Journal of the Archives and Records Association of New Zealand October OBJECTS OF THE ASSOCIATION The objects of the Association shall be: i. To foster the care, preservation and proper use of archives and records, both public and private, and their effective administration. ii. To arouse public awareness of the importance of records and archives and in all matters affecting their preservation and use, and to co-operate or affiliate with any other bodies in New Zealand or elsewhere with like objects. iii. To promote the training of archivists, records keepers, curators, librarians and others by the dissemination of specialised knowledge and by encouraging the provision of adequate training in the administration and conservation of archives and records. iv. To encourage research into problems connected with the use, administration and conservation of archives and records and to promote the publication of the results of this research. v. To promote the standing of archives institutions. vi. To advise and support the establishment of archives services throughout New Zealand. vii. To publish a journal at least once a year and other publications in furtherance of these objects. MEMBERSHIP Membership of the Association is open to any individual or institution interested in fostering the objects of the Association. Subscription rates are: Within New Zealand $45 (individuals) $75 (institutions) Two individuals living at the same joint address can take a joint membership $55; this entitles both to full voting rights at meetings, but only one copy of Archifacts. Overseas $75 (individuals) $95 (institutions) Applications to join the Association, membership renewals and correspondence on related matters should be addressed to: The Membership Secretary ARA Ν Ζ PO Box 11-553 Manners Street Wellington New Zealand ARCHIFACTS Published by the Archives and Records Association of New Zealand 99 ARCHIFACTS Editor: Brad Patterson Editorial Committee: Russell Clarke David Green Gavin McLean Brad Patterson John Roberts Reviews Editor: David Green Archifacts is published twice-yearly, in April and October. Articles and correspondence should be addressed to the Editor at: PO Box 11-553 Wellington Intending contributors should obtain a style sheet from the Editorial Committee. Articles and reviews should be submitted both in hard copy and on disk. Printed by McKenzie Thornton Cooper Ltd, Wellington. ©Copyright ARANZ 1999 ISSN 0303-7940 Contents Editorial ν Political The Future of National Archives: Statements Party Leaders State Their Positions 1 Articles Janice Chong Anecdote and Memory: The Cenotaph Database Imaging Project at Auckland War Memorial Museum 5 Alexander New Zealand Materials Held in Trapeznik Moscow's Archives 10 Bernard Makoare Kaitiakitanga i roto i ngà Whare Pukapuka: Appropriate Care for Maori Materials in Libraries and Archives 18 Michael Hoyle Metadata and Government Information Locator Services: Opportunities to Expand New Zealand's Knowledge and Technological Capabilities? 27 Comment J.O.C. Phillips Archives and Heritage 46 ARANZ/NZSG A Response to Dr Phillips 53 Joint Action Committee Reviews Michael Bassett The State in New Zealand 1840-1984: Socialism Without Doctrines? (Brian Easton) 60 continued over page Reviews continued Australian Society Archives and Reform: Preparing for of Archivists Inc Tomorrow. Proceedings of ASA Conference, Adelaide, 25-26July 1997. Place, Interface and Cyberspace: Archives at the Edge. Proceedings of ASA Conference, Fremantle, 6-8 August 1998. (David Colquhoun) 65 Gregory S. Developing and Maintaining Practical Hunter Archives: How-To-Do-It-Manuals for Librarians, No 71 (Pauline Porteous) 69 National Library Guidelines for Preservation of Australia Microfilming in Australia & New Zealand (David Adams) 71 Dianne Archives at the Millenium Vogt-O'Connor (Gavin McLean) 73 (ed) David Green: An Appreciation This issue of Archifacts is the last for which David Green will act as Reviews Editor, he having decided to step down after 11 years, a period of service to the journal without parallel. David's reliable and efficient management of reviews and reviewers, together with his contributions to the deliberations of the Editorial Committee, have appreciably lessened the burdens on successive editors and helped to raise the profile of the journal. He will be difficult to replace. His colleagues on the Committee, together with Council, members, and no less the journal's wider readership, wish to place on record their appreciation of his efforts, and to extend to David, Philippa, and now Kate, their best wishes for the future. Editorial The Archives Case: Where to Now? In a 'further judgement' in the case ARANZ and NZSG ν R.W. Blakeley and the Attorney-General, released in Wellington's High