the p r i n c i p l e s of modern a r c h i v a l theory, which increas ing ly emphasizes the g lobal approach to the management of records throughout t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . Unless a r c h i v i s t s learn to master the l e g i s l a t i o n by understanding the subt ler influences i t has upon the i r a b i l i t y to carry out the preservat ion of documents in the present information environment, the conceptual problems created by present d e f i n i t i o n s of key terms w i l l continue to adversely a f fec t the other major components of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , s ince a l l other provis ions draw upon the basic concepts expressed in these d e f i n i t i o n s for t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Unfortunately , as the next chapter w i l l show, the negative consequences of inadequate d e f i n i t i o n s can be far -reach ing . page 69 CHAPTER THREE THE IMPACT OF THE DISJUNCTION BETWEEN THEORY AND LAW ON ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES Provis ions s e t t ing forth the l ega l author i ty for the establishment of adminis trat ive s tructures to carry out a r c h i v a l work have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been a major component of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . This chapter w i l l examine these provis ions and assess how they a f fec t the a b i l i t y of archives to a t t a i n the o v e r a l l object ives of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The body or person responsible for the general management of the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l arch ives , or of the act e s tab l i sh ing the archives , is an important determinant of the archives ' a b i l i t y to f u l f i l l i t s mandate. A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n s except the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , spec i fy the body or person responsible for the a r c h i v e s ' , or act e s tab l i sh ing the a r c h i v e s ' , general management. This content a t t r i b u t e appears in primary l e g i s l a t i o n in seven out of ten j u r i s d i c t i o n s . In Saskatchewan and Nova Sco t ia , general management of the province's archives is the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of an archives board. In a l l other provinces , general management of the archives f a l l s to a page 70 minister who may be responsible for c u l t u r e , government s erv i ce s , tourism, education or some other p o r t f o l i o - Over the years, debates have occurred regarding the r e l a t i v e merits of conferr ing r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the arch ives ' general management upon an archives board as opposed to a minister of a government department or m i n i s t r y . Advocates of the board s tructure argue that boards, being at arms length from government, are less p o l i t i c i z e d and, therefore , in a better pos i t ion to acquire a broad range of p o l i t i c a l l y sens i t ive records . Archives boards a lso al low the archives to a t t r a c t greater publ ic support from non-government sources. Moreover, they permit greater f l e x i b i l i t y in the day to day operations of the archives ; for example, administrators can e s tab l i sh job q u a l i f i c a t i o n s c a l l i n g for an appropriate l eve l of education and experience.*1 On the other hand, the content analys i s c l e a r l y shows that only two j u r i s d i c t i o n s maintain a board s tructure governing the archives and none have moved in that d i r e c t i o n since the establishment of the Saskatchewan Archives Board in 1944. Archives boards have become an anachronism because, while they are well sui ted to r e a l i z i n g the object ives of ear ly archives ac t s , which focussed on the c u l t u r a l mandate of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , they are not well sui ted to the present s o c i a l and technologica l environment. This environment demands that page 71 administratIve s tructures establ ished In a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n promote a close l ink between archives and the i r sponsoring agencies in order to ensure the e f fec t ive management and preservat ion of publ ic records by p lac ing archives within the executive hierarchy of government, preferably within a centra l department or min i s try which can deal independently with a l l branches of government in carry ing out i t s funct ions . Any advantages a t t r ibuted to archives boards are l arge ly f i c t i o n a l given the fact that boards r e l y on government funding and are accountable to government for how those funds are spent. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , one of the main object ives of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has been the establishment of the legal author i ty for the existence of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . Provis ions e s tab l i sh ing th i s l ega l author i ty help to ensure that the l e g i s l a t i o n can be properly implemented. One would, therefore , expect a l l p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n to include a prov i s ion e s tab l i sh ing the arch ives , or in the case of second generation l e g i s l a t i o n , continuing the existence of the arch ives . B r i t i s h Columbia, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and New Brunswick, however, do not have such a prov i s ion in t h e i r l e g i s l a t i o n , although a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s ex i s t in a l l three j u r i s d i c t i o n s . Lack of l e g i s l a t i v e author i ty for the existence of these three archives can have at least two page 72 possible negative consequences for the a r c h i v a l programme. F i r s t , because such provis ions l eg i t imize the existence and a c t i v i t i e s of arch ives , j u r i s d i c t i o n s without them may f ind i t more d i f f i c u l t to j u s t i f y increased funding, or even the continued existence of the arch ives . Second, because a prov i s ion e s tab l i sh ing the archives usual ly guarantees the existence of the archives as a separate e n t i t y , there i s a p o s s i b i l i t y that another agency, such as a museum, could be made to serve as an archives or that the archives could be made subordinate to another c u l t u r a l agency. Another important provis ion is that which establ ishes the archives as the j u r i s d i c t i o n ' s o f f i c i a l repos i tory for publ ic records; yet , only Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Is land, and Newfoundland include such a prov i s ion in t h e i r a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Without th i s p r o v i s i o n , however, there i s a danger that government departments could e s tab l i sh the i r own records repos i tor i e s and that the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l archives would not have author i ty to intervene in cases where the records were not properly preserved or made acces s ib le . If current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n establ i shes the l ega l author i ty for the existence of arch ives , i t is l o g i c a l to expect that the l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l a l so provide for the appointment of an i n d i v i d u a l to act as head of the a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n . The appointment of such an i n d i v i d u a l i s a lso a requirement i f , page 7 3 in any of i t s prov i s ions , the l e g i s l a t i o n confers spec ia l powers upon the head of the archives . The content analys i s reveals that nine out of the twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s include such a prov i s ion in the i r l e g i s l a t i o n . Only B r i t i s h Columbia and Alberta do not s p e c i f i c a l l y mention the appointment of a p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t , although the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t i s mentioned in the l e g i s l a t i o n and has s p e c i f i c powers and duties under the laws of both j u r i s d i c t i o n s . In addi t ion to providing for the appointment of a p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t , seven j u r i s d i c t i o n s out of the nine give th i s i n d i v i d u a l a proper lega l t i t l e , such as "Prov inc ia l A r c h i v i s t " , and eight spec i fy the i n d i v i d u a l ' s manner of appointment. Some a u t h o r i t i e s on the subject of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n a lso suggest that a r c h i v a l laws should contain some prov i s ion for the t r a i n i n g or profess ional q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of the "chief a r c h i v i s t . " * 2 To include a prov i s ion of th i s type, however, decreases the f l e x i b i l i t y of the l e g i s l a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y in the Canadian context where standards for a r c h i v a l education and t r a i n i n g continue to be debated. Nevertheless, i f a r c h i v i s t s are given spec ia l powers, duties and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , i t may not be unreasonable to expect that the i r profess ional q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and the l e v e l of the i r t r a i n i n g be set forth in law; however, in the p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l context, th i s is usua l ly deal t with in regulat ions and p o l i c y statements concerning the recruitment, appointment, and page 7 4 q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of publ ic servants . As more archives are establ ished by pr ivate organizat ions , i t is not inconceivable that a r c h i v i s t s could fol low other professions in s e t t ing out q u a l i f i c a t i o n s in a separate statute governing the profess ion . Quebec, where a proposed regu la t ion , i f passed, w i l l require that private archives provide information about the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of the i r a r c h i v i s t s as a prerequis i t e for a c c r e d i t a t i o n , presents another p o s s i b i l i t y . * 3 A threat of i n f l e x i b i l i t y ex i s t s where the law provides for the appointment of other archives ' employees. In t h e i r draf t model law, however, European a r c h i v i s t s Carbone and Gueze include de ta i l ed provis ions on the subject of personnel , such as q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , h i r i n g procedures, education and promotion.*4 This l eve l of d e t a i l concerning archives personnel i s unsuitable in the present Canadian context. Again, i t assumes a more formalized method of t r a i n i n g than ex i s t s in th i s country. It could a lso lock the archives into an i n f l e x i b l e adminis trat ive s tructure which i t might l a t er outgrow. For the time being, such matters are best l e f t up to the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t . There are , however, circumstances in which i t is b e n e f i c i a l to spec i fy the appointment of an i n d i v i d u a l who is not the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t . Indiv iduals who are e s sent ia l to the proper implementation page 7 5 of the provis ions in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n but who do not work d i r e c t l y under the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t are i d e a l l y included in l e g i s l a t i o n , as the statute can la ter be used to ensure that such ind iv idua l s are a c t u a l l y appointed. A lber ta ' s Publ ic Records Regulation which provides for the appointment of "public records o f f i c er s" is an example of th i s type of p r o v i s i o n . *5 It might also be prudent to speci fy the i n d i v i d u a l ' s l eve l of education and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n to ensure that standards are met concerning these subjects . As mentioned in the previous chapter, provis ions which set for th the mandate of the archives , or the duties of the a r c h i v i s t , often take the place of d e f i n i t i o n s of the term archives in current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Consequently, the content analys i s shows that most j u r i s d i c t i o n s Include such prov i s ions . Only Nova S c o t i a , B r i t i s h Columbia and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s do not out l ine the functions of the archives or the duties of the a r c h i v i s t . While some j u r i s d i c t i o n s may have both a d e f i n i t i o n of archives and provis ions o u t l i n i n g the archives ' mandate or the a r c h i v i s t ' s duties in t h e i r l e g i s l a t i o n , i t is rare for neither prov i s ion to be included. In fac t , B r i t i s h Columbia i s the only j u r i s d i c t i o n without e i ther p r o v i s i o n , which can be explained by the fact that the j u r i s d i c t i o n has no primary page 76 l e g i s l a t i o n to e s t a b l i s h the l ega l author i ty for the existence of i t s arch ives . In Ontar io , Prince Edward Is land, Manitoba, Alberta and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , general provis ions concerning a r c h i v a l functions are formulated as an enumeration of the objects of the archives or the act l e g a l l y e s tab l i sh ing the arch ives . When one is reminded of the o r i g i n a l purpose of archives ac t s , which was to e s tab l i sh a r c h i v a l repos i tor i e s to preserve a l l manner of documentary sources of the past, i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that older enactments use a form of expression which enumerates the objects of the archives or the objects of the act e s tab l i sh ing the archives . Provis ions se t t ing out the archives ' functions in such enactments, l i k e the enactments themselves, focus more on archives as c u l t u r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s than on the care and management of publ ic records, inc luding a r c h i v a l records . For example, the content analys i s shows that provis ions o u t l i n i n g the archives ' functions in these j u r i s d i c t i o n s include t r a d i t i o n a l a r c h i v a l a c t i v i t i e s and may even, as in the case of Ontar io , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and Prince Edward Is land, mention e x t r a - a r c h i v a l funct ions , such as research and archeo log ica l inves t iga t ion , associated with the broad c u l t u r a l purpose of the l e g i s l a t i o n . In New Brunswick, Quebec and Newfoundland, on the other hand, such provis ions are formulated as an enumeration of the duties or powers of the a r c h i v i s t , or page 77 the a r c h i v i s t ' s appointee, in th i s l e g i s l a t i o n , which has been enacted more recent ly , the focus i s less on the i n s t i t u t i o n and more on g iv ing the a r c h i v i s t author i ty over the care and management of publ ic records throughout t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . Therefore, the functions l i s t e d In these provis ions go beyond t r a d i t i o n a l a r c h i v a l a c t i v i t i e s to include a c t i v i t i e s associated with the management of act ive and semi-active publ ic records , such as records scheduling and the prov i s ion of semi-active storage space. The intent ion of provis ions o u t l i n i n g the duties of the a r c h i v i s t is the same as for provis ions se t t ing forth the mandate of the archives; that i s , to e s t a b l i s h the mission of the arch ives . This being the case, the question ar i ses as to whether i t i s appropriate to express the mission statement of the archives in terms of the a r c h i v i s t ' s duty. To answer th i s quest ion, i t is necessary to examine the use of language to express legal r e l a t i o n s h i p s . In his analys i s of fundamental l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , Wesley Newcomb Hofeld created a scheme for the lowest common denominators of actual l ega l r e l a t i o n s .*6 According to his scheme, r ight s and dut i e s , p r i v i l e g e s and no -r igh t s , powers and l i a b i l i t i e s , and immunities and d i s a b i l i t i e s comprise the most basic l ega l re la t ionsh ips of the law.*7 Rights , dut i e s , powers and l i a b i l i t i e s are the ones that most often appear in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . page 78 What is a r ight? According to the l ega l philosopher A u s t i n , quoted by Hofeld, a r i g h t i s "any advantage conferred or protected by law."*8 Hofeld maintains that each l ega l concept has a j u r a l c o r r e l a t i v e so that i f a l ega l advantage or burden concerning a p a r t i c u l a r subject - matter i s observed to inhere in one person, the c o r r e l a t i v e may be observed to inhere in some other person. The c o r r e l a t i v e to a r i g h t i s a duty. For example, i f a c red i tor has a r ight to be pa id , i t is the debtors' duty to pay him. The l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p i s an imperative one which t e l l s others what they absolute ly must do. In s ta tutory language the word "shal l" denotes t h i s type of legal- r e l a t i o n s h i p . For example, in the a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n of New Brunswick, the prov i s ion o u t l i n i n g the a r c h i v i s t ' s ro le concerning the care , custody and contro l of archives , the preparation of records schedules, the prov i s ion of storage f a c i l i t i e s and the prov i s ion of other records management funct ions , es tabl ishes an imperative legal r e l a t i o n s h i p through the use of the term dut i e s . A case can be made for the use of a term which denotes an imperative legal r e l a t i o n s h i p in such a p r o v i s i o n , since the l e g i s l a t i o n is concerned with the care and management of valuable records which, i t may be argued, soc ie ty has a r i g h t to see protected. On the other hand, th i s form of expression can be i n f l e x i b l e and inadvertent ly place a burden on the page 79 archives resources because i t implies that a l l of the functions enumerated must be c a r r i e d out a l l of the time. Thus, i t might be concluded that provis ions which are intended to state the purpose or mission of the arch ives , such as to acquire publ ic or pr ivate records , are best expressed in terms of the functions of the arch ives , not the duties of the a r c h i v i s t . Such provis ions are a lso best couched in general terms in order to al low for the addi t ion of new functions and to prevent l i m i t i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The other l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p commonly found in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n is that which ex i s t s between a power and a l i a b i l i t y . A power, according to Hofeld, is "an a b i l i t y conferred upon a person by the law to determine, by his own w i l l d irec ted to that end, the r i g h t s , dut i e s , l i a b i l i t i e s and other l ega l r e l a t i o n s e i ther of himself or of other persons."