... I will talk about the life of the organization.
Provincial funding has become much more stable. There is a mechanism, if I can use that expression, because your question is very specific. The funding we receive from provincial departments comes in a form of grants. This type of funding is much more regular and the areas of responsibility contained in agreements are much more clear and specific, not only as far as the centre's responsibilities are concerned, but also the responsibilities of the funding organization, given the fact that it is asking the centre to carry out work on its behalf.
As for the federal government, it works in a completely different way. There are very few funding agreements by way of grants; the funding agreements are by way of contributions. This is a basic problem for several reasons.
First, the contribution agreements must be renewed every year. It is very rare that a contribution agreement is spread out over several years, and if it is, it would be for very specific projects, with a beginning and an end, after which the whole process would begin anew.
Second, let's talk about the funding process. It involves transfers based on refunds. This complicates things: there is a lot of paper work and organizations have to deal with a lot of red tape, much more so at the federal than at the provincial level, in fact, the paper burden, in my opinion, is four or five times heavier with the federal government. This is scandalous. There is no doubt that the federal government imposes accountability requirements when it transfers money to agencies. That is understandable, but the provincial government has managed to establish rules which are more flexible and which are also adapted to the size and the capacity of smaller community agencies.
I would like to add a few words on that subject. I have high expectations of a group of experts which was given the mandate to review and make recommendations on the implementation of Treasury Board's draft policy on transfer payments. This group was created by the federal government, for which it should be congratulated. It is chaired by Frances Lankin, who is the president of the United Way in Toronto. I had the opportunity to take part in consultations with Frances Lankin to help her better understand the impact these types of transfers have on agencies, and in particular francophone agencies in Toronto. Several of the points I raised in my presentation today were points I addressed during my presentation to Frances Lankin. I would really like this committee to make recommendations which will then be implemented by the various federal government departments; that would make life much easier for us. I am not saying that accountability should be removed; I am just saying that manageable accountability measures should be imposed on agencies, and everyone should agree on the objectives, but we should have tools which are easier to manage to help us measure outcomes.
Thank you for your question.