I can cite some examples.
Saskatchewan has a higher immigration rate. Immigrants are mainly non-francophones and non-anglophones—allophones, in other words—mainly from francophone Africa and are not rights holders. All the programming that concerns them, in areas such as improved education, learning English or French-language development, is done out of the budgets of the francophone school division, which has no money granted for that purpose. For example, the network's immigration coordinator alone probably costs $100,000 and the grants from the province do not reflect that work, which has to be done to ensure the education and academic success of those people.
Now let's consider another area and the example of child care facilities, which are often funded out of money from the community or the Fransaskois school division. There is no funding for that. And yet, if we lose three- or four-year-old children, they'll never come back to us.
We've negotiated more than $30 million for the community at the postsecondary level since 1968. Today, what do we have at the University of Regina, for example? Very little.
The answer to your question, Mr. Godin, is that, yes, we have an idea of the amounts that are being invested. As for how they are spent, we are often at the mercy of a majority community or a majority institution over which we have no legal authority. We are somewhat at the mercy of a number of people who do not necessarily accept our influence or intervention. However, we can't say that there has been no success or that the investment has been of no value. We have a school system; we have public and college-level education, and we have child care services, but the question is: at what cost?