*9 The j u r a l c o r r e l a t i v e to a power is a l i a b i l i t y , which does not ex i s t in one i n d i v i d u a l u n t i l power is exercised by another. Since the exercise of power is d i s c r e t i o n a r y , the s tatutory verb that denotes t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p is "may". This i s the l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p establ ished in sect ion 30 of Quebec's Archives Act , which out l ines the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t ' s powers. Use of words that denote th i s l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p are more appropriate in provis ions involv ing the a c t i v i t i e s of the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t , s ince th i s r e l a t i o n s h i p establ ishes that the a r c h i v i s t is page 80 expected to perform c e r t a i n funct ions , such as c e r t i f y i n g copies as t rue , from time to time without penalty for f a i l i n g to perform any one funct ion . C l e a r l y , th i s type of l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p is more f l e x i b l e than an imperative one, as i t operates on a d i s c r e t i o n a r y bas i s . In some j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the l e g i s l a t i o n goes beyond e s tab l i sh ing the lega l author i ty for the existence of the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l archives and se t t ing forth i t s miss ion, to e s tab l i sh i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to other agencies. It i s s i g n i f i c a n t that only those j u r i s d i c t i o n s which have enacted l e g i s l a t i o n more recent ly contain provis ions which deal with a wider community of i n t e r e s t s . Quebec's Archives Act scored the highest in th i s category, as i t allows the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t to negotiate agreements with publ ic and private bodies regarding the deposit of arch ives , to accred i t pr ivate a r c h i v a l r e p o s i t o r i e s , and to provide f i n a n c i a l and technica l assistance to accredi ted pr ivate a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . Unlike cen tra l i zed countries such as France, I t a l y , Spain, F i n l a n d , Sweden and the German Democratic Republ ic , Canada, being a more federal s ta te , cannot e s tab l i sh a National a r c h i v a l system in federal l e g i s l a t i o n ; however, f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n can include prov i s ions , such as the ones in Quebec's Archives Act , which recognize and promote an a r c h i v a l system. In addi t ion to author iz ing the establishment of page 81 p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l archives , most enactments authorize the establishment of publ ic records committees. A l l of the committees establ ished under current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n are responsible for e i ther reviewing and approving records schedules, recommending or author iz ing one-time d i spos i t i ons of records , or both. In several j u r i s d i c t i o n s these committees a lso take on a d d i t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . For instance, in Nova Scot ia and Manitoba the committees are responsible for overseeing the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of records , while in Alberta and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , they decide on issues of access to records . I n i t i a l l y conceived of as bodies which would provide a means of protect ing the interests of government through a cons iderat ion of the l e g a l , f i n a n c i a l and other values of records ready for d i s p o s i t i o n , the purpose of publ ic records committees now var ies from one j u r i s d i c t i o n to another. I The composition of publ ic records committees a lso var ies from one j u r i s d i c t i o n to another. In a l l cases, the l e g i s l a t i o n refers to the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t , but only in Manitoba, Prince Edward Is land, and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s is the a r c h i v i s t the chairman of the committee. The Yukon T e r r i t o r y , the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and Newfoundland Include a p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l records manager. Nova Scot ia and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y include a representative of the publ ic body whose records are under cons iderat ion . Several j u r i s d i c t i o n s page 82 include a member with f i n a n c i a l or audit expert i se . Of a l l the j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the Yukon Publ ic Records Committee of fers the broadest range of opinions , as i t includes the A r c h i v i s t , the Records Manager, the Secretary to Cabinet , one representat ive from each of systems and computing s erv i ce s , the Department of Finance, and the Department of J u s t i c e , and other publ ic servants from time to time.*38 Other j u r i s d i c t i o n s would do well to include systems representat ion on t h e i r committees given the h ighly t echnica l nature of contemporary records . Only Ontario and Quebec do not e s t a b l i s h publ ic records committees in the i r a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Ontario does not e s t a b l i s h a publ ic records committee as i t s l e g i s l a t i o n , enacted in 1923, predates the establishment of the f i r s t publ ic records committee in the 1951 Saskatchewan Archives Act . Quebec, on the other hand, does not e s t a b l i s h a publ i c records committee as i t s l e g i s l a t i o n provides necessary oversight and scrut iny of the records d i s p o s i t i o n process in other ways. In contrast to j u r i s d i c t i o n s which enacted l e g i s l a t i o n when publ ic records committees provided the only source of expert opinion regarding a request for a one-time d i sposa l of records, usua l ly long since i n a c t i v e , Quebec has a progressive records management programme which allows those involved in the d r a f t i n g of records schedules to seek out expert advice page 83 c o n c e r n i n g r e c o r d s at the time o£ t h e i r schedul ing, l £ the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t requires a d d i t i o n a l expert advice , he may obtain the opinion of the Commission des biens c u l t u r e l s . The Commission, as l a i d out in the C u l t u r a l Property Act , cons is ts of twelve members appointed by the government for up to three years to provide advice on any matter r e l a t i n g to the conservation of c u l t u r a l property.*10 As in the case of the Archives Advisory Counci l of the National Archives of Canada, Quebec's commission consis t of both creators and users of archives .*11 By e s tab l i sh ing an archives advisory c o u n c i l , Quebec has managed to el iminate the need for a publ ic records commmittee. The establishment of an archives advisory body in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has become popular as is witnessed by the number of countr ies , such as A u s t r a l i a , Belgium, Czechoslovakia and France, that have establ ished them.*12 As w e l l , au thor i t i e s on the subject of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , namely Carbone and Gueze and R-H. Baut ier , recommend them.*13 An advisory body, such as the one establ ished in Quebec law, has two main advantages over publ i c records committees. F i r s t , the minister i s not obl iged to seek the opinion of th i s body in cases of routine records d i s p o s i t i o n , thus considerably expedit ing the records d i sposa l process. Second, as t h i s body is comprised of ind iv idua l s both from within and outside o£ government, i t is conceivably less Isolated and inward- page 84 looking than a committee which is comprised s o l e l y of government o f f i c i a l s . J u r i s d i c t i o n s with l e g i s l a t i o n that provides for scheduling need not r e t a i n the i r publ ic records committees, as they are a throw-back to one-time d i sposa l s , but could instead e s tab l i sh advisory committees. As in the case of d e f i n i t i o n s of key terms, provis ions e s tab l i sh ing adminis trat ive s tructures in current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n l i m i t , even work against , the r e a l i z a t i o n of the ultimate goal of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The ph i lo sophica l grounding of the l e g i s l a t i o n , which is i t s e l f anachronis t i c , es tabl i shes , anachronis t ic administrat ive s t ruc tures , such as publ ic records committees or archives boards. The form of expression used in provis ions concerning the archives ' mandate or the a r c h i v i s t ' s duties conveys more about the a t t i tudes which underl ie the l e g i s l a t i o n than of the ac tua l l ega l re la t ionsh ips such provis ions are intended to e s t a b l i s h and leads to i n f l e x i b i l i t y and vagueness in the l e g i s l a t i o n . These inherent problems, which ar i se out of the e f fect of external s o c i a l influences on the meaning of the l e g i s l a t i o n , lead to the same tension as ex is ts in provis ions e s tab l i sh ing d e f i n i t i o n s of key terminology between the intented meaning of the l e g i s l a t i o n and the meaning i t s provis ions i m p l i c i t l y convey. page 85 CHAPTER FOUR THE IMPACT OF THE DISJUNCTION BETWEEN THEORY AND LAW ON PROGRAMME ELEMENTS There can be no question that provis ions e s tab l i sh ing adminis trat ive s tructures are an important part of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Provis ions bestowing the l ega l author i ty for the establishment of adminis trat ive s tructures are needed to implement other l e g i s l a t i v e prov i s ions . If the s tructures are non-existent or inadequate, they prevent the e f f ec t ive preservat ion of documents. Nevertheless, i t i s provis ions e s tab l i sh ing basic elements of a r c h i v a l and records management programmes for the preservat ion of documents that should be the focus of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . In Ontar io , Prince Edward Is land, Manitoba, Alberta and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , one finds that l e g i s l a t i o n focuses more on e s tab l i sh ing adminis trat ive s tructures than on e s tab l i sh ing the programme elements that the adminis trat ive s tructures are designed to implement. Indicat ive of th i s focus is the fact that , in most of these j u r i s d i c t i o n s , provis ions e s tab l i sh ing a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s or publ ic records committees appear a t , or near, the beginning of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n as well as the fact that average scores in the content analys i s under Group B, Adminis trat ion , were page 86 higher as a percentage o£ the t o t a l score (42.6%) than they were in Group C, Programme Elements (33%). L e g i s l a t i o n that focuses on the establishment of adminis trat ive s tructures derives from an outdated ph i lo soph ica l perspective which sees archives as purely c u l t u r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . As already mentioned, th i s perspective i s l inked to the emergence of ear ly archives acts out of the des ire to e s tab l i sh r e p o s i t o r i e s for records , of both pr ivate and publ ic o r i g i n s , documenting the past . Although the s o c i a l context has changed, recent enactments s t i l l r e f l e c t th i s perspect ive , despite e f for t s to modernize them by inc luding provis ions that e s tab l i sh records management, because l e g i s l a t i v e d e f i n i t i o n s of archives in these enactments, e i ther e x p l i c i t or impl ied, remain i n s t i t u t i o n - b a s e d . Quebec's a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n does not focus excess ive ly on the establishment of adminis trat ive s tructures at the expense of programme elements. Although, i t s score under Group B, Adminis trat ion , i s among the highest at 61%, i t s score under Group C, Programme Elements i s a lso among the highest . A prov i s ion for the appointment of a p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t appears close to the end of the enactment, af ter provis ions s e t t ing forth p o l i c i e s concerning the management of a c t i v e , semi-active and inact ive archives .*1 Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n properly takes the focus away from adminis trat ive page 87 s t ruc tures , which should only be establ i shed to f a c i l i t a t e the implementation of programme elements, and, in combination with the use of a funct ional d e f i n i t i o n of arch ives , places i t on programme elements for the protect ion and management of documents throughout t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . As discussed in chapter two, the i n s t i t u t i o n a l focus of the d e f i n i t i o n of archives m i l i t a t e s against the kind of integrated approach to the care and management of records throughout the i r ent ire l i f e cycle in that i t creates an a r t i f i c i a l b a r r i e r between records of enduring value preserved in an a r c h i v a l repos i tory and those same records at an e a r l i e r stage of the ir l i f e c y c l e . It i s not s u r p r i s i n g , then, that many ear ly enactments based e i ther e x p l i c i t l y or i m p l i c i t l y on the t r a d i t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of archives do not include records management prov i s ions , since the d e f i n i t i o n precludes the l e g i s l a t i o n from focussing on the care and management of act ive and semi-active publ ic records that have not been transferred to an a r c h i v a l repos i tory . As chapter one has shown, the fact that records management provis ions appear in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n at a l l can be l inked to a change in the volume and complexity of publ ic records . This change gradual ly necessitated c loser t i e s between archives and t h e i r sponsoring agencies and led to an Increased involvement of the archives in programmes to sys temat ica l ly contro l records page 88 throughout t h e i r l i f e c y c l e . Thus, a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in some j u r i s d i c t i o n s es tabl i shes the l ega l author i ty for the existence of a records management programme, while , in other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , no such programme i s establ ished by law. The content analys i s reveals that i t is only l e g i s l a t i o n which has been enacted within the l a s t ten years that includes such prov i s ions . Therefore, only f ive of the twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s include records management provis ions in the i r l e g i s l a t i o n . Of these, Newfoundland scored the highest , as i t s l e g i s l a t i o n expressly provides for the establishment of a records management programme, defines records management, out l ines the ro le of the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t in the adminis trat ion of records management, appoints a p r o v i n c i a l records manager, out l ines the duties of the p r o v i n c i a l records manager, and provides for the creat ion of semi-active storage f a c i l i t i e s . The comprehensiveness of Newfoundland's provis ions concerning records management accounts for at least some of the praise i t c u r r e n t l y receives from a r c h i v i s t s . Alberta and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y scored second highest o v e r a l l , Alberta having passed l e g i s l a t i o n r e l a t i n g to records management in 1983 and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y in 1985. New Brunswick and Quebec scored t h i r d highest . Most of the j u r i s d i c t i o n s with records management provis ions include them in primary l e g i s l a t i o n , except for page 89 Alberta and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , where these provis ions appear in regu la t ions . In A l b e r t a , the records management regulat ion is provided for pursuant to the Publ ic Works, Supply and Services Act while the archives i s establ ished pursuant to the H i s t o r i c a l Resources Act . The fact that Alberta establ ishes these two i n t e g r a l l y re la ted programmes under separate acts reveals the prevalence of a l imi ted c u l t u r a l view of archives and does nothing to promote the e f f i c i e n t implementation of the province's records management programme or the f u l f i l l m e n t of the archives ' mandate. Records management provis ions are most l o g i c a l l y placed in the same enactment as provis ions which e s tab l i sh the l ega l author i ty for the existence of arch ives , as these a c t i v i t i e s are f u n c t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d . However, without an encompassing d e f i n i t i o n of archives , i t is d i f f i c u l t for l e g i s l a t o r s to understand the funct ional r e l a t i o n s h i p between these a c t i v i t i e s . The degree of contro l exercised by the archives over records management var ies from one j u r i s d i c t i o n to another. An a r c h i v i s t has s tatutory r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the records management programme in three of f ive j u r i s d i c t i o n s . In other j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the a r c h i v i s t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for records management i s l imi ted to involvement i n , or contro l over, the d i s p o s i t i o n process. In these cases the a r c h i v i s t is a member of a committee responsible for coordinat ing records management. In Quebec, the a r c h i v i s t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for records management depends on the publ ic page 90 body; for example, the a r c h i v i s t coordinates and supervises the records management programmes of the Executive Counsel , Treasury Board and government departments, but only advises m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , school boards or publ ic health and s o c i a l services agencies on the i r records management programmes. Where the archives and records management programmes do not f a l l under the same general management, there is a danger that the two programmes w i l l lack coordinat ion of both f i n a n c i a l and human resources. The emphasis on the archives as an i n s t i t u t i o n housing sources of the past in much ex i s t ing p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has a lso led to the underdevelopment of provis ions concerning t r a d i t i o n a l a r c h i v a l funct ions , such as a p p r a i s a l , s e l e c t i o n , a c q u i s i t i o n , conservat ion, and arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n , s ince the inherent assumption in such l e g i s l a t i o n i s that once the i n s t i t u t i o n is establ ished everthing else w i l l f a l l into p lace . A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n deals with the mechanics of a p p r a i s a l , the methods by which appra i sa l decis ions w i l l be c a r r i e d out, but not the d i f f i c u l t question of which records should be kept. The resu l t s of the content analys i s uphold a statement made by Jerome O'Brien in 1984 that a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n " f a i l s to spec i fy , except in a general way, which c lasses of records must be kept permanently."*2 It page 91 a lso f a i l s to spec i fy the reasons for which material must be kept. As O'Brien notes, "archiv i s t s are l e f t to apply whatever appra i sa l and se l ec t ion c r i t e r i a they deem appropriate ."*3 O'Brien goes on to say that "as a r c h i v i s t s become more accountable to the publ ic for the conduct of the i r a f f a i r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y when supported with tax d o l l a r s , i n t e r n a l adminis trat ive methods and procedures become subject to outside scrut iny."*4 His statement has proved to be prophetic in the wake of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the des truct ion of immigration f i l e s perta in ing to Nazi war c r i m i n a l s , during which the appra i sa l and se l ec t ion c r i t e r i a of the National Archives came under at tack. As O'Brien warns, "wel l - intentioned l a x i t y concerning requirements is one th ing; defending informal , inadequate, or non-existent a r c h i v a l procedures or s e l ec t ion standards before a judge is quite another."