Sonderband 2. International Council on Archives. Dritte Europäische Archivkonferenz, Wien 11. bis 15. Mai 1993. Tagungsprotokolle (1996)

1. Session / Séance. Experiences gained, current Situation, future Prospects / Expériences acquises, Situation actuelle, Perspectives futures - Hall, Kenneth: Perspectives opened up by the Maastricht Symposium / Perspectives ouvertes par le Symposium de Maastricht (english 41 - français 48)

1. Session/Séance: Hall, Maastricht Symposium

was that many of those participating in the discussions had not done so before at an international level and had not considered the issues in a European context. Speakers included historians, politicians, administrators, those working in industry and commerce and archivists from different levels and specialisms.

I have concentrated on the structure and philosophy underlying the Symposium because they in themselves appear to represent a new perspective, or at least an attempt to reassess and restate what could be the purposes of a professional conference at the international level, and for whom such conferences might be held. Maastricht was not a European substitute for the quadrennial International Congress on Archives, or for the CITRA. Indeed, it strictly avoided the notion of national representation or delegations and confined its preoccupations to a current regional concern. In doing so, however, the organizers took care to provide the participants with a balance of European and non-European perspectives in their choice of speakers. It was primarily a celebration which was used as an opportunity to stimulate a debate among those most affected by the concerns being addressed. It was also used as an opportunity to expose archivists to the views and opinions of those outside the profession.

Because of the numbers of people attending and the costs of providing simultaneous translation in five languages, it is almost impossible at ICA Congresses to facilitate spontaneous debate in comparatively small groups. Furthermore, when opportunities for debate do occur at the Congress, the necessary constraints on spontaneity, the eminence of many of the speakers and the presence of so many leaders of the profession combine to overawe many, more junior archivists. The latter attend tole- arn, rather than to debate. Neither is it reasonable to expect such a forum to focus exclusively, for any length of time, on the concerns of any one geographical area, or on an issue of less than wide interest. Congresses are properly concerned with wider issues and broader perspectives. They meet a different need. Similarly the CITRA has a specific purpose of bringing together the heads of national archives and the presidents of national professional bodies. It is not designed to cater for the needs of middle-ranking practitioners.

The Maastricht Symposium filled a gap by affording an opportunity to junior and mid-career archivists to engage in a debate about something which was affecting and will continue to affect them all. Many were aware that such a debate was already takingplace, but at levels from which they were excluded, either because of their rank within the organisation by which they were employed or of which they were members, or because of their professional isolation.

More importantly, perhaps, the Symposium provided a forum at the European level which did not otherwise exist. Because of the way it was structured, to facilitate spontaneous debate amongst professionals attending in their own right, it had the more intimate and relaxed atmosphere of the annual conference of a national professional association No participant was a delegate of an association or the representative of an institution. They were at liberty to express their own views as practising archivists.

44