The Finance Committee, headed by MK Hanoch Milbitsky, approved this evening (Tuesday), after a 7-hour discussion, an internal change to the Ministry of Education budget, as part of a repeated discussion that took place following the High Court of Justice's decision - as part of the petition regarding the funds allocated to the Ministry of Education, before they were approved by the Finance Committee. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In accordance with the court's decision, the transfer included funds that had not yet been allocated from the original request approved on December 25, 2025, for a total amount of approximately 2.66 billion shekels. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Following the court ruling, a request for approximately 98 million shekels was submitted to the committee, which was discussed today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Below are the details of the transfer:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Approximately 98 million shekels of internal changes in the Ministry of Education - Finance budget, as part of a revenue-based expenditure for overhead budgets, transportation, and outreach services in the Haredi education networks. As part of this, a budget of approximately 20 million shekels is designated within the framework of independent education for headquarters expenses, salaries of headquarters and operational employees, as well as for student transportation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Approximately 39 million NIS for the Torah Education Spring, as well as for headquarters expenses, salaries of headquarters and operational staff, and for student transportation. Approximately 4 million NIS for financing cleaning services, maintenance, and salaries of administrative staff, in the secondary institutions of the Torah Education Spring network. Approximately 35 million NIS for cleaning, maintenance, and administrative services in the Torah Education Spring and independent education networks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As part of the request, it was noted that the reason for the change is the transition to a normative budgeting method starting in September 2025, with the overhead budget calculated according to 6% of the base facility, and that the amounts were not fully budgeted in advance due to uncertainty that prevailed when the 2025 budget was being prepared regarding the operating mechanism of the normative model and the status of students eligible for transportation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As part of the details of the appeal, it was noted: "In accordance with the transition during the year between the various budgeting methods, the consequential and normative, according to which the budget of the Haredi education networks will be determined according to the student situation, the profile of the teaching staff and the budgeting formulas accepted by the Ministry of Education.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
During the discussion, the issue arose that the committee was aware of the matter, so that the funds had already been actually allocated, when the committee originally approved it.
Yoav Hecht, Ministry of Finance: "There is some inaccuracy that bothers me, and what I will say now may also bother you, and that is that the things were clear. Clear to everyone, clear to the previous speaker, clear to the members of the Knesset.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Committee Chairman, MK Hanoch Milbitsky: "I chaired that meeting as chairman, and I had already been chairman for several months. I had no idea. Not one of you came and told me, either indirectly or directly, that we were dealing with money that had passed here. I don't know on what basis it was said that they were aware. I can tell you that all the new Knesset members here were certainly not aware, and I don't know from the veterans how much they were aware or not. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\""But I'm telling you as a member of Knesset, this being his first Knesset, I wouldn't have imagined that such a thing could even happen, without you saying so. I really am telling you. Now again, I don't think that salary should be withheld, and in my opinion, you did well to make sure that there wasn't a salary withholding, but the minimum that should be done is to come and say that because of this thing and because it was delayed, we are discussing expenses here that have salary components, per thousand and one, that were paid. Not to come and present it as if we knew. No one here knew anything, at least as far as I know.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hecht: "I don't think my goal is to create any kind of argument about this. I do want to say that from the perspective of the representatives of the Budget Division, and from my perspective as well, the things were said and were considered. We wrote the things explicitly.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MK Naor Shiri: "No, Yoav, you can't have said that now. You've never come and hinted at that, not even by an inch. Where is it explicitly mentioned? Lack of pay. No, no, where, where, where?".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MK Naama Lazimi: "Yoav, I'll tell you, instead of arguing, please show me the passage in the minutes of the discussion. I would be happy, God forbid we think you lied here, that you said something untrustworthy, God forbid we think that a public official is messing with you, you'll find it in the discussion, I'll apologize to you here.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MK Vladimir Belyak: "I was here throughout the entire debate, this was not implied in a word or even half a word.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee members later noted that on the day the budget was originally transferred, the Accountant General's staff called them and emphasized to them that if they passed a certain time, the funds would not be allocated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hecht: "There may be a gap here between what you require as a minimum, and what we consider to be self-evident, and we have pledged before the court that we will clarify this even further, so that there will be no situation in which you say, the required minimum is different from our minimum.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee's legal counsel, Attorney Shlomit Erlich: "There is a difference between addressing the question of whether or not the required minimum was done and the question and the things you said earlier, as if the things were certainly clear and even written explicitly. They were not written explicitly, they were not clear, and no one was aware that the committee was being asked to approve something whose budget had already been passed.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MK Milbitsky: "They sat here for hours. What is this? We were here screaming?"\" <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hecht replied: "And they went back and discussed and discussed the lack of wages and how long it took for this wage to be created, etc.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The chairman of the committee: "I know and have sat not only on the Finance Committee of the Knesset of Israel, but I have sat on municipal committees, and I was a council member for ten years and sat on all sorts of other committees, and there has never been such an incident, where people who, from our point of view, are a kind of ultra-qualified, a kind of gatekeepers, come and provide partial information at this level, and do not clarify to your little Rachel, 'Know that you are here discussing money that has already been spent,' you can call it a lack of pay, it does not matter at all, it is money that we are discussing the approval of that day, and arguing whether to transfer it or not to transfer it, and it has already been spent a long, long time ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\""Beyond the minimum is to come next time, in case such an event comes up, both to be an asterisk in the appeal itself and also when you present the appeal, after you have finished the usual ceremony, to come and say, pay attention, committee members, such and such items have already been paid, this is what the minimum required should be.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hecht: "I want to distinguish between two things you said, one of which I have to protest against and the other I hear and am attentive to. The first, that to the extent that we are attributed with some kind of statement of partial truth in order to create a picture that is inaccurate... it was not, and we did more than an asterisk. Looking ahead, we will do above and beyond so that this thing does not change, from our perspective, we will say this much more clearly in the future, I am attentive to the committee's words.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MK Shiri: "To be completely honest, I really liked you, Yoav, but it's impossible for the Ministry of Finance, and you as its representative, to come here today, after all the petition, after all the arguments, after all the hours we've been spending here, and say, listen, what do you want? We were perfectly fine. We told you, we hinted to you, we wrote to you, you knew explicitly.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hecht: "I'm not saying everything was excellent, I said the more this happens again, the clearer we will be.".<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Following the discussion, the various sections were discussed, and many questions were presented by Knesset members, which were answered by representatives of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education, and in addition, various supplementary data was provided by the ministries at the request of the committee members. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this context, the opposition members claimed that the answers and data presented to them were insufficient, that a great deal of material was conveyed to them during the hours of discussion that could not be controlled, and that it was not possible to vote on the appeal in light of this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In response to the opposition's claims, the committee's legal counsel noted that the answers and data held by the ministries were presented to Knesset members, and that while a great deal of material was provided, the answers to the opposition's questions are concentrated in specific and focused sections within it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Opposition members chose not to vote, and the appeal was approved.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Finance Committee, headed by MK Hanoch Milbitsky, approved this evening (Tuesday), after a 7-hour discussion, an internal change in the Ministry of Education budget, as part of a repeated discussion that took place following the High Court of Justice's decision - as part of the petition on the funds allocated to the Ministry of Education, before they were approved by the Finance Committee. In accordance with the court's decision, the transfer included funds that had not yet been allocated from the original request approved on December 25, 2025, in the amount of [\u2026]","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":999096,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1059409","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-1"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n