*5 C l e a r l y , a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n needs to address th i s i ssue. L e g i s l a t i o n need not include provis ions o u t l i n i n g appra i sa l and se l ec t ion c r i t e r i a in d e t a i l . Most a r c h i v i s t s agree that there is a strong element of "f ingerspitzegefuhl", or s c h o l a r l y i n t u i t i o n , involved in the appra i sa l process, too e lus ive to set down in law. Instead, the answer may l i e in having provis ions s ta t ing that a r c h i v i s t s must set down in wr i t ing the appra i sa l and se l ec t ion c r i t e r i a they use in s p e c i f i c cases and that these c r i t e r i a must meet with the approval of a higher author i ty , such as the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t . Unfortunately , there i s page 9 2 no legal precedent In the texts examined for th i s study upon which the wording of such provis ions might be based, which is in i t s e l f a commentary upon the de f i c i enc i e s of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in th i s area . A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n makes extensive prov i s ion for the a c q u i s i t i o n of publ ic records through provis ions which set for th methods for carry ing out appra i sa l dec i s ions , or the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records . Current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n provides for the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records by s e t t ing forth the approval process for e i ther records schedules, which provide ongoing author i ty for d i s p o s a l , or for one-time requests . Scheduling of publ ic records i s provided for in the l e g i s l a t i o n of a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n s , with the exception of Ontar io , Saskatchewan and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s ; although, provis ions in Saskatchewan and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s can be interpreted in such a way as to make scheduling poss ib le . The quant i tat ive analys i s reveals a c o r r e l a t i o n between l e g i s l a t i o n which has been recent ly amended or enacted and the appearance of provis ions al lowing for the scheduling of publ ic records . Scheduling is now the preferred method of acquir ing publ ic records because i t allows a r c h i v i s t s to become involved in the appra i sa l and s e l ec t ion of publ ic records much e a r l i e r in the l i f e cycle than they formally d i d . page 93 The approval process for schedules var ies from j u r i s d i c t i o n to j u r i s d i c t i o n . Publ i c records committees have some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for recommending or approving schedules in Nova Sco t ia , B r i t i s h Columbia, Manitoba, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , Prince Edward Is land, A l b e r t a , New Brunswick, and Newfoundland. In Nova Sco t ia , B r i t i s h Columbia, Manitoba and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , author i ty to review and approve schedules i s a lso vested in the agency that created the records . F i n a l approval of schedules must come from the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly in B r i t i s h Columbia. In Quebec, the Minis ter of C u l t u r a l A f f a i r s has f i n a l author i ty to approve schedules. In the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and New Brunswick, the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t gives f i n a l consent. In most j u r i s d i c t i o n s , as the content analys i s shows, the approval process for records schedules remains involved, perhaps much more so than i t needs to be. Since schedules al low for consul tat ion with experts at the time of t h e i r development, which takes place before the records are ready for d i s p o s a l , there i s l i t t l e need to have them reviewed and approved by a publ ic records committee in addi t ion to , in B r i t i s h Columbia's case, the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. In most j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the schedule approval process i s no more than an adminis trat ive hab i t . Under most circumstances, the approval of the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t , or the minister charged with the general management of the archives, should s u f f i c e . Review by another body, such as an advisory c o u n c i l , should only be required in the case of page 94 a dispute or uncertainty on the part o£ the a r c h i v i s t or min i s t er . The ro le of the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t in the scheduling process also var ies from j u r i s d i c t i o n to j u r i s d i c t i o n . In Nova Sco t ia , B r i t i s h Columbia, Prince Edward Is land, Manitoba, Alberta and Quebec, the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t s are i n d i r e c t l y involved in the process by v i r tue of the fact that they s i t on a publ ic records committee which i s charged with r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for overseeing the scheduling of publ ic records . In the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and New Brunswick, the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t i s d i r e c t l y involved in overseeing the scheduling of publ ic records , although not s o l e l y responsible for reviewing and approving schedules. In Quebec, the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t ' s involvement in the scheduling of publ ic records var i e s ; for example, the a r c h i v i s t oversees the scheduling of publ ic records in government departments, but may only advise m u n i c i p a l i t i e s on the scheduling of the i r records . Oversight of, i f not d i r e c t involvement i n , the scheduling process i s d e s i r a b l e , as i t puts the a r c h i v i s t in a pos i t i on to use the schedule more e f f e c t i v e l y as an a c q u i s i t i o n t o o l . Records schedules are only l i k e l y to be an e f fec t ive means of a c q u i s i t i o n i f the retent ion periods and f i n a l d i spos i t i ons they set out are abided by; however, not a l l j u r i s d i c t i o n s e x p l i c i t l y state that approved schedules are b inding . Such a prov i s ion ex is ts only in the a r c h i v a l page 95 l e g i s l a t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia, A l b e r t a , New Brunswick, Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundland. Nova Scot ia ' s Publ i c Records Disposal Act serves as an example of a prov i s ion concerning records scheduling that does not use the imperative to make the transfer of records, in accordance with approved records schedules, ob l iga tory . Section 5(3) states that "the minister appointing the documents committee may authorize the publ ic records to which the schedule and the report or memorandum, i f any, refers to be disposed of In the manner set out in the schedule."*6 While i t may be appropriate to give the minister with r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the general management of the archives or records management programme veto power over records schedules, to give other ministers veto power might jeopardize the implementation of a government-wide p o l i c y concerning the care and management of publ ic records . Occas iona l ly , however, disputes concerning retent ion periods or f i n a l d i spos i t i ons a r i s e . New Brunswick and Newfoundland deal with these s i tuat ions by inc luding procedures for the reso lu t ion of disputes in the i r l e g i s l a t i o n . * 7 Although a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in Ontar io , Sasktachewan and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s makes no provis ion for records schedul ing, i t does spec i fy the approvals required to dispose of records on a one-time bas i s . In Ontar io , the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t must approve the d i sposa l of records , in Saskatchewan, the Publ ic Records committee and the page 96 c r e a t o r s of the r e c o r d s rev i ew a l l r e q u e s t s , and the L i e u t e n a n t Governor approves them. In the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , t h i s a u t h o r i t y r e s t s w i t h the P u b l i c Records Committee and the T e r r i t o r i a l Commiss ioner . A r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , P r i n c e Edward I s l a n d , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and Newfoundland o u t l i n e s e p a r a t e a p p r o v a l proces se s for both r e c o r d s s chedu le s and one- t ime a u t h o r i t i e s , d e m o n s t r a t i n g the p i ecemea l e v o l u t i o n of many a r c h i v a l enactments . B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ' s Document D i s p o s a l A c t , f o r example, was amended i n 1953, 1964, 1965, 1977 and 1983. The development of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a ' s l e g i s l a t i o n has l e a d to an o v e r l y complex method of d i s p o s a l i n which the P u b l i c Document Committees , the r e c o r d s c r e a t o r and the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly must a l l r e v i e w both r e q u e s t s to d i s p o s e of r e c o r d s l e s s than seven years of age and r e c o r d s s c h e d u l e s . Records seven y e a r s of age and o l d e r must be rev iewed and approved by the P u b l i c Documents Committee and the L i e u t e n a n t G o v e r n o r . * 8 In a d d i t i o n to l a y i n g out methods for implement ing a p p r a i s a l d e c i s i o n s , a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n may a l s o c o n t a i n p r o v i s i o n s r e s p e c t i n g the form of d i s p o s i t i o n t h a t has been a p p r o v e d , e i t h e r i n a schedule or a one- t ime a u t h o r i t y . D e t a i l e d procedures f o r the c o n t r o l l e d d e s t r u c t i o n of p u b l i c r e c o r d s e x i s t p r i m a r i l y i n r e g u l a t i o n s . In the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , however, the procedure i s o u t l i n e d i n the A r c h i v e s Ord inance and c a l l s f o r the announcement of page 97 pending destruct ions in the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s ' Gazette.*9 This p r a c t i c e , which is unique to the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , aims at permitt ing publ ic response to appra i sa l dec i s ions . Although consistent with the or ig ins of current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in those enactments which sought to protect records concerning i n d i v i d u a l and publ ic r i g h t s , t h i s procedure lengthens the des truct ion process and is therefore u n l i k e l y to be copied by other j u r i s d i c t i o n s . As well as providing for contro l l ed destruct ion of publ ic records , a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in Nova Sco t ia , B r i t i s h Columbia, Manitoba and Quebec s p e c i f i c a l l y provides for photoreproduction or microf i lming as a form of d i s p o s i t i o n . The purpose of these provis ions i s to ensure the q u a l i t y of microf i lm copies as evidence. In Manitoba and Quebec, the l e g i s l a t i o n gives de ta i l ed procedures for disposing of records af ter the production of microfilmed copies . In Manitoba, these procedures appear in regulat ions passed pursuant to the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act , while in Quebec they appear in secondary l e g i s l a t i o n , the Photographic Proof of Documents Act . Transfer of records to p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l archives i s a lso deal t with in l e g i s l a t i o n . There is a d e f i n i t e connection between provis ions concerning the transfer of publ ic records to archives and the non- appearance of scheduling provis ions in the l e g i s l a t i o n . Where the l e g i s l a t i o n allows scheduling to take place and page 98 states that schedules must be followed, transfer provis ions are no longer necessary because the schedule sets out the f i n a l d i s p o s i t i o n of the records and ensures the ir transfer to arch ives . Two exceptions to t h i s pattern are the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , because the primary l e g i s l a t i o n came into force before i t s regulat ion on scheduling was passed, and Quebec, because of i t s t i e red approach to the management of publ ic arch ives . In Ontar io , Saskatchewan and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , where l e g i s l a t i o n does not e x p l i c i t l y provide for scheduling of publ i c records , l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions spec i fy that transfer i s to take place no sooner than seven years af ter the records cease to be in current use. This type of prov i s ion r e f l e c t s the at t i tudes towards archives of an e a r l i e r age, when a r c h i v i s t s could af ford to take a less proactive approach to a c q u i s i t i o n . Now, a r c h i v i s t s increas ing ly f ee l the need to accept transfers immediately a f ter current adminis trat ive needs have been met to ensure the preservat ion of information stored in unstable formats. In Ontar io , the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , the transfer clauses are not permissive. Publ ic bodies must transfer the i r records. Conversely, in Saskatchewan, the prov i s ion is permissive and publ ic bodies are not obliged to transfer records. As noted e a r l i e r , Quebec uses both permissive and non-permissive prov i s ions , depending on the publ i c body. Under most circumstances, the page 99 imperative l ega l r e l a t i o n s h i p is pre ferable . Use of the verb s h a l l in provis ions where the transfer of records i s contingent upon the elapse of a c e r t a i n time period causes I n f l e x i b i l i t y in the l e g i s l a t i o n because i t implies that valueless records cannot be destroyed nor can valuable records be transferred a f t e r , or even before, the spec i f i ed number of years has elapsed. This l i m i t a t i o n occurs in the l e g i s l a t i o n of both Ontario and Saskatchewan. Evidence of the ad hoc fashion in which p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n developed ex i s t s in provis ions deal ing with the a p p r a i s a l , s e l ec t ion and a c q u i s i t i o n of spec ia l c lasses of records , such as court records , municipal records, school board records and e l e c t i o n records . The very fact that these c lasses of records f a l l outside the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records in some j u r i s d i c t i o n s , while in others they f a l l w i th in , i s i t s e l f evidence of the pragmatic evolut ion of a r c h i v a l laws. In j u r i s d i c t i o n s where these c lasses of records f a l l outside the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records, p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l archives do not have the same author i ty and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to preserve these records or , in Quebec's case, to make the creators of these records preserve them, as they do in j u r i s d i c t i o n s where these records are considered to be publ ic records . Consequently, several j u r i s d i c t i o n s have f e l t i t necessary to e s tab l i sh l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions to ensure the preservat ion of such page 100 records. The creators of the records are most often given author i ty , in secondary l e g i s l a t i o n , over the d i s p o s i t i o n of such records . For example, Saskatchewan's l e g i s l a t i o n states that only municipal counci l s may recommend the d i sposa l of municipal records.*10 In Ontar io , only a school board can determine the f i n a l d i s p o s i t i o n of i t s records.*11 In Manitoba, the Chief E l e c t o r a l Of f i cer must authorize a l l d isposals of e l e c t i o n records , although the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t and the Leg i s la ture L i b r a r i a n must also be consulted.*12 Several j u r i s d i c t i o n s also have deposit provis ions for spec ia l c lasses of records . In Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Is land, court records may not be transferred to the archives sooner than twenty-five and f i f t e e n years re spec t ive ly , from the date the court record is f i l e d . L e g i s l a t i o n in B r i t i s h Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Prince Edward Island includes provis ions al lowing for the deposit of municipal records in p r o v i n c i a l arch ives . In the a r c h i v a l laws of Ontar io , B r i t i s h Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Prince Edward Is land, school board records may be deposited in the archives with the consent of the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t . In Manitoba, Alberta and New Brunswick, laws r e l a t i n g to e lec t ions state that c e r t a i n types o£ e l e c t i o n page 101 records, such as e l ec t ion writs and re turns , must be transferred to the archives . Other such transfer or deposit provis ions include Ombudsman's inves t igat ion f i l e s (Alberta ) , r e g i s t r y records (New Brunswick), Executive Counci l records (Newfoundland) and S h e r i f f ' s records (Ontar io) . These prov i s ions , drafted af ter the enactment of primary l e g i s l a t i o n , appear in e i ther secondary l e g i s l a t i o n , the subject matter of which re la tes p r i m a r i l y to the function for which the records were created, or re la ted regulat ions .*13 The d i f f i c u l t y with these provis ions i s that they are usual ly not drafted with the o v e r a l l a r c h i v a l programme in mind and therefore may impede i t s development. It is preferable to include these categories of records in a d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records so that they may be given equal pro tec t ion , rather than have them dealt with in l e g i s l a t i v e loose ends. If some d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between these and other records is necessary, the Quebec t i e r e d approach provides a model which may be used. Since Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l archives are "total" arch ives , meaning that they acquire material from pr ivate as wel l as publ ic sources, the content analys i s a lso measures the appearance of provis ions concerning the a p p r a i s a l , s e l e c t i o n and a c q u i s i t i o n of pr ivate records . Eleven out of twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s have provis ions covering the a c q u i s i t i o n of pr ivate records , B r i t i s h Columbia being page 102 the only j u r i s d i c t i o n that does not. Eight out of twelve out l ine the methods by which private mater ia l might be acquired, such as by g i f t , bequest or loan, and speci fy that the archives may negotiate the terms and condit ions of deposits with donors. In Ontar io , Nova S c o t i a , Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Prince Edward Is land, Alberta and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , the l e g i s l a t i o n also out l ines the types, by phys ica l form, of private mater ia l that the archives may acquire . Only Ontar io , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and Nova Scot ia spec i fy in d e t a i l the subjects to which the pr ivate mater ia l that the archives acquires may r e l a t e . Most other j u r i s d i c t i o n s leave acqu i s i t i ons mandates for pr ivate mater ia l quite broadly defined within p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l geographic boundaries, the exception being Nova Sco t ia , where the archives ' acqu i s i t i ons mandate a c t u a l l y extends beyond the province's boundary. O v e r a l l , the r e s u l t s of the content analys i s reveal that most provis ions in a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n r e l a t i n g to the a c q u i s i t i o n of pr ivate m a t e r i a l , in keeping with provis ions concerning the a c q u i s i t i o n of publ ic records, ex i s t to f a c i l i t a t e the transfer of ownership and phys ica l custody of the records , rather than out l ine c o l l e c t i o n s p o l i c i e s or appra i sa l c r i t e r i a in d e t a i l . Due to the fact that p u b l i c l y funded p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l archives face f i s c a l r e s t r a i n t and increased pressure to care for the records of t h e i r own sponsoring page 103 agencies, one might question whether current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n should encourage the a c q u i s i t i o n of private mater ia l by p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l arch ives . A better approach, given the present environment, might be that taken by Quebec, where a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n gives the archives author i ty to acquire mater ia l of pr ivate o r i g i n , but also encourages the development of l o c a l repos i tor i e s that are , perhaps, in a better pos i t ion to care for l o c a l l y created records.