Thank you for having us here today and allowing us to present our viewpoints.
I will begin by explaining the situation in Prince Edward Island. The Société Saint-Thomas-d'Aquin was founded in 1919. Its main mandate is to preserve the French Acadian culture and language in our province through education. In 1950, with the merger of small schools, Prince Edward Island lost all of its French schools, except in the Évangéline region. This had a negative impact on the preservation of the French language. We are said to have lost some 35,000 francophones, because they were assimilated into the English-language education system.
For us, the agreements are an essential tool. I will speak to you about our concerns, but I do not want to go over the same points that my colleagues have raised.
Is funding adequate for us? We have a fixed budget envelope over five years. However, in five years, many things can occur to change the situation. In Prince Edward Island, in 1999, there were only two French schools, whereas in 2003, there were six. This change occurred very rapidly, but the budget envelope has not increased. We must thus provide services to four more schools and four more communities with the same amount of funding.
Prince Edward Island is experiencing extraordinary growth in terms of official language knowledge. With a bilingualism rate of 12.7%, our province currently ranks third in Canada, after Quebec and New Brunswick. Between 2001 and 2006, the bilingualism rate increased by 0.76%, whereas the national trend declined.
This means that requests for services are increasing and needs are becoming more pressing. The number of French schools is climbing while the number of English schools is dropping. Despite this, we have the same budget, which prevents us from properly meeting the needs of our community.
Our employees and volunteers are becoming exhausted trying to meet these growing needs. We are passionate, resolute and dedicated. The study that has just been conducted shows that on average, our employees in the community network receive one-third of the salary that is paid in the public service or in the private sector for the same skills and the same work. In addition, they work an average of 15 hours more per week, unpaid, to offer quality services and continue to do their work. Our volunteers sit on an average of three committees or more, and do an average of three times more volunteer work than our English-speaking counterparts.
In terms of accountability, since the programming envelope under these agreements continues to be inadequate, we are increasingly forced to deal with several departments and granting agencies, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, as my colleagues have said, departments and granting agencies have very different and complex requirements.
As concerns our priorities, once again, the program funding provides leverage and ensures a certain stability for employees who oversee the diversification of our funding. However, every time we submit an application to a department, we must adapt our results and our priorities to the framework of the targeted funding.
The cooperation agreements have allowed the community of Prince Edward Island to maintain an ongoing dialogue with Canadian Heritage. We would have liked to negotiate an agreement that included the Canadian government, and not only Canadian Heritage. All the departments have an obligation, and it would be a way for us to simplify the approach and set things straight for all sectors and all departments. A joint trilateral plan would also help cut down on red tape. The Société Saint-Thomas-d'Aquin is currently devising a comprehensive community development plan that includes both the provincial and federal governments.
As my colleagues have said, the disadvantages of the accord are as follows. Instead of giving responsibility to the community, it strips it of certain powers. The funding evaluation and recommendations committee appears to me to be more of an advisory committee. It is no longer a decision-making committee like it was before. We are lucky, because there is a director at Canadian Heritage who clearly understands the needs of our community. However, the staff can change any time and influence the way things work.
I, too, would recommend the establishment of a mechanism that includes more than one department. The next phase of the action plan and the subsequent collaboration accords must include the provincial and territorial governments as well as the other federal government departments. They must take part in the process as full-fledged partners rather than simply holding summary consultations.
The federal government's actions in the area of official languages must be felt on the ground. The fact remains, however, that certain areas of intervention that have a direct impact on the vitality and lot of our communities come under provincial jurisdiction. We recommend a trilateral collaboration model. For the past six months, we have been working with both levels of government in order to develop this type of collaboration model, which should result in joint planning and empowerment. This mechanism will allow for the provision of a plethora of institutional and community services so that citizens can live their everyday lives in French.
Under this model, governments would assume their obligations towards the Acadian and francophone community in all sectors. Furthermore, the community would have the partners it needs to ensure its full-fledged development and vitality.
In closing, governments must recognize and showcase, in a tangible fashion, the work done by community development organizations on the ground. To do this work, communities need stable, adequate and foreseeable funding in order to meet the growing needs of the regions effectively.
Thank you.