The Justice Ministry continues to create obstacles to prevent
the transfer of funding to Torah and chinuch
institutions, citing various legal rationales, some of which
are not grounded in reality but are apparently just intended
to delay, disrupt and prevent the chareidi public from
receiving their rightful funding.
A long letter Attorney Amnon De Hartoch, head of the Justice
Ministry's support funding department, sent to Attorney
General Mani Mazuz in reaction to a harsh letter MK Rabbi
Moshe Gafni sent the Attorney General three weeks ago attests
to this prolonged trend.
In his letter Rabbi Gafni complained that funding earmarked
for the chareidi public, including funding pledged in the
coalition agreement between UTJ and the Likud, has been
delayed for months. The letter, sent at the beginning of
Kislev, states that NIS 150 million made a part of the basic
budget and approved by the Knesset in the 2005 budget has
been held up by the Justice Ministry.
The Justice Ministry claims it has to check whether the
requirements have been met, although it made no effort to
withhold the transfer of the NIS 700 million pledged to
Shinui or the NIS 600 million pledged to Labor by such
checking. "New issues are constantly arising in various areas
(the vast majority of which affect religious matters and the
chareidi public) and you have not managed to complete this
although we have already arrived at the end of the budget
year," wrote Rabbi Gafni.
A few days ago Rabbi Gafni received a laconic reply from the
Attorney General, saying he was enclosing the remarks sent by
De Hartoch, who the Justice Ministry apparently placed in
charge of creating the delays. In response to De Hartoch's
remarks, Rabbi Gafni sent another letter to the Attorney
General in which he refutes De Hartoch's claims one by
one.
Regarding the transfer of funds to talmudei Torah, De
Hartoch claims that NIS 28 million has not been transferred
because the Finance Ministry raised doubts regarding the
legality of the transfer. "The addition of NIS 28 million for
talmudei Torah would mean increasing the state's
participation in the cost of the studies from 55 percent to
60 percent, the original level recommended by the Shoshani
Commission . . . and the Education Minister decided to
decrease the level of participation to 55 percent based on
budget considerations."
De Hartoch notes that one of the Shoshani Commission's
recommendations calls for the state to pay 65-85 percent of
the maintenance costs at recognized but unofficial schools
depending on the degree to which the school adheres to
Ministry regulations. Yet the Education Minister decided to
set a uniform level of support at 75 percent, which
constitutes a departure from two of the Shoshani Commission's
basic principles, and rather than maintaining a substantial
disparity of 41 percent between the assistance the state
provides recognized schools versus exempt schools (85 percent
compared to 60 percent) the disparity was reduced to 36
percent, a gap of 20 percent (75 percent compared to 55
percent).
However, De Hartoch claims, transferring the funding in
question to the talmudei Torah would mean government
assistance for exempt institutions would rise to 60 percent
while recognized but unofficial schools would still receive
75 percent; in this case the gap between the different types
of institutions would be just 20 percent as opposed to the
original recommendation of 41 percent.
He also claims Rabbi Gafni's demands are based on politics
whereas the Shoshani Commission recommendations were based on
a professional assessment. "An educational institution that
does not teach the Core Curriculum Program and also applies a
student filtering system is supposed to receive only 35
percent of coverage for instruction, while other private
institutions that do teach the Core Curriculum Program are
eligible for 65 percent of coverage for instruction, a
different of 85 percent."
In response Rabbi Gafni wrote that De Hartoch's arguments
were absolutely without foundation. "Numerous programs are
funded in other sectors, such as mainstreaming handicapped
students, special education, etc., but are not provided at
the talmudei Torah. [Counting this funding, the
percentages that are funded in the chareidi sector are much
lower.] But worst of all is his claim there is no legal basis
to raise their funding to 60 percent since the talmudei
Torah do not have the obligations placed upon other
sectors. This is not true. According to his principle, the
amount of funding corresponds to the amount of commitment and
even now the talmudei Torah have an obligation of 55
percent which, by the way, is an empty statement since the
formal funding is 55 percent, but in practice it is far less
due to the reasons I listed as well as other areas in which
the talmudei Torah are not funded. Furthermore relying
on the Dovrat Report that was never implemented in any part
of the system shows his true intent of reaching foreordained
conclusions by bringing supporting arguments out of
nowhere."
In his letter Rabbi Gafni goes on to refute De Hartoch's
claims regarding seminaries, bussing to Chinuch Atzmai
schools and Jewish culture; he also attacks the Justice
Ministry for instructing the Education Ministry to cut
funding at schools that do not adhere to 100 percent of the
Core Program and for delaying the signing of a recovery
agreement for Agudas Yisroel kindergartens.
Rabbi Gafni notes that chareidi girls' seminars get only 1.2
points of funding, while the non-chareidi teacher training
seminars enjoy 1.95-2.05 points of funding.
The Agudas Yisroel kindergartens have done their part and
prepared the proper plans and taken the necessary steps
towards implementing a recovery plan. All this has been in
place for a long time, yet the Ministry of Justice has
inexplicably not yet signed a formal recovery agreement. The
lack of such an agreement means that funding that should be
forthcoming is withheld.
Attorney de Hartoch complains that he is personally
overworked. Rabbi Gafni notes that when the Ministry of
Justice "displays such intimate involvement in all matters
pertaining to the chareidi community, and only one man is
delegated to deal with everything, and therefore no matter is
resolved, and despite this new requirements are instituted
which have insufficient manpower to deal with them, I will
not say what I — and many others — think about
this."