*14 L e g i s l a t i o n that allows the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t to regulate pr ivate a r c h i v a l agencies i s an a l t e r n a t i v e method of ensuring the preservat ion of documents that do not f a l l within the meaning of the term publ i c records , and makes provis ions r e q u i r i n g the deposit of pr ivate records less necessary. Administrators of l o c a l archives can help to ensure the preservat ion of documents by providing a l ega l foundation for the a c q u i s i t i o n of records of t h e i r own sponsoring agency. Pr ivate agencies that have no a r c h i v a l program or no pr ivate repos i tory in t h e i r l o c a l i t y should s t i l l have the option of using the p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l archives as a repos i tory for the i r records, provided the records have p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . One drawback to encouraging the development of l o c a l repos i tor i e s is the p o s s i b i l i t y of decreased contro l over such matters bearing on the preservat ion of documents as environmental contro ls and descr ip t ive standards; however, phys ica l d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n does not have to imply page 104 decentra l ized c o n t r o l . For example, Quebec's provis ions for the a c c r e d i t a t i o n of pr ivate agencies, under sect ion 22 of the Archives Act , ensures the preservat ion , to acceptable standards, of those private records that are not deposited in the p r o v i n c i a l arch ives . Quebec may soon pass regulat ions pursuant to th i s sect ion which require that pr ivate archives meet a c e r t a i n minimum l e v e l of standards.*15 Turning to conservat ion, current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n provides for preservat ion, or the preventative aspects of conservat ion, in general prov i s ions , rather than the treatment or res torat ion aspect.*16 For example, Saskatchewan, Prince Edward Is land, A l b e r t a , and New Brunswick state that publ ic records must be preserved u n t i l t h e i r transfer to the arch ives . Where the l e g i s l a t i o n does not contain a general clause concerning preservat ion , i t usua l ly proh ib i t s such harmful a c t i v i t i e s as unauthorized des t ruc t ion , removal, or mut i la t ion of records . Such provis ions appear in primary l e g i s l a t i o n in Ontar io , Manitoba, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , New Brunswick, the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , Quebec and Newfoundland. In a d d i t i o n , sanctions for the v i o l a t i o n of these provis ions are often l a i d out in the l e g i s l a t i o n , as for example, in New Brunswick, the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , Quebec and Newfoundland.*17 While these provis ions prevent in tent iona l des truct ion page 105 of documents, they do not prevent neglect of records or provide general standards and guidel ines concerning conservat ion. Thus, many permanently valuable publ ic documents l i e in basements, a t t i c s or parking lots of government bui ld ings because government agencies refuse , or have not bothered, to provide for the i r preservat ion or t h e i r transfer to archives . Examples of l e g i s l a t i v e provis ions which set out standards concerning preservat ion do e x i s t . In the 1940s, the Society of American A r c h i v i s t s published a ser ies of model laws in which they re ferred to standards for paper, ink and f ireproof ing .*18 More recent ly , the new Brunswick Registry Act provided that: 15(1) When in any r e g i s t r y o f f i ce any book, records , plan or instrument, from age or use, i s becoming o b l i t e r a t e d , unf i t for further use or is in need of r e p a i r , the Minis ter of J u s t i c e . . . m a y order such book, record , p lan , or instrument to be recopied or r e p a i r e d . . . 15(2) Every o r i g i n a l s h a l l be c a r e f u l l y preserved, notwithstanding that a copy thereof has been made, e i ther by keeping such an o r i g i n a l in a place of safe custody in the Regis try Off ice or by p lac ing the o r i g i n a l in the P r o v i n c i a l Archives.*19 New Brunswick's Regis try Act obl igates the r e g i s t r y to maintain i t s permanently valuable records in good repair and in safekeeping, or transfer them to the arch ives . The a p p l i c a t i o n of th i s type of prov i s ion could well be extended to a l l government agencies that create records of permanent value and invoked whenever necessary to ensure the preservat ion of such mater ia l . page 106 New Brunswick's Registry Act addresses the neglect of records held by government agencies, but not the neglect of records held in archives themselves. This i s of concern because government cutbacks have affected the a b i l i t y of many archives to preserve t h e i r records under proper condit ions or to carry out treatments, such as d e a c i d i f i c a t i o n , reprography and r e s t o r a t i o n . To improve the s i t u a t i o n , p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n needs to be strengthened by inc luding provis ions which spec i fy , in d e t a i l , the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the archives for conservat ion. Most statutes only c a l l on the a r c h i v i s t or the archives to preserve records, without lay ing out exact ly what standards, i f any, must be met. The language used in the National Archives Act is somewhat more emphatic, s ta t ing that the A r c h i v i s t may "take such measures as are necessary to . . . preserve and restore records . "*20 However, the addi t ion of a phrase such as "under condit ions that meet accepted a r c h i v a l standards" is a l l the more emphatic. The Swedish General Archives Ordinance goes even fur ther . It prescribes that "Archives s h a l l be kept and handled with care . Spec ia l care s h a l l be taken to ensure that they are protected from moisture and f ire ."*21 Such a prov i s ion would, perhaps, oblige resource a l l o c a t o r s to provide funds for the proper care of records within the arch ives . Unfortunately, the content analys i s of current Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n upholds, page 107 without quest ion, the statement made in the 1985 RAMP study- on a r c h i v a l and records management l e g i s l a t i o n that "the a t tent ion paid by current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n to preservat ion is inverse ly proport ional to the importance of th i s basic a r c h i v a l function."*22 As with provis ions concerning conservat ion, provis ions regarding arrangement and descr ip t ion bear strengthening. Current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n touches upon the arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n of records only b r i e f l y in mentioning the dut ies of the a r c h i v i s t or the objects of the arch ives . The National Archives Act , which states that the National A r c h i v i s t may take any steps necessary to arrange and describe records, again provides an example to be followed.*23 In th i s case the National Archives Act i s probably s u f f i c i e n t because, unlike preservat ion, arrangement and descr ip t ion i s more or less subject to the contro l of p r o v i n c i a l or t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v i s t s who w i l l ensure that the function is c a r r i e d out in accordance with profess ional standards. However, more de ta i l ed provis ions concerning arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n could be deal t with in a regu la t ion; for example, in the l e g i s l a t i o n of the Dominican Republic and Greece.*24 While a r c h i v i s t s abide by the two c a r d i n a l p r i n c i p l e s of arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n , provenance and respect for o r i g i n a l order, government agencies often d iv ide "fond" and d i s turb o r i g i n a l order. To prevent the disturbance of fond page 108 and o r i g i n a l order, future a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n could include provis ions s imi lar to those found in Quebec's Archives Act , which state that the documents of a publ ic body that ceases i t s operation must be transferred to the p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t i f i t s r ight s and obl igat ions are not assumed by another body and that archives must not be dispersed for commercial purposes. This l a s t prov i s ion i s re inforced by penalt ies of up to $25,000.*25 Publ ic access to records in archives has been a basic tenet of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n since the French Revolut ion. Current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n deals with both the i n t e l l e c t u a l and phys ica l aspects of the access issue. Seven out of twelve j u r i s d i c t i o n s have l e g i s l a t i o n which establ ishes a general r ight of access to publ ic records . In Ontar io , Nova Sco t ia , the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , Prince Edward Island and Quebec, th i s statement is found in access l e g i s l a t i o n and therefore appl ies to a l l publ ic records , whether or not they have been transferred to the P r o v i n c i a l Archives . Nevertheless, in Ontar io , Manitoba and Quebec, the l e g i s l a t i o n states that private records deposited in the archives are not subject to access and privacy prov i s ions . In New Brunswick and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , i t appears in primary l e g i s l a t i o n and appl ies only to records transferred to the arch ives . Provis ions e s tab l i sh ing a general r i g h t of access appear in both page 109 primary and secondary l e g i s l a t i o n in the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and Newfoundland. The general r i g h t of access i s accompanied by some l i m i t a t i o n s in a l l cases. If the j u r i s d i c t i o n has access and pr ivacy l e g i s l a t i o n , i t w i l l include provis ions o u t l i n i n g s p e c i f i c c lasses of r e s t r i c t e d mater ia l , usual ly for reasons of personal pr ivacy or nat ional s e c u r i t y . In New Brunswick, only, do de ta i l ed provis ions concerning l i m i t a t i o n s on access appear in primary l e g i s l a t i o n . L e g i s l a t i o n in Ontar io , Manitoba, New Brunswick, Quebec and Newfoundland provides that s p e c i f i c c lasses of records , having reached a c e r t a i n age, may be made access ib le , although the release date var ies between d i f f e r e n t categories of records and d i f f e r e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n s . J u r i s d i c t i o n s with provis ions r e s t r i c t i n g access to c e r t a i n categories of records a lso spec i fy whose approval must be sought in order to temporari ly l i f t r e s t r i c t i o n s . Procedures for obtaining access are a lso often o u t l i n e d . L e g i s l a t i o n may even, as in the case of Ontar io , Manitoba and New Brunswick, out l ine the information that must be provided in requests for access to r e s t r i c t e d categories of records , in the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , the T e r r i t o r i a l A r c h i v i s t evaluates a l l such requests for access, while in Nova S c o t i a , New Brunswick and Quebec, p r o v i n c i a l a r c h i v i s t s only evaluate requests to view records in the arch ives . In Ontar io , Manitoba and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , the page 110 a r c h i v i s t ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s are not s p e c i f i e d . As o r i g i n a l documents cannot be removed from the archives , l e g i s l a t i o n provides for the r i g h t to request copies of documents. Ten j u r i s d i c t i o n s state that the a r c h i v i s t may c e r t i f y copies of records in the archives as being t rue . In every case but B r i t i s h Columbia th i s prov i s ion appears in primary l e g i s l a t i o n . In Saskatchewan, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and New Brunswick, there are a lso regulat ions which set out terms and condit ions surrounding phys ica l access to a r c h i v a l m a t e r i a l . Many provis ions concerning basic a r c h i v a l and records management programme elements are inadequate; however, regulat ions can serve as a mechanism to al low inadequate s ta tutory provis ions to respond to the needs of changing s o c i a l and technologica l circumstances. For example, the Yukon Archives Ordinance does not provide for modern methods of records d i s p o s i t i o n , as i t makes no mention of schedul ing. The T e r r i t o r i a l Commissioner does, however, have the a u t h o r i t y , pursuant to the ordinance, to pass regulat ions regarding the manner in which publ ic records should be disposed. Consequently, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y was able to pass regulat ions in 1985 permitt ing records schedul ing. Since i t is becoming more d i f f i c u l t to replace outdated a r c h i v a l s tatutes , regulat ions may be increas ing ly r e l i e d upon to update outmoded l e g i s l a t i v e prov i s ions . page 111 It is most common to f ind l e g i s l a t i o n al lowing for the promulgation of regulat ions r e l a t i n g to adminis trat ive s t ruc tures , the d e f i n i t i o n of publ ic records , the publ ic records d i sposa l process, the transfer and deposit of publ ic records and access to records . Less common are provis ions permitt ing the passage of regulat ions concerning records management, the designation of publ ic bodies the records of which are subject to the l e g i s l a t i o n , schedul ing, d i sposa l procedures and preservat ion . Quebec and Newfoundland have the widest regulatory powers. Of the two, Newfoundland has the widest powers owing to i t s greater number of regulatory provis ions def in ing the subject upon which a regulat ion might be passed. These provis ions normally begin with phrases, such as "in r e l a t i o n to" or "in respect to". Quebec, on the other hand, uses more p r e s c r i p t i v e language, such as the words "prescribing" and "setting". Such language, although not as broad as the language used in Newfoundland's ac t , can be used quite e f f e c t i v e l y to expand or contract the a p p l i c a t i o n of the law, as, for example, in the case of a prov i s ion which allows for regulat ions prescr ib ing c lasses of publ i c records or government agencies subject to the ac t . The broadest form of expression is denoted by the use of such phrases as "for the purposes of" or "in order to". The only l i m i t a t i o n on th i s type of prov i s ion is that the regulat ion must ex i s t for the prescribed purpose.*26 It i s page 112 Important to note, however, the di f ference between the use of these phrases and the power to make regulat ions "for the purpose of the Act", as the l a t t e r has a much more l imi ted meaning and gives the power to pass regulat ions of only an adminis trat ive or procedural character.*27 Current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , owing to the outdated a t t i tudes and assumptions that l inger on in the d e f i n i t i o n of archives upon which the l e g i s l a t i o n is based, focuses too narrowly on the establishment of a r c h i v a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . The focus in many p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l laws on archives as i n s t i t u t i o n s rather than on the records themselves as documents of any age accumulated as a natural course of carry ing out business and preserved for the ir informational value leads to inadequacies in provis ions concerning such basic a r c h i v a l functions as a p p r a i s a l , s e l e c t i o n , a c q u i s i t i o n , conservat ion, and arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n . Moreover, i t m i l i t a t e s against an integrated programme for the care and management of records throughout the ir l i f e c y c l e . The lack of adequate provis ions deal ing with basic programme elements concerning the care and management of records throughout t h e i r l i f e cycle can only be perceived as a serious flaw in l e g i s l a t i o n which is intended to set for th p o l i c y to encourage the care and preservat ion of a l l documents. page 113 CONCLUSION Current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n suf fers from the same de f i c i enc i e s inherent in other forms of communication. These de f i c i enc i e s ar i s e from the ef fect that external s o c i a l influences have on the meaning of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n or , put another way, the ad hoc manner in which the meaning of l e g i s l a t i o n has evolved in response to reg ional circumstances and broader issues concerning government adminis trat ion or soc ie ty . This process of development has meant that the words which comprise current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n derive t h e i r meaning, even when that meaning seems natural or inherent, from the s o c i a l and technologica l context of the period when these words f i r s t entered into the corpus of a r c h i v a l law. Consequently, they carry overtones of past a t t i tudes and assumptions about archives which can have a profoundly negative impact upon archives ' a b i l i t y to r e a l i z e the in tent ion of the l e g i s l a t i o n , the care and preservat ion of documents. For example, as th i s thes is has shown, current d e f i n i t i o n s of the term record or document grew up in response to the need to p h y s i c a l l y manage the vast page 114 accumulations of records in government o f f i c e s . At the time, information and the medium upon which i t was recorded were c l o s e l y l i n k e d . Thus, d e f i n i t i o n s of the term record or document became descr ip t ive l i s t s of various media. Now, however, information i s less c l o s e l y associated with the medium upon which i t i s recorded. The media-based d e f i n i t i o n of the term record or document can conceivably render a r c h i v i s t s powerless to preserve information because i t is based on an outdated assumption about the nature of records . The conventional use of the word archives in most current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in conjunction with the use of the separate term publ ic records to describe what i s e s s e n t i a l l y one un i f i ed thing is perhaps the best example of the far-reaching impact that past a t t i tudes and assumptions about archives , inherent in the language of l e g i s l a t i v e t ex ts , can have upon the r e a l i z a t i o n of the object ive of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The word archives commonly refers to archives as i n s t i t u t i o n s concerned s o l e l y with the preservat ion of inact ive records documenting the past. This d e f i n i t i o n of archives , which arose in the l a t e - nineteenth century in response to h i s t o r i a n s ' des ire to e s tab l i sh "arsenals of h i s tory" , f a i l s to recognize the funct ional l ink between the care and management of records in archives and the care and management of these same records at an e a r l i e r stage of the i r l i f e cycle due to t h e i r nature as documents n a t u r a l l y accumulated as a