Presentation at the 13th Workshop of Parliamentary Scholars and Parliamentarians, 29-30th July 2017

1. Strengthening the Capacity of Parliaments through
Development of Parliamentary Research Services
Dr. Fotios Fitsilis
Head of Department
Scientific Documentation and Supervision
Scientific Service
Hellenic Parliament
1
Thirteenth Workshop of
Parliamentary Scholars and
Parliamentarians
29-30th July 2017

2. 2
Presentation structure
Part A. Introduction
Part B. Study of Parliamentary Research Services*
Part C. PaRS and parliamentary innovation
Part D. Conclusions and outlook
* PaRS

3. 3
Part A. Introduction

4. 4
Parliaments and innovation
 Technology affects political behavior in societies
 Role of tradition in parliamentary operation
… tradition vs. innovation*
 Parliaments have long kept technology debates
out of their agenda
The role of PaRS?
* Technological and non-technological innovation

5. 5
Characteristics of PaRS
 Research services in majority of parliaments
 Accumulation of procedural and technical
expertise
 Necessity for parliamentary evolution
 Innovation to strengthen…
a) administrative capacity
b) the role of Parliament in digital societies
Redefine the role of PaRS?

6. 6
Part B. Study of Parliamentary Research Services

7. 7
Work in progress… more to follow
 Hellenic Parliament Scientific Service
 Austrian Parliament Scientific Service*
 National Assembly of Serbia Research Group
 IPU Guidelines
European Parliament Research Service**
* Wissenschaftlicher Dienst
** EPRS

8. Hellenic Parliament
Scientific Service
*under the scientific supervision of
the President of the Scientific Council
Provisions: art. 65 par. 5 C., 1975
Implementation: art. 160 RoP, 1987
 Scientific Council
 Internal RoP
 Directly linked to the Speaker
8
*

9. Legal reporting
Documentation In-house
consultancy
Technical
assistance
Main
services
9
Scientific Service operations
e.g. bilateral,
Twinning, Europaid
e.g. digitization,
OCR, archiving

10. Austrian Parliament
Scientific Service
 1 of 7 services
 Restructuring of the original
service in 2006
 Output: legal advice in
administrative & procedural
questions
 Contains PBO* related unit
 Also: special advisors for parl.
research
10
*Parliamentary Budget Office

11. National Assembly of
Serbia Research Group
 NARS Organization: 4 Sectors
 Embedded in the Library within
the Legislation sector
 Support to MPs (via Committees
or Groups)
 Output: knowledge based
products
11

12. IPU guidelines
 5 key phases (own
categorization)
 13 distinct steps
 Reverse engineering
possible to assess
existing PaRS!
12
Phase/Guideline
Phase a: Governance
1. Determine where PaRS will be located in the organization
Phase b: Define the mandate
2. Establishment and objectives
3. Identify who may access the service
4. Determine what types of services will be offered
Phase c: Determine how the research service operates
5. Adopt a Service Charter and criteria for prioritizing demands
6. Identify staff requirements
7. Establish a process for quality control
8. Secure access to a range of information sources
9. Define information management requirements
10. Establish means of promotion and evaluation
Phase d: Make the most of partnerships
11. Build partnerships within the parliamentary administration
12. Set up partnerships with other research services
Phase e: Reporting to Parliament
13. Establish ways to report to parliament

13. 13
1. Determine where PaRS will be located in the
organization
Phase a: Governance
 AUP: One of seven ‘services’
 HeP: Linked to Speaker
 NARS: Unit within library

14. 14
2. Establishment and objectives
Phase b: Define the mandate
 AUP: Major rearrangement/shrinking in
past decade
 HeP: Constitutional basis
 NARS*: Regulations on Internal
Organization and Job Classification
EPRS: Establishment in November 2013
*establishment of research institutes or
departments within the state
administration is not supported by
applicable national law

15. 15
3. Identify who may access the service
Phase b: Define the mandate
 AUP: MPs (PBO); administration
 HeP: Via the Speaker
 NARS: Requests from MPs via
Committees or Parliamentary Groups
EPRS: Direct MP requests

