Talk of unfair subvention for ESF ignores the fact HK has two official languages

[from Education Post Mailbag - 15 November 2008]

Recently we saw yet another letter from Pierce Lam slamming the ESF's government subvention ("We need school system that is fair for all", South China Morning Post, November 7).

It appears Mr Lam has a serious chip on his shoulder about the ESF and colonialism in general. In a letter to Time magazine, he wrote: "A city can never be great if the majority of its population is taught that everything good is foreign. The cosmopolitan city glamorised in your report is a city of cultural orphans brainwashed into becoming submissive to myriad foreign cultures that have been filtered through a colonial sieve."

As a parent with three children at ESF schools it costs me HK$25,000 a month to educate my children. That sum will increase when the other two move to college from junior school. All my children were born in Hong Kong.

Mr Lam insinuates "ESF's admission policy explicitly discriminates against Cantonese speakers. Cantonese speakers have only a token presence in ESF schools". Hogwash. I suggest he stands outside Sha Tin Junior School and college when the schools close for the day and plays "spot the gweilo" among the sea of Asian student faces, most of whom speak Cantonese at home.

The ESF is a foundation based on statute. Its objectives are to own, manage, administer and operate schools offering, without regard to race or religion, a modern liberal education through the medium of the English language to boys and girls who are able to benefit from such an education. The medium of instruction is specifically enshrined within the laws of Hong Kong.

He refers to a judgment 40 years ago: "In a Belgian linguistics case (1968), a European court held that `the right to education does not mean the right to be provided education in a language of the parent's choice and the right to education is confined to the right of access to educational establishments existing at a given time'."

What he deliberately omits is the fact that Hong Kong has two official languages, English and Chinese, and that they are spoken throughout Hong Kong and the local business world. In Belgium, whose official languages are Dutch and French, there were in 1968 specific unilingual areas where people spoke either French or Dutch, but not both. Legco studied this judgment and it can be found at www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/english/bc/bc52/papers/bc520228cb2-1152-2-e.pdf

Moreover, here is a link to The Right to Education and Minority Language by Fernand de Varennes. He discusses the Belgian and Cyprus cases in a modern day interpretation of the 40-year-old judgment: www.eumap.org/journal/features/2004/minority_education/edminlang

This learned lecturer opined: "Until recently, particularly in Europe, there has been the widespread - and mistaken - belief that there is absolutely no right to education in a minority language under traditional human rights treaties ... Many have referred to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Belgian Linguistic Case [6] as concluding that the state has the absolute and unqualified right to determine the official language of instruction in public schools and denied that a right to education in a particular language existed under Article 2 of Protocol (the right to education), even in combination with the prohibition of discrimination (article 14).

"This interpretation is, in fact, an incorrect reading of the decision, since what the European Court actually said was that, given the social and political context at the time in Belgium, the overall linguistic regime, which mainly included monolingual Dutch (and French) language territories for purposes of public schooling, was not arbitrary and therefore was not discriminatory."

Mr Lam states: "The World Economic Forum's global competitiveness report 2005/06 shows that Hong Kong is 28th - below Taiwan (fifth), Singapore (sixth) and South Korea (17th) - partly because of government inadequacy in handling matters impartially ... Subvented ESF schools offer new immigrants who are native-English-speakers unquestioned admission at the expense of native students. Withdrawal of the ESF's subvention will improve Hong Kong's competitiveness by making it a fairer place. In Singapore all children are taught in English in primary school and at the next levels with their mother-tongue teaching in Chinese, Malay or Tamil ranked second." I suggest he does a Wikipedia search on education in Singapore.

"Immigrants", as he calls us, can only come here if they have a talent not locally available and beneficial to Hong Kong society. He also omits the rights of locally born children.
Hong Kong-born children of permanent and tax-paying residents of any ethnic race should be entitled to education in either of the two official languages here with the same subventions as provided to DSS schools.

The ESF provides a valuable and necessary service in this "Asia World City".

JAMES MIDDLETON, Yuen Long

We need school system that is fair for all

[SCMP Letters page November 7th]

ESF review highlights need for new direction" (Editorial, October 25), misleadingly alleges that the ESF subvention makes ESF schools "affordable to many Chinese middle-class families". Hong Kong's middle-class Chinese families are predominantly Cantonese-speaking but the ESF's admission policy explicitly discriminates against Cantonese speakers.

Without equal right of admission, Cantonese speakers have only a token presence in ESF schools. The proposed withdrawal of funding will help eliminate language-based privileges without compromising a child's "right to a subsidised education". In a Belgian linguistics case (1968), a European court held that "the right to education does not mean the right to be provided education in a language of the parent's choice and the right to education is confined to the right of access to educational establishments existing at a given time".