re su l t of doing business. Consequently, the d e f i n i t i o n i m p l i c i t l y denies page 11.5 that archives have r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the care and management of act ive and semi-active publ ic records . However, in many j u r i s d i c t i o n s , the l e g i s l a t i o n e x p l i c i t l y gives the archives author i ty over th i s funct ion . Thus, a contrad ic t ion ar i ses between the intended meaning of the l e g i s l a t i o n , that the archives has r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for the care and management of publ i c records both in the archives and in publ i c agencies, and the s o c i a l l y produced meaning of the word, which implies that archives are responsible only for the preservat ion of records transferred into the i r custody. In a d d i t i o n , the t r a d i t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of archives gives the l e g i s l a t i o n an i n s t i t u t i o n a l focus which has lead to a lack of emphasis in i t s provis ions on such basic elements of an a r c h i v a l programme as a p p r a i s a l , conservat ion, and arrangement and d e s c r i p t i o n . The ad hoc fashion in which current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has developed over time has a l so led to inconsistency, c o n f l i c t , vagueness and ambiguity in the corpus of a r c h i v a l law. The phrase publ ic records , for example, which entered into a r c h i v a l law meaning p u b l i c l y access ib le wri t ten memorials of o f f i c i a l t ransact ions , has now emerged with several meanings, rooted in both the common law and l e g i s l a t i o n , that create an inherent ambiguity in present l e g i s l a t i v e texts , as the Manitoba L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y case very c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e s . The introduct ion of access to information and privacy l e g i s l a t i o n in several page 116 j u r i s d i c t i o n s has only served to further complicate the meaning of the term. The meaning of the word publ ic records as i t is now used in current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n i s based upon provenance, or the creator of the records . Def in i t ions of those publ ic agencies, the records of which are subject to provis ions concerning publ ic records , var ies widely from one j u r i s d i c t i o n to another. The fact that many publ ic agencies and the i r records were excluded from the protect ion given to publ ic records under the law, has resul ted in the piecemeal establishment of enactments to provide for the protect ion of spec ia l c lasses of records . These enactments, often drafted with no regard for re la ted l e g i s l a t i o n , have undermined the development of a coordinated p o l i c y for the preservat ion of documents. The current d i s p o s i t i o n approval process out l ined in the l e g i s l a t i o n of several j u r i s d i c t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y that of B r i t i s h Columbia, i s yet another example of how the ad hoc evolut ion of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n has given r i s e to ambiguity and inconsistency. Of the current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l l e g i s l a t i v e texts examined in th i s thes i s , Quebec's Archives Act comes the c loses t to providing a model a r c h i v a l enactment. Through adopting a funct ional d e f i n i t i o n of arch ives , drawn from the theory of European a r c h i v a l sc ience, as those documents of any age created and received by a body in meeting i t s own adminis trat ive requirements, Quebec has been able to overcome the l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by the conventional , i n s t i t u t i o n - page 117 based d e f i n i t i o n of arch ives . Moreover, Its d e f i n i t i o n of a document, which encompasses both data and the medium upon which i t i s recorded, abandons the past assumption that information and i t s medium are inseparable in conceptual terms. The d e f i n i t i o n s of these two terms form the basis upon which Quebec is able to e s tab l i sh an e f f i c i e n t and f u n c t i o n a l l y un i f i ed programme for the care and management of a c t i v e , semi-active and inact ive publ ic arch ives . The l e g i s l a t i o n ensures the preservat ion of the records of a wide range of publ ic agencies without over-burdening the archives through the use of i t s f l e x i b l e t i e r e d approach. It a lso avoids over-burdening the archives by encouraging the development of private arch ives . The Quebec Archives Act places the establishment of adminis trat ive s tructures in t h e i r proper perspective as a means of implementing programme elements and abolishes obsolete s t ruc tures , such as publ ic records committees. The only major defect of the l e g i s l a t i o n is that in abandoning the t r a d i t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l focus of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n , Quebec has not gone far enough towards inc luding de ta i l ed provis ions concerning basic a r c h i v a l funct ions . Nevertheless, other j u r i s d i c t i o n s would do well to consider Quebec's l e g i s l a t i o n when r e v i s i n g or redraf t ing the ir own l e g i s l a t i o n . Quebec's a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n overcomes some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s inherent in the l e g i s l a t i o n of other j u r i s d i c t i o n s because a r c h i v i s t s proposed the adoption of page 118 l e g i s l a t i o n based on a c l e a r l y a r t i c u l a t e d conceptual framework derived from a r c h i v a l science rather than opting for var ia t ions on t r a d i t i o n a l concepts found in past enactments. Quebec was thus able to free i t s e l f of outdated a t t i tudes and assumptions about archives found in conventional d e f i n i t i o n s of key terms and adminis trat ive s tructures and of the p e c u l i a r i t i e s of l e g i s l a t i v e form and content that had i n e v i t a b l y emerged over time to create inconsistency and ambiguity in the l e g i s l a t i o n . As the problems of current p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n or ig inate in i t s nature as a form of wri t ten communication, i t i s imperative that a r c h i v i s t s understand i t s nature and the subt ler influences that i t can have on the a b i l i t y of the l e g i s l a t i o n to f u l f i l l i t s intended purpose. Without such an understanding, external s o c i a l influences w i l l continue to adversely a f fec t the meaning of a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in ways unintended by a r c h i v i s t s . A r c h i v i s t s need to bring both th i s understanding and a wel l -def ined theory about archives and a r c h i v a l work to the regular process of reviewing and redraf t ing current a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . If a r c h i v i s t s take a more proactive approach to developing a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n in t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n s , as d id the a r c h i v i s t s in Quebec, they can then begin to take contro l of the ef fects of the l e g i s l a t i o n upon t h e i r work by introducing contemporary conceptual ideas f i r m l y grounded in a r c h i v a l theory into Canadian p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Only then w i l l page 119 a r c h i v i s t s t r u l y r e a l i z e how necessary and useful a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n can be. page 120 NOTES Co l l ec t i ons of p r o v i n c i a l statutes and t e r r i t o r i a l ordinances frequently c i t e d in the notes have been i d e n t i f i e d by the fol lowing abbreviat ions: 1. See Ernst Posner, Archives in the Ancient World (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1972), 14. 2. Ernst Posner, "Some Aspects of A r c h i v a l Development since the French Revolut ion, " in Maygene F . Daniels and Timothy Walch, eds. A Modern Archives Reader (Washington, D . C . : National Archives and Records Adminis trat ion , 1984),3-14. 3. See the volume "Archival L e g i s l a t i o n 1970-1980," Archivum 28 (1982). 4. Lewis H. Thomas, "Archival L e g i s l a t i o n in Canada," Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc ia t ion Report 1962:101-115 and John Archer, "A Study of A r c h i v a l Ins t i tu t ions in Canada," (PhD Thes is , Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , 1969). ONT OYT RSBC RSC RSNS RSO S . SA SBC SM SN SNB SNS SO SPEI SQ SS c. chapter Ordinances of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s Ordinances of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y Revised Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia Revised Statutes of Canada Revised Statutes of Nova Scot ia Revised Statutes of Ontario sect ion Statutes of Alberta Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia Statutes of Manitoba Statutes of Newfoundland and Labrador Statutes of New Brunswick Statutes of Nova Scot ia Statutes of Ontario Statutes of Prince Edward Island Statutes of Quebec Statutes of Saskatchewan NOTES TO INTRODUCTION 5. Jerome O'Br ien , "Archives and the Law: A Br ie f Look at page 121 the Canadian Scene," A r c h i v a r i a 18 (Summer 1984):38-46. 6. See John Archer, "The Publ ic Records of Saskatchewan," Journal of the Society of A r c h i v i s t s 2 (1960-64):16-22; Marc-Andree L e c l e r c , "L* implantation de la l o i sur les archives : b i l a n d'une experience reuss ie ," Archives 18,2 (Septembre 1986):15-40; Marion Beyea, "Records Management: the New Brunswick Case," A r c h i v a r l a 8 (Summer 1979):61-77; C. Bruce Fergusson, "The Publ i c Archives of Nova S c o t i a , " Acadlensls 2 r l (Autumn 1971):71-79; John P. Greene, "Prov inc ia l Archives in Newfoundland," Acadlensis 3,1 ( F a l l 1973):72-77; W. Brian Spe ir s , "Yukon Archives - A Regional Experiment," Canadian A r c h i v i s t s 2(4) (1973):26-37; David W. Leonard, "Establ i sh ing the Archives of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s : A Regional Casel study in L e g a l i t y , " A r c h i v a r l a 18 (Summer 1984):70-83. 7. F . Geny, Methode d 1 Interpretat ion et sources en d r o i t prlve p o s l t i f , Volume I (Par i s : L . G . D . J . , 1954) quoted in P ierre A. Cote, The Interpretat ion of L e g i s l a t i o n in Canada (Cowansvil le, Quebec: Les Ed i t ions Yvon B l a i s I n c . , 1984), 194. 8. Ole H o l s t i , Content Analys is for the S o c i a l Sciences and Humanities (Massacheusetts: Addison Wesley Publ i sh ing C o . , 1969),14. 9. I b i d , 2. 10. B. Berelson, Content Analys is in Communications Research (Glencoe, I l l i n o i s : Free Press , 1952) quoted in H o s t i , Content Analys is for the Soc ia l Sciences and Humanities, 15. 11. Klaus Krippendorf , Content Analys is (Beverly H i l l s , C a l i f o r n i a : Sage P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1980), 21. 12. George W. Bain , "State A r c h i v a l Law: A Content A n a l y s i s , " American A r c h i v i s t 46(2) (Spring 1983):158- 174. 13. There are numerous pieces of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l l e g i s l a t i o n which set out requirements whereby publ ic agencies or pr ivate ind iv idua l s or organizations must keep s p e c i f i c types of records and/or information. One example of t h i s type of l e g i s l a t i o n i s A l b e r t a ' s F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act , Revised Statutes of A l b e r t a , 1980, c . F - 9 , s. 12(3), 22 ( l ) (d ) , 23(1) and 23(3) in which the P r o v i n c i a l Treasurer of Alberta is given the author i ty to prescribe the form and content of a l l f i n a n c i a l records and the accounting systems which are to be maintained by a l l crown and p r o v i n c i a l agencies, to make regulat ions or issue d i r e c t i v e s page 122 regarding the records which must be maintained by ind iv idua l s with r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for publ ic funds, to inspect those records which must be maintained by revenue o f f i c e r s and to s ieze or make copies of a l l records concerning f i n a n c i a l matters within the government. E . A. Driedger, The Construct ion of s tatutes , (Toronto Butterworths and C o . , 1974), 81-82. page 123 NOTES TO CHAPTER ONE 1. Quoted in J.W. H a r r i s , Legal Phi losophies (London: Butterworths, 1980),219. 2. T .R . Schel lenberg, Modern Archives (Chicago: The Univers i ty of Chicago Press , 1956), 16. 3. Ernst Posner, "Some Aspects of A r c h i v a l Development since the French Revolut ion," in Maygene F . Daniels and Timothy Walch, eds. A Modern Archives Reader (Washington, D . C . : National Archives and Records Services , 1984), 3-14; C a r l Berger, Uae_ W r i t i n g Of Canadian His tory : Aspects of English-Canadian H i s t o r i c a l WKltlng; 190Q-1970 (Toronto: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1976), 1-32. 4. Macleod, "'Quaint Specimens of the E a r l y Days , ' : P r i o r i t i e s in C o l l e c t i n g the Ontario A r c h i v a l Record, 1872-1938," A r c h i v a r i a 22 (Summer 1986): 29. 5. I b i d , 30. 6. Joseph S c h u l l , Ontario Since 1867 (Toronto: McClel land and Stewart L t d . , 1978): 250-256. 7. Ontar io , Archives Act , RSO 1980, c. 28, s. 3. 8. Saskatchewan, Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act , SS 1920, c. 17, s. r ; A l b e r t a , Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act , SA 1925, c. 31, s. 4. 9. Archer, "The Publ ic Records in Saskatchewan," Journal of the Society of A r c h i v i s t s 2 (1960-64): 19. 10. Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc ia t ion Archives Committee, "The Discussion of the Problem of Publ ic and H i s t o r i c a l Records in Canada." (Report of the Annual Meeting, June 1-2, 1944):41. 11. P r o v i n c i a l L i b r a r i a n and A r c h i v i s t , W. Kaye Lamb, to the Departmental S o l i c i t o r , Department of the Attorney General , 29 November 1983, f i l e number 4966, L e g i s l a t i o n F i l e s , Department of the Attorney General , V i c t o r i a , B r i t i s h Columbia. 12. Saskatchewan, An Act to Amend the Archives Act , SS 1949, c. 119, s. 9. 13. Saskatchewan, Archives Act , SS 1945, c. 113, s. 9-10; Saskatchewan, An Act to amend the Archives Act , SS 1949, page 124 c. 119; Saskatchewan, An Act to Amend the Archives Act , SS 1951, c. 101. 14. See f i l e e n t i t l e d "1969 P r o v i n c i a l Archives of Alber ta" , Box 1, Accession 81.5, Administrat ive F i l e s of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a , P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a , Edmonton, A lber ta ; A l b e r t a , Publ ic Documents Act , SA 1970, c. 90. 15. Alberta Heritage Act , SA 1970, c. 7; A l b e r t a , Heritage Act , SA 1973, c. 5; A l b e r t a , Department of Government Services Act , SA 1975, c. 11. The 1973 Alberta Heritage Act was renamed due to a name c o n f l i c t with the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund and the Department of Government Services Act , because of another departmental reorganizat ion which took place in 1983. 16. A l b e r t a , Heritage Act , SA 1973, c. 5. 17. I b i d . 18. Jay Atherton, "From L i f e Cycle to Continuum: Some Thoughts on the Records Management-Archives Re la t ionsh ip ," A r c h i v a r i a 21 (Winter 1985-86): 43-52. 19. Yukon, Access to Information Act , OYT 1983, c. 13, s. 5(3); Yukon, Archives Ordinance, O r d e r - i n - C o u n c i l 1985/17, Yukon T e r r i t o r y Gazette, Part I I . 20. Quebec, An act or Ordinance for the Better Preservat ion and Due D i s t r i b u t i o n of the Ancient French Records, Revised Acts and Ordinances of Lower Canada 30 George I I I , c . 8. 21. Edgar Mclnnls , Canada: A P o l i t i c a l and Soc ia l Hi s tory , Fourth E d i t i o n (Toronto: Ho l t , Rinehart and Winston of Canada, 1982), 145. 22. I b i d , 154-160. 23. Quebec, An act or Ordinance for the Better Preservat ion and Due D i s t r i b u t i o n of the Ancient French Records, Revised Acts and Ordinances of Lower Canada 30 George I I I , c . 8. 24. I b i d . 25. Nova Sco t ia , Publ ic Records Act , SNS 1861, c .23. 26. Nova S c o t i a , Publ ic Record Act , SNS 1861, c. 23, s. 1. 27. Saskatchewan, Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Ac t , SS 1920, c .17, s . l . page 125 28. Newfoundland, H i s t o r i c Objects , Sites and Records Act , SN 1959, c. 76, s. 28(7). 29. M.D. K i r b y , "Access to Information and Pr ivacy: The Ten Information Commandments," A r c h i v a r i a 23 (Winter 1986- 87) :5-6. 30. Saskatchewan, Archives Act , SS 1955, c. 84, s .3 . 31. I b i d . 32. See for example, Manitoba, L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Amendment Act , SM 1966, c. 31; Nova S c o t i a , Publ ic Records Act , RSNS 1967, c. 253; Newfoundland, Archives Act , c. 33; Yukon, Archives Ordinance, OYT 1971 (1st ) , c . 2. 33. Newfoundland, Publ ic Records Act , SN 1951, c. 68. 34. Ontar io , Archives Act , RSO 1980, c. 28, s. 5(q) and ( i ) . 35. Yukon, Archives Ordinance, OYT 1971 (1st ) , c . 2, s. 6(g) and ( i ) . 36. Fergusson, "The Publ ic Archives of Nova Sco t ia ," Acadiensis 2,1 (Autumn 1971): 75. 37. Nova S c o t i a , Publ i c Archives Act , SNS 1929, c. 1, s. 7. 38. Nova S c o t i a , An Act to Amend the Publ ic Archives Act , SNS 1930, s. 56 and SNS 1931, c. 63. 39. George Simpson, "Archives in Canada," American A r c h i v i s t 1,14 (October 1948): 264. 40. Archer, "A Study of A r c h i v a l Ins t i tu t ions in Canada," (PhD Thes i s , Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , 1969), 240; Saskatchewan, Archives Act , SS 1945, c. 113, s. 6(2). 41. Quebec, An Act Respecting Access to Documents Held by Publ ic Bodies and the Protect ion of Personal Pr ivacy , SQ 1982, c. 30; "Al locut ion Du Minis tre Des A f f a i r e s C u l t u r e l l e s , " Archives 15,1 (Juin 1983): 7-13. 42. Denys Chouinard, Carol Couture and Jean-Yves Rousseau, "Memoire r e l a t i f au project de l o i nluraero] 3 i n t i t u l e l o i sur les arch ives ," Archives (Juin 1983):26. 43. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38. page 126 NOTES TO CHAPTER TWO 1. Prince Edward Is land, Archives Act , SPEI 1975, C. 64, s. 1. 2. Canada, National Archives of Canada Ac t , 1987, Statutes of Canada, 36 E l i zabe th 2, c. 1, s. 2. 3. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38. , s. 2. Emphasis added. 4. B r i t i s h Columbia, Document Disposal Act , RSBC 1979, c. 95, s. 1; B r i t i s h Columbia, Interpretat ion Act , RSBC 1979, c. 206, s. 29. 5. A l b e r t a , Publ i c Works, Supply and Services Act . Publ ic Records Regulat ion, Alberta Regulation 373/83, Alberta Gazette Part I I , s. 5(2). 6. The general schedule for "transi tory" EDP records includes such information as t r a n s i t o r y input records , processing records and output records as well as user views of master f i l e s and convenience copies of COM or tapes. This material i s scheduled for retent ion by the min i s try u n t i l superseded or obsolete; the f i n a l d i s p o s i t i o n is des truc t ion . 7. Manitoba, Freedom of Information Act , SM 1985, c. 6. 8. Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , Archives Ordinance, ONT 1981 (3rd ), c. 2, s . 4 . 9. Bob Tapscott , "Access and Archives: The Manitoba Experience," paper presented at the Assoc iat ion of Canadian A r c h i v i s t ' s Conference, Hamilton, June, 1987; Canadian Newspapers Company L t d . v Government of Manitoba Queen's Bench," Western Weekly Review 2 (1986):393; "Canadian Newspapers Company L t d . v Government of Manitoba Court of Appeal ," Western Weekly Review 2 (1986):673. 10. Tapscott , "Access and Archives ," 6-18. 11. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c . 38, s. 2. 12. E r i c Kete laar , A r c h i v a l and Records Management L e g i s l a t i o n and Regulations: A RAMP Study with Guidel ines (Par i s : UNESCO, 1985), 16. 