Court on 23 June 1999, Justice A.A.T. Ellis ruled that monies voted to National Archives by Parliament in 1997 had been illegally diverted to other departmental purposes by Internal Affairs' Chief Executive Roger Blakeley. It had been alleged that $300,000 had been removed from the Archives' depreciation fund and spent on Internal Affairs restructuring initiatives. Yet, while the judgement vindicated the plaintiffs' decision to launch legal proceedings, there was acute awareness that a number of key issues, issues perhaps even more critical than those relating to funding, remained unresolved. In an earlier judgement (31 July 1998), while expressing concern over the proposals, Justice Ellis had ruled that it was 'too early' to determine whether or not incorporation of the National Archives within Internal Affairs' new Heritage Group significantly affected the Chief Archivist's statutory sole responsibility for the 'custody, care, control and administration of all public archives'. Hence, in early July, upon the advice of counsel, the plaintiffs sought leave to have aspects of the case reheard in the Court of Appeal. Soon after, the Crown gave notice of its intention to cross- appeal Justice Ellis' June 1999 judgement. Official reaction to the judgement had been initially muted, but consternation followed realisation in higher government circles that it placed in question wider Crown financial transfers encompassing many millions of dollars. What has become known as 'the Archives Case' is now scheduled to come before the Court of Appeal on 1-2 November, Dr D.L. Matheson QC appearing for the stakeholder organisations and the Solicitor-General 0J. McGrath QC) for the Crown. Archives and recordkeeping have traditionally been low-profile professions. Practitioners have tended to just get on with their jobs, out of the public view, doing the best they can within the limited resources provided. The recent court hearings represent the culmination of five years of unprecedented publicity for archives-related issues in this country. Just a few years ago it would have been inconceivable that archives stories might regularly feature in national ν press pages, be the subject of television programmes, be the focus of ongoing questioning in the House of Representatives, or that New Zealand archives matters would be central to professional debates in locations as far spaced as Brisbane and Sardinia. It would have been equally inconceivable that the probity of the Crown's stewardship of public archives and recordkeeping might be legally challenged. It would have been beyond belief that a Secretary for Internal Affairs, the official legislatively charged with 'general administration' of the Archives Act, could be found to have acted in contravention of the Public Finance Act.The determined attempts by officials to 'reform' National Archives, to force the institution to conform more closely to the revenue- generating commercial model favoured by bureaucratic ideologues and an influential (yet perhaps shrinking) group of politicians, has arguably, and perhaps ironically, done more to raise public archives-consciousness than decades of dedicated service to the community. This is not to argue that heightened public consciousness means that the principal issues in contention are necessarily widely understood. Indeed, it is highly likely that the details of the controversy have passed most New Zealanders by. That the contested restructurings have caused so much fuss doubtless remains a matter of surprise even to many individuals expressing an interest in, and support for, archives. There is superficial appeal in the case for National Archives having a heritage identity, as put by Internal Affairs Acting Heritage General Manager Jock Phillips in the present issue; at least until his case is subjected to informed scrutiny. It is even possible that some ARANZ and NZSG members have questioned why so much energy, so much in the way of organisational resources has been poured into the defence of a single custodial institution. The critical point, of course, is that National Archives is not just one among many such institutions. It is New Zealand's paramount public records repository, the guardian of the public memory. With the constitutional and administrative arguments for a strong and independent national archives having been frequently rehearsed, there is no need for their reiteration. They are powerful in themselves. But an almost equally powerful argument, one that has tended to be overlooked, is that the health of the nation's leading repository has the power to dramatically influence the standing of institutions at all levels of the national archives and recordkeeping hierarchy. This was clearly discerned over 20 years ago by the late Dr