Hong Kong's public education, which includes English- and Chinese-medium schools, is open to all applicants. There is neither legal nor moral obligation for Hong Kong to subsidise a separate English-medium schools system especially for non-Cantonese speaking students.
The funding perpetuates shameful privileges which induce cultural divisiveness rather than diversity. It enables ESF teachers to enjoy higher pay and ESF students, better facilities than their counterparts in non-ESF schools. As all ESF schools have shifted to the International Baccalaureate programme, the funding promotes an exclusive qualification (IB diploma), which students in local schools have no access to through public exams.

The World Economic Forum's global competitiveness report 2005-06 shows that Hong Kong is 28th - below Taiwan (fifth), Singapore (sixth) and South Korea (17th), partly because of "government inadequacy in handling matters impartially".

These Asian countries are competitive without offering privileged education to non-residents. Subvented ESF schools offer new immigrants who are native English-speakers unquestioned admission at the expense of native students. Withdrawal of the ESF's subvention will improve Hong Kong`s competitiveness by making it a fairer place.

To become socially relevant in the post-colonial era, the ESF must take effective measures to implement a fair and open admission policy even if it is allowed to turn its schools private and operate without subvention.

Pierce Lam, Central

ESF fees increase - a letter to the SCMP

This is a letter that was sent to the SCMP by James Middleton. Only part of it was published, and I have placed brackets [] round the parts that were cut:

ESF schools suffering

According to the ESF accounts 2005-6 in 2003-4 the ESF educated 6,007 Primary and 5,782 secondary students.(11,789)

In 2005-2006 they educated 6,444 primary and 6,260 secondary students. (12,704) By now this is probably an increase of 1,000 children being educated by ESF since 2003-4. Many more sit on the waiting list - there is huge demand. To any sensible Government this shows that there is a significant need to provide additional assistance to the growth of the organisation in this 'World City' whilst ensuring the excesses of the past do not re-occur [such as buying property at the property market peak for the former chief executive because she did not like the one she was housed in].

However the current accounts show the opposite, a drop in subvention as a result of the Government freezing the number of classes it subvents and reducing the subvention per class by 1.8% from the 1999/2000 level with effect from September 2003, 4.8% from January 2004, 6.44% from April 2004,9.572% from April 2005 and 12.372% from April 2006 (all figures cumulative).

In an interview with Arthur Li in 1998 (the enlightening interview in full is at www.asian-affairs.com) whilst he was then the Vice Chancellor of the Chinese university he stated:

[The SCMP version of the letter includes only a very brief summary of this interview:

Professor Li said he kept telling the government that education was an investment. He pointed out that Hong Kong had no natural reserves, only people. If we did not invest in them and did not train them to be more competitive, we would not survive. ]

[" The Financial Secretary thinks he is being prudent keeping the money. My view is that Hong Kong must invest in the future. My colleagues and I keep telling the government that education must not be looked at as an expenditure. It is an investment. In Hong Kong, we don’t have any natural reserves, no oil, no gold mines, we have only people. If we don’t invest in them, make them better trained, more competitive, more suitable for a global economy, we are not going to survive. Hong Kong will just become another city in China! So keeping the money is one thing, but it is not an end in itself. The government has to use it not only for the rainy days but for our future. " ]

I presume that Mr Li included native English speakers in his above quote. He goes on to say:

[The problem in the Civil Service is the lack of talent. Before 1997, many of the very able senior civil servants left the administration, either because they didn’t get on with (the last governor) Chris Patten or they worried about immigration or their future. If you look at the present top civil servants, they have all been promoted extremely rapidly through the ranks. They don’t have a great deal of experience in dealing with problems . This is why, for example, the handling of the chicken flu was a disaster. Many problems are dealt with by young people who are learning on the job rather than by experienced people. Young people are sensitive to criticism. When you try to be helpful the Civil Service thinks that it is under attack. So it puts up the shutters, it doesn’t want to know. It doesn't listen. This is rather sad.

Q.- Is inexperience the only problem of the Civil Service? A.L.- No. There is also a great deal of inefficiency. So on the one hand you want to support the government very much, on the other hand you see that it is really bumbling around. It is very sad, because if you stand up and criticize its lack of action or its policies, you are considered a bad guy. >From that moment on, it won’t listen to whatever you say. If you don’t stand up, it thinks it is doing all right. So what happens is that the government likes to surround itself with people who think it is doing all right, without even listening to those who could come forward with different ideas. "

Q.- As a measure to fight unemployment among the young the government has announced that the tertiary institutions will take an additional one thousand students. Isn’t it a positive measure ?