13. I b i d , 6-10. For d e t a i l s about the use of the term archives in French or "archivio" in I t a l i a n see Ronald page 127 J . Planchan, e d . , "The Internat ional Scene: News and Abstrac t s ," American A r c h i v i s t 43(3) (Summer 1980): 392- 4 and Ernst Posner, Archives in the Ancient World (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univers i ty Press , 1972) :4. 14. Canada, National Archives of Canada Act , 1987, Statutes of Canada, 36 E l i zabe th 2, c. 1, s. 2 and 4. 15. B r i t i s h Columbia, Document Disposal Act , RSBC 1979, c. 95. 16. England, Data Protect ion Act , 1984, Statutes of England, 33 E l i zabe th 2, c. 35, s. 1(5). 17. England, Publ ic Records Act , 1958, Statutes of England, 6&7 E l i zabe th 2, c. 51, s. 4. 18. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38. 19. New Brunswick, Right to Information Act , SNB 1978, c. R- 10.3; New Brunswick, An Act to Amend the Archives Act , SNB 1986, c . 11, s. 10. 20. Manitoba, Freedom of Information Act , SM 1985, c. 6. s. 61(c) . page 128 NOTES TO CHAPTER THREE 1. On the pros and cons of the board s tructure see John Archer, "A Study of A r c h i v a l Ins t i tu t ions in Canada," (PhD Thes i s , Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , 1969): 554 and "The P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A lber ta : A Prel iminary Reprt on the Nature of the Programme and a Plan for Development," November 25, 1965, Box 1, Accession 88.239, P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a , Edmonton, A l b e r t a . 2. See Salvatore Carbone and Raoul Gueze, Draft Model Law on Archives: Descr ipt ion and Text (Par i s : UNESCO, 1962), 35-39; R-H Baut ier , "Princ ip les of Arch iva l L e g i s l a t i o n , " in A Manual on T r o p i c a l Archivology, edited by Yve Perot in (Par is : Mouton and C o . , 1966), 39. 3. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38, Projet de reglement sur l'agrement d'un service d'archives pr ivees , Gazette O f f l c i e l du Quebec, Le 16 Aout, 1989, s. 2(12). 4. Carbone and Gueze, Draft Model Law on Archives , 35-39. 5. A l b e r t a , Pu lb ic Works, Supply and Services Act . Publ ic Records Regulation 373/83, Alberta Gazette Part I I . 6. Wesley Newcomb Hofeld was a professor of law at Stanford Univers i ty and the Southmayd Professor at Yale U n i v e r s i t y . On the Hofeldian Scheme see R. Stone, The Province and Function of the Law (Buffalo: Wi l l iam S. Hein and Co. Inc, 1968): 115-139. 7. Hofeld's scheme is set out by Stone, I b i d , 17, as fol lows: Right No-Right Right Duty 8. Op C i t , 115. 9. R. Stone, The Province and Function of the Law, 116. 10. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38, s. 2. 11. Canada, Nat ional Archives of Canada Act , 1987, Statutes of Canada, 36 E l i zabe th 2, c. 1, s. 9(1). J u r a l Opposites P r i v i l e g e Power Duty D i s a b i l i t y Immunity L i a b i l i t y J u r a l Corre la t ives P r i v i l e g e Power No-Right L i a b i l i t y Immunity D i s a b i l i t y page 129 E r i c Kete laar , A r c h i v a l and Records Management L e g i s l a t i o n and Regulations: A RAMP Study with Guidel ines (Par i s : UNESCO, 1985), 39-44. Carbone and G u £ z e , Draft Model Law on Archives , Baut ier , "Princ ip les of Arch iva l L e g i s l a t i o n , " page 130 NOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR 1. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c . 2, s. 29. 2. Jerome O'Br ien , "Archives and the Law: A Br ie f Look at the Canadian Scene," A r c h i v a r i a 18 (Summer 1984):43. 3. I b i d . 4. Op C i t . 5. O 'Br ien , "Archives and the Law," 44. 6. Nova S c o t i a , Publ ic Records Disposal Act , RSNS 1967, c. 254, s. 5(3). Emphasis added. 7. New Brunswick, Archives Act , RSNB 1977, c . A - l l . l , s. 7(2); Newfoundland, Archives Act , SN 1983, c. 33, s. 7. 8. The Document Disposal Act reads: 3(1) No document s h a l l be destroyed except on the writ ten recommendation of a committee to be known as the Publ ic Documents Committee. . . 3(2) No document s h a l l be destroyed before the exp ira t ion of 7 years from the date on which i t was created unless (a)2 years have expired from the date on which i t was created and there i s ava i lab le to the o f f i c e r who would, but for the des truct ion have charge or custody of the document a microf i lm copy of i t , (b)a recommendation under subsection (1) has been approved by the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly on the recommendation of the Select Standing Committee of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly on Publ ic Accounts and Economic A f f a i r s ; or (c) i t i s ( l ) l l s t e d in a records schedule approved by the Select Standing Committee of the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly on Publ ic Accounts and Economic A f f a i r s , and ( i i ) destroyed in accordance with the ins truct ions in the records schedule. 3(3) Subject to subsections (1) and (2), the Lieutenant Governor in C o u n c i l , may on the recommendation of the minister having j u r i s d i c t i o n over the min i s try concerned, (order the des truct ion or transfer of records) . 3(4) No document desposited in a record of f i ce s h a l l be destroyed without the approval of the page 131 Attorney General , and, in the case of an o f f i ce of the Court of Appeal, without the further approval of the Chief Jus t i ce of B r i t i s h Columbia, and, in the case of an o f f i ce of the supreme Court , without the further approval of the Chief Jus t i ce of the Supreme court.*46 ( B r i t i s h Columbia, Document Disposal Act , RSBC 1979, c. 95, s. 3) 9. Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , Archives Ordinance, ONT 1981 (3rd) , c. 2, s. 5(6). 10. Saskatchewan, The Rural M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Act , RSS 1978, c. R-26, s. 78; Saskatchewan, The Urban M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Act , RSS 1978, c. U-10, s. 23; Saskatchewan, The J a c k f i s h - Murray Lake Resort M u n i c i p a l i t y Act , RSS 19878, c. J - l , s. 69. 11. Ontar io , The Education Act , RSO 1980, c. 129, s. 150(34). 12. Manitoba, The E l e c t i o n Ac t , RSM 1970, c. E30, s. 119(3). 13. A l b e r t a , Ombudsman Act , RSA 1980, c. 0-7, s. 29(3); New Brunswick, Regis try Act , RNB 1973, c. R-6; Newfoundland, the Archives Act . The Archives (Executive Counci l Records) Regulat ion, Newfoundland Regulation 1/85, The Newfoundland Gazette Part II ; Ontar io , The S h e r i f f ' s Act , RSO 1982, c. 6, s. 5(1) and schedule. 14. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, ss . 21-28. 15. I b i d ; Quebec, Archives Act . Projet de reglement sur l'agrement d'un service d'archives pr ivees , Gazette O f f i c i e l du Quebec, Le 16 Aout, 1989. 16. Mary Lynn Ritzenthaler describes conservation as a three phase funct ion: 1) examination, 2) preservat ion; that i s re tarding or preventing d e t e r i o r a t i o n and 3) r e s t o r a t i o n ; that i s , re turning the document to as close to i t s o r i g i n a l state as possible (Mary Lynn Ri tzentha ler , Archives and Manuscripts: Conservator! [Chicago: Society of American A r c h i v i s t s , 19831). 17. The Quebec Archives Act , for example, states that persons who unlawfully a l ienate or destroy publ ic documents are l i a b l e to f ines of up to $3,000 and persons who destroy fonds created or received by a person in the course of carry ing out his or her duties are l i a b l e to a f ine of up to $25,000, providing a strong ra t iona le for adhering to the a r c h i v a l p r i n c i p l e of resect des fond (Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38, ss . 12, 13, 15, 28, 31). page 132 18. SAA Committee on Uniform L e g i s l a t i o n , "The Proposed Uniform State Publ ic Records A c t , " American A r c h i v i s t 3(2) ( A p r i l 1940):107-115; Saa Committee on Uniform L e g i s l a t i o n , "A Proposed Model Act to Create a State Department of Archives and H i s t o r y , " American A r c h i v i s t 7(2) (January 1944 ):130-134; Saa Committee on A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n , "Model B i l l for a state Archives Department," American A r c h i v i s t 10(1) (January 19 47): 47-49. 19. New Brunswick, Regis try Act , SNB 1978, c. 48, ss . 15(1) and 15 (2). 20. Canada, National Archives of Canada Act , 1987, Statutes of Canada, 36 E l i zabe th 2, c. 1, s. 2(b). 21. E r i c Kete laar , A r c h i v a l and Records Management L e g i s l a t i o n and Regulations: A RAMP Study with Guidel ines (Par i s : UNESCO, 1985), 75. 22. I b i d , 77. 23. Canada, National Archives of Canada Ac t , 1987, Statutes of Canada, 36 E l i zabe th 2, c. 1, s. 2(b). 24. Kete laar , A r c h i v a l and Records Management L e g i s l a t i o n . 80. 25. Quebec, Archives Act , SQ 1983, c. 38, ss . 17 and 38. 26. E . A . Driedger, The Construct ion of Statutes (Toronto: Butterworths and C o . , 1974), 199-201. 27. I b i d , 199. page 133 BIBLIOGRAPHY L e g i s l a t i o n For p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n see Appendix I I . For Foreign a r c h i v a l l e g i s l a t i o n see the volume of Archivum c i t e d below. A l b e r t a , Interpretat ion Act , Revised Statutes of A l b e r t a , 1980, c. 1-7 B r i t i s h Columbia, Offense Act , Revised Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1979, c. 305. Canada, Copyright Act , Statutes of Canada, 1956, 4&5 E l i zabe th 2, c. 34. Canada, National Archives of Canada Act , 1986, Statutes of Canada, 35 E l i zabe th 2, c . l . Canada, Publ i c Archives Act , Revised Statutes of Canada 1970, c. P-27. Canada, Publ ic Archives Act , 1912, Revised statutes of Canada, c. P-27, Publ ic Records Order, P . C . 1966-1749. England, Data Protect ion Act , Statutes of England, 1984, 33 E l i zabe th 2, c. 35. Min i s ter of Communications. B i l l C-95 "An Act Respecting the Archives of Canada. . ." F i r s t Reading, February 12, 1986. Quebec, Project de l o i 3, L o i sur les archives , Assemble Nat ionale . 1983, 42nd L e g i s l a t u r e , 4th Session. Quebec, Project de reglement sur 1,'agrement d' un service d'archives pr ivees , Gazette O f f i c i e l du Quebec, Le 16 Aout, 1989 Government Records Archives of Ontar io . Records of the Archives of Ontar io , RG 3, O r d e r s - i n - C o u n c i l . Order - in -Counc i l 129/370, approving the regulat ion under the Archives Act , 1923, Department of the Treasurer . Archives of Ontar io . Records of the Archives of Ontar io , RG 8, I -7 -H. O f f i c i a l copies of b i l l no. 53, An Act to Provide for the Care and Permanent Preservat ion of the Publ ic Archives , 23 February and 27 March 1923. page 13 4 Archives of Ontar io . Records of the Archives of Ontar io , RG 17,14, V o l . 1, Lands and Fores t s . Memoranda by W.C. Cain regarding the proposed Act to Provide for the Preservat ion of Publ ic Archives , 31 January 1923 to 30 A p r i l 1923. B r i t i s h Columbia. Department of the Attorney General . L e g i s l a t i o n F i l e s . "Document Disposal Act". F i l e numbers 2755 and 4966. Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . Administrat ive F i l e s of the Archives of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . "7 and 10 J u l y , 1981 draf ts of the Archives Ordinance". P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . Administrat ive F i l e s of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . F i l e 17.10, Part I I . "Public Records F i l e s . " P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . Accession 81.5 Administrat ive Records of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a , 1966-75. P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . Accession 88.239. Records of R.O. Harr i son , 1962-1980, former Director of the Alberta P r o v i n c i a l Museum and Archives , t ransferred from the Department of Culture and M u l t i c u l t u r a l i s m . Interviews Beyea, Marion. Interview with author. Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, 20 January 1987. Publ icat ions Akz in , Benjamin. "Leg i s la t ion" . In The Internat ional E n c y c l o p e d i a of the Soc ia l Sciences. David L . S i l l s , ed. New York. MacMillan Co. and the Greer Press , 1968. A l b e r t a . Attorney General . Draft ing Style Manual for Acts , Regulations and Orders in C o u n c i l , Fourth E d i t i o n . A l b e r t a : Department of the Attorney General , L e g i s l a t i v e Counsel O f f i c e , n .d . "Al locut ion du Minl s tre Des A f f a i r e s C u l t u r e l l e s . " Archives 15,1 (Juin 1983): 7-13. Archer, John H . . "The Publ ic Records in Saskatchewan." Journal of the Society of A r c h i v i s t s , 2 (1960-64). Archer , J . H . "A study of A r c h i v a l Ins t i tu t ions in Canada." page 13 5 PhD Thes is , Queens U n i v e r s i t y , Ontar io , 1969. Bain , G.W. "State A r c h i v a l Law; A content A n a l y s i s . " American A r c h i v i s t . 46(2) (Spring 1983); 158-174. Baut ier , R . H . "La L e g i s l a t i o n A r c h i v i s t i q u e . " Gazette Des Archives , 86, (3e tr imestre 1974); 191-4. Bein, Dr. A. "Archives in I s r a e l . " Archivum II (1961); 171- 75. Bennion, F . Statute Law. London: Oyez Longman Publ i shing L t d . , 1983 Berger, C a r l . The Writ ing of Canadian Hi s tory . Toronto: Oxford Univers i ty Press , 1976. Beyea, M. "Records Mangement: The New Brunswick Case." A r c h i v a r i a 8 (Summer 1979): 61-77. B i a n c h i n i , L . "Draft Model Law on Archives: Descr ipt ion and Text by Salvatore Carbone and Raoul Gueze." A r c h i v a r i a 3: 127-8. Boberach, H. "Archives in the Federal Republic of Germany." A r c h i v a r i a 7 (Winter 1978): 62-69. B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of P r o v i n c i a l Secretary and Government Services . Annual Report. 1983-84. B r i t i s h Columbia: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1984. Brown, George W. "The Problem of Publ ic and H i s t o r i c a l Records in Canada." Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review 25 (March 1944) : 1-5. Burke, E . E . "Some A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n of the B r i t i s h Common- wealth." American A r c h i v i s t 22 (July 1959): 275-296. Brown, George W. "Prov inc ia l Archives in Canada." Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review 16 (March 1935): 1-18. Black, Henry C. Black's Law Dic t ionary , 5th E d i t i o n . St . Paul , Minnesota: West Publ i sh ing Company, 1979. Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc iat ion Archives Committee. "The Discussion of the Problem of Publ ic and H i s t o r i c a l Records in Canada." Report of the Annual Meeting, June 1- 2, 1944: 40-45. Canadian Newspapers Company L t d . v Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Queen's Bench." Western Weekly Review 2 (1986):393. Canadian Newspapers Company L t d . v Government of Manitoba, Manitoba Court of Appeal ." Western Weekly Review 2 (1986):673. page 136 Car bone, s. and Gueze, R. Draft Model r.aw nn Archives: d e s c r i p t i o n and text . P a r i s : Unesco, 1962. Consultat ive Group on Canadian Archives , Report to the Soc ia l Sciences and Humanities Research C o u n c i l . Ottawa: Information D i v i s i o n of the S . S . H . R . C . , 1980. Cook, M. Archives Adminis trat ion: A Manual for Intermediate and Smaller Organizations and for l o c a l Government. Kent, England: Dawson and Sons L t d . , 1977. Cote, P ierre A, The Interpretat ion of L e g i s l a t i o n in Canada. Cowansvi l le , Quebec: Les Edit iones Yvon B l a i s I n c . , 1984. Couture, C. and Rousseau, J . The L i f e of a Document: A Global Approach to Archives and Records Management. Montreal: Vehicule Press , 1982. Cowan, J . G . "Administrative Law." In The Canadian Enclopedia . J . H . Marsh, ed. Edmonton: Hurt ig Publ i shers , 1985. C r a i g , B. "Meeting the Future by Returning to the Past: A Commentary on Hugh T a y l o r ' s Transformations." A r c h i v a r i a 25 (Winter 1987-88):7-11. Dickerson, F . Reed. The Interpretat ion and Appl i ca t ion of Statutes . Boston: L i t t l e , Brown and C o . , 1975. D o u v i l l e , Raymond. "La Genese de la L o i de Des Archives". Archives , 70.2 (1970): 8-14. Driedger, E . A . The Composition of L e g i s l a t i o n . Ottawa: Queens P r i n t e r , 1957. Driedger, E . A . The Construct ion of Statutes . Toronto: Butterworths and C o . , 1974. Driedger, E . A . A Manual of Instruct ions for L e g i s l a t i v e and Legal Writ ing - Book Six . Ottawa: Department of J u s t i c e , 1982. Duchein, Miche l . "Archives in France: The New L e g i s l a t i o n of 1979." A r c h i v a r i a 11 (Winter 1980-81): 127-133 Duchein, Miche l . "Archives (Legis la t ive Foundations) ." In ALA World Encyclopedia of L i b r a r y and Information Services . Chicago: American L i b r a r y a s soc ia t ion , 1980: 38-40. Eastwood, T e r r y . " R . E . Gosne l l , E . O . S . S c h o l f i e l d and the Founding of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1894-1919." B . C . Studies 54 (Summer 1982): 38-62. page 137 E l l i s , Roger. 'The H i s t o r i c a l Manuscripts Commission." Archivum II (1961): 229. Ewart, D. Documentary Evidence in Canada. Toronto: Carswell Pub l i ca t ions , 1984. Ferguson, C . B . "The Publ ic Archives of Nova Sco t ia ." Acadiensis 2,1 (Autumn, 1971): 71-79. Forsey, E . A . How Canadians Govern Themselves. Canada: Minis ter od Supply and Services , 1982. Ford , F.W. "Some Legal Problems in Preserving Records for Publ ic Use." American A r c h i v i s t 20 (Jnauary 1957): 41-47. Fox, P.W. "Regionalism and Confederation." In Regionalism in the Community 1867-1967. Mason Wade, ed. Toronto. Un ivers i ty of Toronto Press , 1969: 3-29. G a l l , G . L . The Canadian Legal System. Toronto: The Carswell Company L t d . , 1977 . Garon, L . "Les Archives Gouvernementales aux Archives Nationale Du Quebec." Archives 10(1) (Juin 1985): 19-22. Greene, J . P . "Prov inc ia l Archives in Newfoundland." Acadiensis 3,1 (Autumn 1973): 72-77. Grimsted, P . K . "Lenin's A r c h i v a l Decree of 1918: The Bolshevik Legacy for Soviet A r c h i v a l Theory and P r a c t i c e . " American A r c h i v i s t 45(4) ( F a l l 1982): 429-443. Grossman, P. L i b r a r y Service in New Brunswick. Freder ic ton: The New Brunswick Department of Education, 1953. H a l l , K. "Archival A c q u i s i t i o n s : Legal Mandates and Methods." A r c h i v a r i a 18 (Summer 1984): 58-69. Hayes, M.T. Lobbyists and L e g i s l a t o r s . New Brunswick: Rutgus Un ivers i ty Press , 1981. Heathcote, A . P . "Guardians of Ontarios Past ." Ontario L i b r a r y Review 53,4 (December 1969)" 192-199. Holmes, O.W. "Public Records - Who Knows What They Are?" American A r c h i v i s t 23 (January 1960): 3-27. H o l s t i , 0. Content Analys is for the Soc ia l Sciences and Humanities. Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Publ ishing Co. 1969. Hosle, J . "Archives in B r i t i s h Columbia." i n P a c i f i c Northwest L i b r a r y Assoc iat ion Proceedings 24th Annual page 138 Conference May 29-31, 1933, V i c t o r i a , B . C . Hornabrook, J . "New Zealands Archives ." A r c h i v a r i a 7 (Winter 1978) :82-85. Internat ional Counci l on Archives , "Archival L e g i s l a t i o n 1970-1980." Archivum 28 (1928). Ire land , W.E. "The P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v a l Scene." The Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc ia t ion , Report of the Annual Meeting,, 1953: 69-76. Isaac, G. "Univers i ty Student Records: Privacy and Research Access." Masters Thes i s , Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1986. Iwakura, N. "Archives of Japan." A r c h i v a r i a 7 (Winter 1978): 76-81. Jepson, R.W. How to Write and Say What You Mean Toronto: Coles Publ i shing Company Limi ted , 1978. Johnson, H .C . "The Publ ic Record O f f i c e . " Archivum 11 (1961): 215-228 . Jones, H.G. "The Pink Elephant R e v i s i t e d . " American A r c h i v i s t 43(4) ( F a l l 1980): 473-483. Jones, H.G. Local Government Records: An Introduction to Their Management, Preservat ion and Use. N a s h v i l l e . American Assoc iat ion for State and Local Hi s tory , 1980. Kete laar , E r i c . A r c h i v a l and Records Management L e g i s l a t i o n and Regulations: A RAMP Study with Guide l ines . P a r i s : UNESCO, 1985. Krippendorf , K. Content A n a l y s i s . Beverly H i l l s , C a l i f o r n i a : Sage P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1980. Kyer, J . C . "Information, Computers and the Law." Paper presented at the Assoc iat ion of Canadian A r c h i v i s t s Conference, Hamilton, June, 1987. Lacour, R. "Les Archives Du Quebec." La Gazette Des Archives 63 (4e Trimestre , 1968): 261-268. Lamb, W.K. "The Federal A r c h i v a l Scene." The Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc iat ion Report of the Annual Meeting, 1953: 61-68. L e c l e r c , M.A. "L'Implantation de l a l o i sur les Archives: B i lan D'Une E x p e r i e n c e Reussie." Archives 18,2 (Septembre 1986): 15-40. page 139 Leonard, D.A. "Establ i shing the Archives of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s : a Regional Case Study in L e g a l i t y . " A r c h i v a r i a 18 (Summer 1984): 70-83. Macleod, D. "Quaint Specimens of the E a r l y Days: P r i o r i t i e s in C o l l e c t i n g the Ontario Arch iva l Record, 1872-1935." A r c h i v a r i a 22 (Summer 1986): 12-39. Manitoba. Department of Cul ture , Heritage and Recreat ion. Annual Report. 