16. 16
4. Determine what types of services will be offered
Phase b: Define the mandate
 AUP: Legal advice in administrative and
procedural questions
 HeP: Legal reports on bills and law proposals,
legal opinions
 NARS: Research documents and knowledge
related products

17. 17
5. Adopt a Service Charter and criteria for prioritizing
demands
Phase c: Determine operation
 AUP, HeP and NARS:
Internal Rules of Procedure
6. Identify staff requirements
 AUP: N/K
 HeP: approx. 35 (with Scientific Council)
 NARS: 6 researchers
EPRS: approx. 340

18. 18
7. Establish a process for quality control
Phase c: Determine operation
 AUP, HeP & NARS: No
EPRS: Editing board
8. Secure access to a range of information sources
 AUP, HeP & NARS: Yes
Parliamentary library offers a basis for
securing and accessing such resources

19. 19
9. Define information management requirements
Phase c: Determine operation
 AUP: Legal workflow management
 HeP: Basic infrastructure; DMS to be defined
 NARS: DMS in place and operational
10. Establish means of promotion and evaluation
 AUP: No
 HeP: No
 NARS: Communication strategy in place
EPRS: Communication plan is
implemented; institutional memory

20. 20
11. Build partnerships within the parliamentary
administration
12. Set up partnerships with other research services
Phase d: Partnerships
 AUP, HeP & NARS: Yes
13. Establish ways to report to parliament
 AUP: N/K
 HeP: No
 NARS: No
EPRS: Yes

21. 21
Part C. PaRS and parliamentary innovation

22. 22
Analysis I: Innovation
 Innovation inherent with IP guidelines
 Innovation* may affect the function of parliaments
 _Challenges: Tackling administrative inefficiency or
procedural aspects, e.g. open legislative
data/Akoma Ntoso quasi-standard
 _Concerns: Undermine the foundations of the
representation system, e.g. through constitutional
or legislative crowdsourcing initiatives
* Focus on ICT

23. 23
Analysis II: Issues
 More efficient use of new technologies in parliaments
through PaRS involvement, e.g. policy communication,
citizen’s engagement, e-democracy etc.
 Study: Impartiality, independency, accuracy and
comprehensibility seem to be the main qualities which
are expected by both MPs and the general public when
using the ICT tools (UN, 2012).
 PaRS need to stand out in the ‘informal’ competition
with external agencies

24. 24
Analysis III: Tools and stakeholders
 Utilization of technology tools to advance quality
of PaRS products
 Internal ICT tools, e.g. DMS, OCR, XML editors …
 Size and composition of PaRS is critical
 ‘Proper’ mix of professionals, e.g. legal, political,
engineering, data scientists etc.
 Develop and manage a vast network of
stakeholders

25. 25
Part D. Conclusions

26. 26
Role of PaRS I
 Project management role in the introduction new
technologies
 Aggressive approach as in-house consultancy
 Coordination of parliamentary experts and external
consultants
 Participation in research and/or technical assistance
consortia to acquire necessary knowhow

27. 27
Role of PaRS II
 Technology may be evolving fast, but some facettes
may not be ripe enough to enter the parliamentary
environment
 Issues of privacy, confidentiality and ethics …
 PaRS have to claim the role for themselves to guide
the adoption of technologies in a controlled manner
 Strengthened ties with parliamentary libraries
Reforms to strengthen
the functions of PaRS

28. 28
Assessment
 In the light of the above, are the aforementioned
PaRS ‘future proof’?
PaRS Assessment
AUP
HeP
NARS
EPRS
limited scope, co-
operations, digital
support
tradition, staffing,
ICT tools
scope, staffing
capacity,
institutional memory
FACTORS

29. 29
IPU guidelines
1. Revision on a frequent basis
2. Addition of a consistent methodological
approach
3. More detailed sections on ‘digital
environment’ and the ‘information
management’, maybe as sub-steps?
4. Include in the next IPU Global Parliamentary
Report

30. 30
Thank you!
fitsilisf@parliament.gr