1984-1985. Manitoba. L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y and P r o v i n c i a l Archives . Annual Report, 1981. M a r t i n , E . A . (ed.) A Concise Dic t ionary of Law. Oxford: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press , 1986. McCormick, N. and Weinberger, 0. An I n s t i t u t i o n a l Theory of Law:New Approaches to Legal P o s i t i v i s m . Detr io t : Reidel Publ i shing C o . , 1986. Mclnnis , E . Canada: A P o l i t i c a l and Soc ia l Hi s tory . Toronto: Hol t , Rinehart and Winston, 1982. McMil lan , J . "Archival and Related L e g i s l a i o n . " Archives and Manuscripts 7(5) (November 1979): 256-267. McOuat, D . F . "Our P r o v i n c i a l Archives ." Ontario His tory 45,1 (Winter 1953): 31-36. Memoires sur le project de l o i 3 i n t i t u l e l o i sur les arch ives ." Archives (Juin 1983):26. Menier, M.A. "Une V i s i t e aux Archives Du Nouveau-Brunswick (1981)." La Gazette des Archives 116. 1981: 36-43. M i l n e r , W.C. "Condition of Publ ic Records in the Marit imes." Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Assoc iat ion Report of the Annual Meeting, 1929. Ottawa: Department of Publ ic Archives , 1929: 41-46. Minis ter Des A f f a i r e s C u l t u r e l l e s . Manual D ' A r c h i v i s t i q u e . Paris s . e . v . p . e . n . , 1970. M i t c h e l l , H. "Archives of Newfoundland." American A r c h i v i s 21 (October 1958): 43-53. M i t c h e l l , T.W.(ed.) Norton on Archives . Carbondale and Edwardsvi l ie : Southern I l l i n o i s Un ivers i ty Press, 1975: 46-48. Newfoundland P r o v i n c i a l Archives . Department of P r o v i n c i a l A f f a i r s . Annual Report of the Newfoundland and Labrador Archives , 1971. page 140 Newsome, A.R. "uniform State A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n . " Amerlean A r c h i v i s t 2(1) (January 1939): 1-17. Newton, S .C . "The A r c h i v i s t as L e g i s l a t o r . " Journal of the Society of A r c h i v i s t s 4 (1973): 654-659. Norton, M.C. "Some Legal Aspects of Arch ives ." American A r c h i v i s t 8 (January 1945): 1-11. Nova Scot ia Publ ic Archives . Report of the Board of Trustees , 1984. O'Br ien , J . "Archives and the Law: A B r i e f Look at the Canadian Scene." A r c h i v a r i a 18 (Summer 1984): 38-46. Ontario Commission of Freedom of Information and Indiv idual Pr ivacy . Publ ic Government for Private People. Toronto. Queens P r i n t e r s , 1980. P e r o t i n , Y . ( ed . ) A Manual of T r o p i c a l Archivology. P a r i s : Moriton and C o . , 1966. P i t t , R.D. Report fo the Survey of Newfoundland and Labrador Archives . Newfoundland: The Assoc iat ion of Newfoundland and Labrador A r c h i v i s t s , 1986. Planchan, R . J . ( e d . ) "The in terna t iona l Scene: News and Abstrac t s ." American A r c h i v i s t 43(4) (Summer 1980): 392- 394. Pocket Criminal Code and Miscellaneous Statutes , as Amended to January 1, 1984. Toronto: Carswell Company Limi ted , 1984. Posner, E . American State Archives . Chicago: The Univers i ty of Chicago Press , 1963. Posner E . Archives in the Ancient World. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univers i ty Press , 1972. Posner, E . "Some Aspects of A r c h i v a l Development since the French Revolut ion ." In A Modern Archives Reader. Maygene F . Daniels and Timothy Walch, e d i t o r s . Washington, D . C . : National Archives Adminis trat ion , 1984. Prince Edward Is land. Department of Educat ion. Annual Report, 1985/85. Prasad, S.N. "Archives in India ." A r c h i v a r i a 7 (Winter 1978): 52-61. P r o v i n c i a l ASrchives of A l b e r t a . A Guide for Records page 141 Managers. Edmonton: H i s t o r i c a l Resources D i v i s i o n , Alberta Cul ture , 1986. Rhoads, J . B . The A p p l i c a b i l i t y of UNISIST Guidel ines and ISO Internat ional Standards to Archives Administrat ion and Records Management P a r i s : UNESCO, 1981. Riggs, F.W. L e g i s l a t i v e O r i g i n s . Internat ional Studies Occas- iona l Paper No.7. R i t zentha ler , M . L . Archives & Manuscripts: Conservation. Chicago: Society of American A r c h i v i s t s , 1983. Roy, P . G . "Les Archives de l a Province de Quebec." Le B u l l e t i n Des Recherches Historiques 32 ( A v r i l 1926): 193- 208. S . A . A . Committee on A r c h i v a l L e g i s l a t i o n , "Model B i l l for a State Archives Department." American A r c h i v i s t 10,1 (January 1947): 47-49. S . A . A . Committee on Uniform L e g i s l a t i o n , "The Proposed Uniform State Publ ic Records A c t . " American A r c h i v i s t 3(2) ( A p r i l 1940): 107-115. S . A . A . Committee on Uniform L e g i s l a t i o n , "A Proposed Model Act to Create a State Department of Archives and H i s t o r y . " American a r c h i v i s t 7(2) (January 1944): 130- 134 . Saskatchewan. Report of the Honourable E . M . C u l l i t o n , Former Chief Jus t ice of Saskatchewan r On the Matter of Freedom of information and Protect ion of Pr ivacy . Regina, Saskatchewan, Queens P r i n t e r s , 1983. Saskatchewan. Archives Board Report, 1974-1976. Se ton ,R.E . The Preservat ion and Administrat ionof Pr ivate Archives: A RAMP Study. P a r i s : UNESCO, 1984. Simpson, G. "Archives in Canada." American A r c h i v i s t . 11,4 (October 1948): 358-366. Sp iers , W.B. "Yukon Archives - A Regional Experiment." Canadian A r c h i v i s t 2(4) (1973): 26-37. Stone, R. The Province and Function of the Law. Buffa lo: Wil l iam S. Hein and Co. I n c . , 1968. Student Legal Services Edmonton. The Layman's Lawbook, Second E d i t i o n . Edmonton: u n i v e r s i t y of A lber ta , 1981. Swift , M.D. "The Canadian A r c h i v a l Scene in the 1970s: page 142 Current Developments and Trends." Arch 1varia 15 (Winter 1982-83):47-57. Sykes, J . B . The Pocket Oxford Dic t ionary of Current E n g l i s h , Sixth E d i t i o n . Oxford: The Clarendon Press , 1978. Tapscot t ,B . "Access and Archives: The Manitoba Experience." Paper presented at the Assoc iat ion of Canadian A r c h i v i s t s Conference, Hamilton, June, 1987. T a y l o r , H.A. "The P r o v i n c i a l Archives of New Brunswick." Acadiensis 1,1 ( F a l l 1971): 71-83. T a y l o r , H.A. "Canadian Archives: Patterns From a Federal Perspect ive ." A r c h i v a r i a 1(2) (Summer 1976): 3-19. T a y l o r , H.A. "Transformation in the Archives: Technological Adjustment or Paradigm Shi f t?" A r c h i v a r i a 25 (Winter 1987-88):12-28. Thomas, L . H . "Archival L e g i s l a t i o n in Canada." CHA Report 1962: 101-115. Thomas, L . H . "Prov inc ia l Archives in Canada." American A r c h i v i s t 18 (October 1955): 343-347. Wade, H.W.R. Administrat ive Law. Oxford: The Clarendon Press , 1961. Wade, E . S . C . and P h i l l i p s , G .G. Cons t i tu t iona l and Administrat ive Law, Ninth e d i t i o n , London: Longman Group Limi ted , 1977. Walichnowski, T. "Polish State Archives ." A r c h i v a r i a 7 (Winter 1978): 42-51. Weilbrenner, B. "Les Archives Du Quebec." Revue D 'Hl s to i re de L'Amerique Francaise 18,1 (Juin 1964): 3-13. Weilbrenner, B. "Les Archives et le Regionalisme." in Regionalism in the Canadian Community 1867-1967. Mason Wade ed. Toronto Univers i ty of Toronto Press , 1969: 264- 272 . Wilson, I . E . Report of the Advisory Committee on Archives . Ottawa: Minis ter of Supply and Serv ices , 1985. Wood, W. "The New P r o v i n c i a l Archives of Quebec." Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review 2,2 (September 1921): 126-154. Yukon Archives . Access to Information Index. Yukon: Department of Education, L i b r a r i e s and Archives , May 1986. page 143 APPENDIX A LIST OF CURRENT PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL LEGISLATION* A l be r t a Acts 1. H i s t o r i c a l Resources Act , 1980, c. H-8 2. Department of Publ ic Works, Supply and Services Act , 1983, c. D-25.5 3. E l e c t i o n Act , 1980, c. E - 2 , s. 149.1 4. Ombudsman Act , 1980, c. 0-7, s. 29(3) Regulations 1. Department of Publ ic Works, Supply and Services Act , Regulation 373/83, Alberta Gazette Part I I . B r i t i s h Columbia Acts 1. Document Disposal Act , Revised Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia,, 1979, c. 95. Amendments Revised Statutes Correct ion Act(No.2) , 1980, c. 50, s. 34. Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act , 1983, 32 E l i zabe th 2, c. 20, s. 8-11. 2. Interpretat ion Act , Revised Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1979, c. 206, s. 29. 3. M i n i s t r y of P r o v i n c i a l Secretary and Government Services Act , Revised Statutes of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1979, c. 279, s. 2,3 and 7. Regulations none Manitoba Acts 1. The L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act , Revised Statutes of Manitoba, 1970, c. L120. Amendments * Current as of August, 1989. Statutes c i t ed are from the most recent p r o v i n c i a l conso l idat ion of statutes or , in the case of statutes which came into force after the la tes t conso l ida t ion , from the sess ional volume for the year that the statute came into force . page 144 An Act to Amend the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act , 1972, c. 2. The Statutes Amendment Act , 1975, c. 42, s. 34(1). 2. The E lec t ions Act , Revised Statutes of Manitoba, 1970, c. E30, s. 119(3). 3. The Municipal Act , 1970, c. 100, s. 98. 4. The C i t y of Winnipeg Act , 1971, c. 105, s. 658 5. Freedom of Information Act , 1985, c. 6. Regulations 1. The L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act . A Regulation Respecting the Preservat ion of Publ ic Records, Manitoba Regulation L120 - R l , Manitoba Gazette Part I I . Acts New Brunswick The Archives Act , 1977, c. A - l l . l Amendments: An Act to Provide for the Merger of the Supreme and County Courts of New Brunswick, 1979, c. 41, s. 5. Statute Law Amendment Act , 1982, c . 3 , s.3 An Act to Amend the Executive Counci l Act , 1983, c. 30, s. 3. An Act to Amend the Archives Act , 19 86, c. 11, An Act to Amend the F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act , 1984, c. 44, s. 11 E lec t ions Act , Revised Statutes of New Brunswick, 1973, c. E - 3 , s. 98 The Regis try Act , Revised Statutes of New Brunswick, 1973, c. R-6. An Act to Amend the Regis try Act , 1980, c. 47, s. 1 An Act to Amend the Regis try Act , 1978, c. 46, s. 1 The Publ ic Records Act , Revised Statutes of New Brunswick, 1973, c. P-24 The F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act , Revised Statutes of New Brunswick. 1973, c. F - l l . An Act to Amend the F i n i n c i a l Administrat ion Act , 1975, c. 22, s. 1 Regulations 1. Archives Act . General Regulation 86-121, New Brunswick Gazette Part I I . 2. The F i n i n c i a l Administrat ion A c t . General Regulation 83-227, New Brunswick Gazette Part I I . 3. The F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act . General Regulation 85-27, New Brunswick Gazette Part I I . page 145 Newfoundland and Labrador Acts 1. The Archives Act , 1983, c .33. 2. An Act Respecting Labour Relat ions in the Province, 1977, c. 64, s. 114(3). 3. The Privacy Act , 1981, c. 6. 4. An Act Respecting Freedom of Information, 1981, c. 5. 5. Department of Cul ture , Recreation and Youth Act , 1973, c. 18 Regulations 1. The Archives Act . The Archives (Executive Counci l Records) Regulations, Newfoundland Regulation 1/85, The Newfoundland Gazette Part I I . Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s Acts 1. Archives Ordinance (Act) , 1981(3rd), c. 2. 2. H i s t o r i c a l Resources Ordinance, 1970(2nd), c . 9 , s. 8(d) .* Regulations none Nova Scot ia Acts 1. Publ ic Archives Act , Revised Statutes of Nova Sco t ia , 19 67, c. 246. 2. Publ ic Records Act , Revised Statutes of Nova Sco t ia , 1967, c. 253, s. 6. 3. Publ ic Records Disposal Act , Revised Statutes of Nova Sco t ia , 1967, c. 254. 4. Freedom of Information Act , 26 E l i z I I , 1977, c. 10. 5. The Cul ture ,Recreat ion and Fi tness Act , Statutes of Nova Sco t ia , Revised Statutes of Nova S c o t i a . 1967, c. 14, s. 7(k) . Regulations none * since sect ion 8(d) of th i s Act has f a l l e n into disuse i t w i l l not be included for the purposes of the content a n a l y s i s . page 146 Ontario Acts 1. The Archives Act , Revised Statutes of Ontario , 1980, c. 28. 2. The Education Act , Revised Statutes of Ontario . 1980, c. 129, s. 150(34). 3. The S h e r i f f ' s Act , Revised Statutes of Ontar io . 1980, c. 470, s. 24. 4. An Act to E s t a b l i s h the M i n i s t r y of C i t i z e n s h i p and Cul ture , 1982, c. 6, s. 5(1) and schedule. 5. Freedom of Information and Protect ion of Privacy Act , Statutes of Ontario 1987, c. 25. Regulations 1. The Executive Counci l Act . Assignment of Powers and Duties - Minis ter of C i t i z e n s h i p and Cul ture , Ontario Regulation 134/82, Ontario Gazette Part I I . Prince Edward Island Acts 1. Archives Act , 1975, c. 64. 2. Archeolog ica l Invest igations Act , 1970, c.3 Regulations none Quebec Acts 1. The Archives Act , 1983, c.38 (ss. 58, 63-67, 69- 73, 78-82 not yet proclaimed). 2. An Act Respecting the Bibliotheque Nationale du Quebec, Revised Statutes of Quebec. 1977, c. B-2 ( l imi t s the d e f i n i t i o n of a 'document' in the Archives Act) 3. The C u l t u r a l Property Act , Revised Statutes of Quebec, 1977, c. B-4 and amendments assented to Ju ly 8, 1972, c. 19* 4. An Act Respecting Access to documents held by publ ic bodies and the Protect ion of personal information, Revised Statutes of Quebec, 1977, c. A - 2 . 1 . * An Act to Amend Various L e g i s l a t i o n , 1984, c. 27, s. 1-8 An Act to Amend Various L e g i s l a t i o n , 1985, c. 30, s. 1-16 * Only those general amendments a f fec t ing the provis ions of these statutes have been included. page 147 5. Photographic Proof of Documents Act , Revised Statutes of Quebec, c. P-22.* Regulations 1. The Archives Act , Regulation respect ing retent ion schedules, t rans fer , deposit and disposal of publ ic archives , O .C . 1894-85, 18 September, 1985, Gazette O f f i c i e l l e du Quebec, October 22, 1985, V o l . 117, No. 44. Saskatchewan Acts The Archives Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatchwan, 1978, c. A-26. Amendments Queen's Bench Consequential Amendment Act , 1979-80, c. 92, s. 7. Government Reorganization Consequential Amendment Act , 1983, c. 11, s. 7. The Rural M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978, c. R-26, s. 78. The Urban M u n i c i p a l i t y Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978, c. U-10, s. 23. The Jackfish-Murray Lake Resort M u n i c i p a l i t y Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatewan, 1978, c. J - l , s. G9. The Liquor Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978, c. L-18, s. 199. The Education Act , Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan. 1978, c. E - 0 . 1 , s. 371. Regulations 1. The Archives Act . Regulations of the Saskatchewan Archives Board Yukon Ordinances 1. Archives Ordinance, 1971( ls t ) , c .2 . 2. Access to Information Act , 1983, c. 12. Regulations 1. Archives Ordinance. Commissioner's Order 1979/84, Government of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y Regulations, Volume 6. page 148 2. Archives Ordinance. Order - in -Counc i l 1985/17 (which establ ishes Records Managment Regulat ions) , Government of the Yukon T e r r i t o r i e s Regulations r Volume 6. 3. Access to Information Act . Schedule of Fees Respecting Access to Information Act . O r d e r - i n - Counci l 1984/60, Government of the Yukon T e r r i t o r i e s , Volume 6. page 143 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET DNT NS BC SASK MAN YUK PEI AB NB NUT QUE NFLD DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS I. DEFINITIONS OF ARCHIVESCtotal scored) p. P P P P i.e. what the archives of the province/territory include I I . TYPES OF MATERIAL(total score=3) 1. D e f i n i t i o n of record/document (a) part of public records F P P F P R P/S P (b) separately S p/R P 2. EDF' mentioned S P R F P P P 3. Types of non-records P P P S P I I I . PUBLIC RECORDS/ARCH IVES(t ot a 1 score=2) 1. D e f i n i t i o n P/S P P P P R P/S P P P 2. O f f i c i a l transaction S P P P P P ? IV. PUBLIC AGENCIES(total score=9) The l e g i s l a t i o n provides a d e f i n i t i o n of departments and/or other public agencies, or indicates those public agencies the records of which are subject to the provisions of the Act 1. Branches 1.1 Administrative P/S S S P P P/S P S P/S ' P P/S P/S 1.2 L e g i s l a t i v e P 5/ P ;P P/S 1.3 J u d i c i a l S/ S P P S P ' P P 1.4 Board/commission P/3 S P P S P S P P P/S P/S 1.5 Crown corporation S S/ S S S P P/S P 1.6 Appointed bodies S S P/S S P/S F73 2. P o l i t i c a l l e vels 2.1 F r o v / T e r r i t o r i a ! P/S S S P P P/S P S P/S P P/S P ? . ? M l i n i . - i n a l S S p S P/S L. J Other P/S page 150 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET ONT NS BC SASK MAN YUK PEI AB NB NWT UE HFLD V. ARCHIVES RECORDS CROWN PROPERTY(tot al  5 core=l) P P S P T0TAL=16 7 n ^ o • -v , PERCENT 8 9 7 1 0 9 1 4 3 15 13 AV6=9.75 4 3 Z m 3 1 1 5 0 X 5 6 X 4 3 X 6 2 * 56Z 877. 50X 937. 812 page 151 APPENDIX 8:DATASHEET ONT NS BC SASK MAN YUK . PE1 AB NB NWT QUE NFLD B. ADMINISTRATION I GENERAL MANA6MENT(total scored) The legislation specifies the person(s) or body lies) responsible tor the general management of the Provincial/Territorial archives, or for the administration. . of an Act establishing a Provincial/Territorial archival programme. (a) Minister (b) Board II ESTABLISHMENT OF ARCHIVES (tot al scored) 1. Establishment/Continuation 2. Official repository for public records III ARCHIVISTUotal score=3) 1. Appointment of official 2. Legal ti t l e of official 3. Manner of appointment This provisions may refer to a public service act IV OTHER EMPLOYEES(total score=l) V DUTIES/OBJECTS SPECIFIED(total score=8) The legislation outlines the duties of the person(s) responsible for the provincial/ territorial archives or outlines the objects of the provincial/territorial archives S S P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P S. P P P P S P P P P P P P P P P P P P P S P 1. Archival functions 4 page 152 APPENDIX B;DATASHEET 1.1 Care/custody/preservation 1.2 Arrangement/description 1.3 Dissemination of inf o 1.4 Acquisition (private) 1.5 exhibition/display 1.6 Pri n t i n g / p u b l i c a t i o n 2. Extra-archival functions 2.1 Research 2.2 Archeological functions VI RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER AGENCIESttotal score=4) 1. Negotiate agreements 2. Accreditation 3. Provide assistance i.e. technical, f i n a n c i a l ONT NS BC SASK MAN YUK PE1 AB NB NWT QUE NFLD • P P P P P P P P P P F P P P P P 4. Cooperation VII RECORDS/DOCUMENTS COMMITTEEUotal score=15) 1. Establishment (a) Permanent (b) Ad hoc R P R 2. Membership 2.1 Archivist 2.2 Records manager 2.3 Public body 2.4 Legal 2.5 Financial 2.6 Other 3, Manner of appointment 5. Duties/purpose 5.1 Classi f i c a t i o n 5.2 Establish schedules 5.3 Review of schedules 5.4 Disposition recommendations P P S P S P P P page 153 APPENDIX B;DATASHEET ONI NS BC SASK HAN YUK PEI AB NB NHT QUE NFLD 5.5 Access R p 5.6 Records management policy R R 7. Arc h i v i s t i s Chairman p R TGTAL-34 3 12 6 15 20 13 16 17 16 12 11 21 PERCENT 267. 357. 267. 447. 537. 5&X 477. 507. 477. 357. 327. 617. AVS=14.5 page 154 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET •NT NS BC SASK HAN YUK f'EI AB NB NUT QUE NFLD C. PROGRAMME ELEMENTS I. RECORDS MANAGEMENT(total s c o r e d ) 1. Establishment of program 2. D e f i n i t i o n of program 3. Role of a r c h i v i s t i n program (a) Administered by a r c h i v i s t (b) Supervision of committee ( i ) A r c h i v i s t i s chairman ( i i ) A r c h i v i s t i s secretary ( i i i ) A r c h i v i s t i s a member 4. Appointment of records manager 5. Appointment of records o f f i c e r s 6. Records Manager's duties outlined 7. Records centre I I . APPRAISAL, SELECTION, ACQUISITION OF PUBLIC RECORDSUotal score-22) 1. Schedules 1.1 Approval process The l e g i s l a t i o n s p e c i f i e s the person(s) with authority to recommend and approve of schedules. 1.1.1 Arc h i v i s t 1.1.2 Minister/board 1.1.3 Lieut. 6ov. S 1.1.4 L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly 1.1.5 Public records committee S 1.1.6 Records creator S 1.2 Role of Arc h i v i s t in scheduling (a) Direct control (b) Indirect control S 1.3 Schedules binding R P R R P P P R P R P P R P P P P R P R P' P P P P P page 155 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET ONT NS BC SASK HAN YUK PEI AB NB NWT QUE NFLD The l e g i s l a t i o n states that records sha l l be dealt with in accordance with schedules 1.4 Schedules defined S 1.5 Content and form The l e g i s l a t i o n s p e c i f i e s the information that sh a l l be included in schedules and/or provides a sample form 1.6 Amendment provision S 1.7 Dispute provision The l e g i s l a t i o n includes procedures for resolving disputes regarding schedules One-time disposal approval process 2.1 A r c h i v i s t 2.2 Minister/board 2.3 Lieut.Gov./Commissner. 2.4 Public records committee 2.5 Records Creator 3. Methods of Disposition of Public Records 3.1 Destruction 3.1.1 Procedures outlined 3.1.2 Fublic body may dispose of no permanent value 3.2 Photoreproduction 3.2.1 Means of disposal 3.2.2 Procedures outlined 3.3 Transfer 3.3.1 Future Data (a) not specified (b) less than 7 yrs (c) more than 7 yrs P 3.3.2 Authority (a) permissive (b) not permissive P P P I I I . OF SPECIAL CLASSES OF RECORDSitotal score=l&) The l e g i s l a t i o n includes provisions concerning the care and management of special categories of records not included in the d e f i n i t i o n . o f page 156 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET" QNT NS BC SASK MAN YUK FEI AB NB NUT • QUE NFLD public records. 1. Disposition approval process 1.1 Court records 1.1.1 Arch i v i s t P P 1.1.2 Lieut.Gov, p p 1.1.3 Public records committee S 1.1.4 Legal S P P 1.1.5 Records creator 1.2 Municipal records 1.2.1 Records creator S 1.3 School records 1.3.1 Records creator S 1.4 Election records 1.4.1 Archivist/LegLibr S 1.4.2 Records creator S 2. Transfer and deposit 2.1 Court records i . i . i i UlU( t UeHt' (a) not specified (b) less than 7 yrs (c) more than 7 yrs P p 2.1.2 Authority (a) permissive P P (b) not permissive 2.2 Municipal records 2.2.1 Future date (a) not specified S P P/S P (b) less than 7 yrs (c) more than 7 yrs 2.2.2 Authority (a) permissive S P P/S P (b) not permissive S 2.3 School board records 2.3.1 Future date (a) not specified S S P/S P (b) less than 7 yrs (t) more than 7 yrs 2.3.2 Authority (a) permissive S S P/S P (b) not permissive 2.4 Election records page 157 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET •NT NS BC SASK YUK PEI AB NB NUT QUE NFLD 2.4.1 Future date (a) not specified (b) less than 7 yrs (c) more than 7 yrs 2.4.2 Authority (a) permissive (b) not permissive 2.5 Other records 2.5.1 Future date (a) not specified (b) less than 7 yrs (c) more than 7 yrs 2.5.2 Authority (a) permissive (b) not permissive IV. APPRAISAL, SELECTION AND AQUISITION OF PRIVATE RECORDSitotal s c o r e d ) 1. Methods of a q u i s i t i o n 2. Terms and conditions 3. Types of records 4. Subject areas specified V PRESERVATION OF PUBLIC RECORDS (tot a l 5 c o r e - 4 J 1. Preservation by public bodies 2. Prohibition 2.1 Destruction 2.2 Alienation 2.3 Mutilation P R VI REPLEVINUotal score=3i The l e g i s l a t i o n includes a procedure for the recovery of unlawfully alienated records page 158 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET GNT NS BC SASK NAN YUK PE1 AB MB NHT QUE NFLD 1. Replevin authorized 3 P p/S P P 2. Recovery/restoration procedures S P/S P P 3. Replevin authority (a) Minister P (b) Attorney General S S P VI1. ACCESSUotal score=lb) 1. Statement of general S S S S P P S P/S right of access 2. Limitations on access S S S P P P 5 P/S 3. Restricted records outlined S S P S S/R 4. Time l i m i t a t i o n s outlined S S P P R 5. Access approvals S S P S S 6. Access procedures S S S S P S S 7. Content of request/appeal S S R forms 8. Appeal procedures S S S S P S S 9. Acess register/index/guide S S 3 R 10. D e f i n i t i o n of personal i n f o S S S P S S 11. D e f i n i t i o n of info S S S S 12. Private material not S P subject to access provisions 13. Role of a r c h i v i s t in reviewing requests for access (a) receives a l l requests S (b) receives requests for records S P 3 in archives only (c) receives no requests/ S S P page 159 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET OUT NS BC SASK HAN YUK PE! AB NB NUT QUE NFLD not specified 14. C e r t i f i e d copies as evidence P S P P P P P P P P 15. Fees for services p p • (e.g. photocopying) 16. Terms/conditions for use of archives R R R page 160 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET ONT NS BC SASK NAN YUK PEI AB NB NWT QUE NFLD VIII. RESULATlDNSitotal scored) Regulations nay be established pursuant to the Act. The following components include any a c t i v i t i e s mentioned i n the functional groups or in individual categories. Choice (a) indicates broad regulatory powers; choice (b) respresents f a i r l y wide regulatory authority; and chocie (c) s i g n i f i e s more li m i t e d powers 1. Administration (a) Purposes p (b) Subject P P P p (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e P P 2. Records management (a) Purposes (b) Subject P (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e S P 3. Public records (a) Purposes (b) Subject S P (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e P S P S P P 4. Public agencies (a) Purposes (b) Subject (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e S P P 5. Scheduling (a) Purposes fb) Subject S P P (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e S • P 6. Disposal 1 (a) Purposes p P , (b) Subject S S P (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e P S P P 7. Transfer and deposit (a) Purposes (b) Subject S S P P (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e P S P P 8. Preservation (a) Purposes (b) Subject F P page 161 APPENDIX B: DATASHEET ONT N3 BC SASK HAN YUK PEI AB NB NUT QUE NFLD (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e S P 9. Use and access (a) Purposes P P (b) Subject p (c) P r e s c r i p t i v e S P P P P T0TAL=8i PERCENT AVG=26.8 25 24 21 23 36 23 18 20 36 14 38 38 307. 237. 26A 287. 447. 367. 227. 24X 44X 177. 477. 477. page 162 APPENDIX C Chronological Synopsis of P r o v i n c i a l and T e r r r i t o r l a l Arch iva l L e g i s l a t i o n * I Alberta 1925 S . A . , c .31: The Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act scheduled a l l publ ic documents for a period of ten years. 1944 S . A . , c.17: The Registered Documents Destruction Act allowed for the destruct ion of non-current reg is tered documents of more than twenty years. 1961 S . A . , c.60: An Act to Amend the Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act reduced the time l i m i t before which destruct ion of publ ic documents could take place from ten years to f ive years . 1966 S . A . , c.73: The P r o v i n c i a l Archives Act replaced The Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act and The Registered Documents Destruction Act . 1970 S . A . , c . 7 : The Alberta Heritage Act replaced The P r o v i n c i a l Archives Act and establ ished the P r o v i n c i a l Museum and Archives of A l b e r t a . S . A . , c .90: The Publ ic Documents Act which provided for publ ic records management. 1973 S . A . , c .5 : The Alberta Heritage Act replaced The Alberta Heritage Act , 1970 and The Publ ic Documents Act . O r d e r s - i n - c o u n c i l no longer required for the des truct ion of records . 1974 S . A . , c. 63: The Alberta Heritage Amendment Act provided that publ ic records would include records "owned by and in the possession of a department". 1975 S . A . , c . l l : The Department of Government Services Act transferred r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for records management to the Department of Government Services . The adminis trat ion of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of Alberta remained under the Heritage Act . * This synopsis includes only those statutes that made subsubstantial changes to the nature, the organizat ion or the services of p r o v i n c i a l and t e r r i t o r i a l publ ic a r c h i v a l programmes. page 163 1977 S . A . , c .3 : The Alberta H i s t o r i c a l Resources Amendment Act out l ined the mandate of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . 1978 S . A . , c .4: The Alberta H i s t o r i c a l Resources Amendment Act added pub l i ca t ion and publ ic e x h i b i t i o n to the mandate of the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . S . A . , c .29, s . l l : The Ombudsman Act Amendment Act provided for the transfer of Ombudsman's records to the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of A l b e r t a . 1983 S . A . , c .D-25.5: The Department of Publ ic Works, Supply and Services Act which replaced The Department of Government Services Act . S . A . , c .75, s. 18: The E l e c t i o n Act Amendment Act which establ ished that the chief e l e c t o r a l o f f i c e r s h a l l provide copies of e l ec t ion writs and o f f i c i a l resu l t s to P r o v i n i c i a l Archives . II B r i t i s h Columbia 1899 S . B . C . , c. 59: P r o v i n c i a l Secretary's Act . 1936 S . B . C . , c .43: The Publ ic Documents Disposal Ac t . 1953 S . B . C . , c .27: The Publ ic Documents Disposal Act Amendment Act establ ished the Publ ic Documents Committee and strengthened the author i ty of the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t over the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic documents. 1964 S . B . C . , c.46: The Publ ic Documents Disposal Act Amendment Act provided for the des truct ion of microfilmed records over two years o l d . 1965 S . B . C . , c .40: The Publ ic Documents Disposal Act Amendment Act made the Comptroller General a permanent member of the Publ ic Documents Committee. 1977 S . B . C . , c .75, s.74: M i n i s t e r i a l T i t l e s Amendment Act which replaced the d e f i n i t i o n of a "departmental of f ice" in the Document Disposal Act with a new d e f i n i t i o n of a "min i s t er ia l o f f i ce" . 1983 S . B . C . , c. 20, s. 8-11: Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act defined records schedules and establ ished a process for the i r approval . page 16 4 III Manitoba 1939 S . M . , c.38: The L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act . Part II of the Act e n t i t l e d "Public Records and Archives" was never proclaimed. 1955 S . M . , c .57: The Publ ic Records Act . 1966 S . M . , c .31: The L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Amendment Act which replaced The Publ ic Records Act and enacted Part II of the 1939 Act . 1972 S . M . , c .2: An Act to Amend the L e g i s l a t i v e L i b r a r y Act expanded the scope of the Act to include court records . 1985 S.M, c. 6: The Freedom of Information Act . IV New Brunswick 1929 S . N . B . , c.54: The Publ ic Records Act . S . N . B . , c .53: The New Brunswick Museum Act 1930 S . N . B . , c .47: amended The New Brunswick Museum Act by changing the Museum's l ega l name from the "Prov inc ia l Museum" to the "New Brunswick Museum". 1942 S . N . B . , c . 39: amended The New Brunswick Museum Act . This amendment changed the membership of the Museum Board, the Board's regulatory powers, and gave the Board author i ty to acquire publ ic records . 1943 S . N . B . , c. 28: amended The New Brunswick Museum Act to provide for the transfer of publ ic records to the custody of the Museum Board. 1963 S . N . B . , c .9 : The Publ ic Documents Disposal Act was modelled on the Saskatchewan Archives Act of 1955 and provided for a Documents Committee and approvals for the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic documents. 1967 S . N . B . , c .9 : The Elec t ions Act provided for the transfer of E l e c t i o n records to the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of New Brunswick. 1968 S . N . B . , c .2: The Archives Act which replaced The Publ ic Documents Disposal Act . 1975 S . N . B . , c. 22: An Act to Amend the F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act which provides for the d e f i n i t i o n of "department" under The Archives Act . page 165 1977 S . N . B . , c. A - l i . i : The Archives Act which replaced The Archives Act , 1968. 1978 S . N . B . , c.46: An Act to Amend the Registry Act provided for the preservat ion of o r i g i n a l r e g i s t r y books through t r a n s f e r r i n g them to the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of New Brunswick. S . N . B . , c. R-10.3: The Right to Information Act . 1986 S . N . B . , c. 11: An Act to Amend the Archives Act . S . N . B . , c . 44: An Act to Amend the F i n a n c i a l Administrat ion Act which provides for the d e f i n i t i o n of "department" under The Archives Act . V Newfoundland and Labrador 1951 S . N . , c. 68: The Publ ic Records Act establ ished a Board of Trustees of Publ ic Records. 1959 S . N . , c. 76: The H i s t o r i c Objects , S i tes and Records Act was modelled on the Saskatchewan Archives Act of 1955 and replaced The Publ ic Records Act . This Act establ ished a precedent by l i m i t i n g access to publ ic records in the P r o v i n c i a l Archives and renamed the Board of Trustees . 1973 S . N . , c. 85: The H i s t o r i c Objects , S i tes and Records Act replaced the H i s t o r i c Objects , S i tes and Records Act , 1959 gave r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for archives to the Minis ter of Tourism and broadened the scope of the Act to include act ive and semi-active publ ic records . 1981 S . N . , c. 6: The Privacy Act . S . N . , c. 5: The Freedom of Information Act . 1983 S . N . , c. 33: The Archives Act . VI Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s 1970 O . N . T . , 2nd sess ion, c. 9: H i s t o r i c a l Resources Ordinance gave the Commissioner the power to create a T e r r i t o r i a l Archives . 1981 O . N . T . , 3rd sess ion, c. 2: Archives Ordinance. page 166 VII Nova Scot ia 1861 S . N . S . , c. 23: The Publ ic Records Act stated that a l l county and municipal records as well as records of quarter sessions and the i n f e r i o r court of common pleas were p r o v i n c i a l publ ic records . 1914 S . N . S . , c. 6: An Act in Respect to the Preservat ion of Court Records. 1929 S . N . S . , c. 1: The Publ ic Archives Act . 1930 S . N . S . , c. 56: changes membership composition of Board of Trustees . 1931 S . N . S . , c. 63: changes membership composition of Board of Trustees . 1944 S . N . S . , c. 44: establ ishes allowance for sums appropriated by the Leg i s la ture to defray the expenses of Board members and states that Board members are employed in the Publ ic Service . 1958 S . N . S . , c. 12: The Publ ic Records Disposal Act establ ished a Document Committee and approval process for the d i s p o s i t i o n of publ ic records . 1973 S . N . S . , c.14: Cul ture , Recreation and Fitness Act refers to the ro le of the department in advis ing the Archives . 1977 S . N . S . , c. 10: Freedom of Information Act . VIII Ontario 1923 S . O . , c. 20: The Archives Act . 1968 S . O . , c. 118, s. 1: An Act to Amend the S h e r i f f ' s Act provided for the transfer of S h e r i f f ' s records to the arch ives . 1972 S . O . , c. 77, s. 18(5): The Education Act provided for the scheduling of school board records and for t h e i r transfer to the P r o v i n c i a l Archives of Ontar io . IX Prince Edward Island 1947 S . P . E . I . , c. 40, s. 35: The Treasury Act allowed for the des truct ion of f i n a n c i a l records . page 167 1964 S . F . E . I . , c. 26; The A r c h i v e s Act was modelled on the Saskatchewan Archives Act o£ 1955. 1965 S . P . E . I . , c. 20: An Act to Amend an Act to E s t a b l i s h the Publ ic Archives of Prince Edward Island allowed the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t to l i m i t access to publ ic records in the P r o v i n c i a l Archives . 1970 S . P . E . I . , c. 4, s. 7: The Archeologica l Invest igat ions Act which amends The Archives Act gives the P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v i s t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for administering archeo log ica l invest igat ions conducted in the province. 1975 S . P . E . I . , c. 64: The Archives Act which replaced The Archives Act , 1964 abolished the Archives Board and created the Prince Edward Island Archives and Record O f f i c e . X Quebec 179 0 Revised Acts and Ordinances of Lower Canada, 30 George I I I , c. 8: An Act or Ordinance for the better preservat ion and due d i s t r i b u t i o n of the Ancient French Records. 1867 S . Q . , c. 11: The P r o v i n c i a l Secretary's Act reaffirmed the 1790 Act . 1969 S . Q . , c. 26, s. 19: An Act to Repeal the P r o v i n c i a l Secretary's Department Act and to amend other l e g i s l a t i v e prov i s ions . 1977 1982 S . Q . , c. 52. , a r t i c l e 10: The C i t i e s and Towns Act The Municipal Code, a r t i c l e 161a as enacted by 1977, c. 53, s. 16 provided for the d i s p o s i t i o n of municipal records . S . Q . , c. 30: An Act respect ing access to documents held by publ ic bodies and the Protect ion of personal information. 1983 S . Q . , c. 38: The Archives Act which replaced An Act Respecting the Ministere Des A f f a i r e s C u l t u r e l l e s . XI Saskatchewan 1920 S . S . , c. 17: The Preservat ion of Publ ic Documents Act schedules a l l publ ic documents for a period of ten years . 1945 S . S . , c . 113: The Archives Act . page 168 S . S . , c. 95: The Registered Documents Destruction Act scheduled a l l reg is tered documents for a period of twenty years. S . S . , c. 112: An Act to Amend the Archives Act . S . S . , c. 119: An Act to Amend the Archives Act . S . S . , c. 108, s. 200a: an amendment to the Liquor Act provides for the d i s p o s i t i o n of e l ec t ion records . s . s . , c. 101: An Act to Amend the Archives Act. S . S . , c. 84: The Archives Act replaced The Archives Act , 1945. S . S . , c. 23, s. 408: An amendment to the Rural of M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Act which contained a sect ion deal ing with the preservat ion of publ ic records . S . S . , c. 78, s. 231: The Urban M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Act which contained a sect ion deal ing with the preservat ion of publ ic records. S . S . , c. 52, s. 69: The Jackfish-Murray Lake Resort M u n i c i p a l i t y Act contained a sect ion deal ing with the preservat ion of publ ic records . S . S . , c. 17, s. 37: An Act Respecting Elementary and Secondary Education in Saskatchewan contained a sect ion deal ing with the preservat ion of school board records . repeal of The Registered Documents Destruction Act , 1946 . S . Y . T . , 2nd sess ion, c. A-3: Archives Ordinance. S . Y . T . , c. 12: Access to Information Act .

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 4 0
Egypt 2 0
China 2 24
City Views Downloads
Unknown 3 6
Mountain View 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items