A.L.- It is a complete U-turn. Last year, we put to the government that we needed an additional one thousand students, to train them for specific purposes like becoming teachers, electronic engineers and so on having in mind that we need to develop high-added value industries. Our request was rejected. Now, because of the economic crisis, the government suddenly comes back to us saying; “now you take on an additional one thousand students, but we have no money for you”.

Q.- Is the cost very high? A.L.- For the government, it is not much. But it is typical. The government may be working very hard, but there is no communication with us. We don't understand what is going on . Why can't it come out and tell us: “this is for the future of Hong Kong, this concerns all of us, we are looking into these possibilities, and we ruled out these possibilities, or we think this one is the best one”. But the government does not share the information.

Of course, in the past, the colonial system has been very high handed, but that style of government has to change. "]

[High handed ? The pot calling the kettle black.] I note Arthur Li was educated at St. Paul's Co-educational College . It is operated under the Direct Subsidy Scheme (DSS), and was the first subsidised school to join the scheme. I agree with him that Government needs to invest in our people through their education , including those whose mother tongue is English without discrimination and they need to look at increased investment in the ESF not as expenditure but as an important part of the future of Hong kong.

Arthur needs to remember his words spoken before he joined Government and act upon them now he is in the hot seat.

James Middleton

From today's SCMP:

Parents are concerned at increase in ESF fees Tuition rise hard on families, father says
LIZ GOOCH

Parents expressed concern yesterday after the ESF announced student fees would increase in August.

Annual fees for English Schools Foundation primary students will rise more than 5 per cent to HK$54,300, while secondary school fees will increase almost 3 per cent to HK$85,000.

Glyn Davies, who has two children at ESF secondary schools, said it appeared the money would be put to good use but he said some families, especially those with many children, struggled to afford the tuition.

"There's certainly no let-up as far as parents are concerned with the increased costs of an ESF education," he said.

The chairwoman of the Joint Council of Parent Teacher Associations, Jane Tracy, said that while she thought the rise was fair, parents were concerned about the affordability of ESF schools. "They are concerned about value for money and affordability," she said, adding that parents would be pleased they were getting more information about how their money was being spent.

The latest rise comes after fees were increased from HK$47,300 for primary and HK$78,600 for secondary in 2005-06 to HK$51,500 and HK$82,600 in 2006-07. Before 2005, fees had remained unchanged since 2001-02.

Parents were informed in a letter from chief executive Heather Du Quesnay, which was sent out yesterday and on Thursday.

Ms Du Quesnay said ESF fees still compared favourably to other international schools.
"We need a little more money to ... improve the quality of education and also to attend to our physical infrastructure," she said.

Major buildings projects were planned and building repairs were needed at ESF schools, which cater to more than 12,600 students, Ms Du Quesnay said.

"We don't pretend that these are not significant amounts of money for some parents but in the great scheme of things ... it's not really a huge amount of money for many people, but for some it will be difficult," she said, adding that financial assistance was available.

The letter said reasons for the increase included the need to employ more educational assistants and higher education guidance counsellors, increase investment in Chinese teaching and make funding available to all secondary schools for business manager positions.

However, this failed to satisfy parent Chris Tringham. "I think a lot of parents are willing to pay as long as they're seeing where the money is going," he said. "It's just a concern that every year they will keep increasing the fees."

The increase is subject to approval by the Education and Manpower Bureau.

In March, the ESF announced that parents would have to pay a deposit equivalent to the September fees to confirm their children would return after the summer holidays.
Hong Kong International School will increase fees by 3 per cent for all students in the new academic year, taking fees for Reception One to HK$137,200. Grade 12 fees will increase to HK$157,100.

The Australian International School increased its fees in January. Fees at the Delia School of Canada will remain unchanged in the next academic year, while the German Swiss International School is yet to confirm its charges.

For the record, what I actually said to Liz Gooch was that fee increases will have a big impact on parents with more than one child in ESF schools, and that we want to see an explanation of the ESF budget. I know she was trying to contact Alex Chiu, but it seems that she was not able to reach him in time.

Fee increase confirmed

FRom the ESF:

The Executive Committee of the English Schools Foundation (ESF) have considered recommendations made to them by ESF’s Finance Committee preparatory to reaching a decision on the level of school fees for the 2007-08 academic year. The discussion was a long one because the Executive Committee were acutely aware of parents’ concerns about a fee increase – these were highlighted by the Chairman of the JCPTA, among others. However, the Committee believe they have a duty to strike a balance between maintaining affordability and ensuring that ESF schools continue to offer an excellent education.

Bearing in mind the investments required in both physical infrastructure and the quality of teaching and learning, we have determined that fees need to increase to the following levels with effect from August:
Primary – HK$54,300 ($5,430 x 10 months) – an increase of 5.44%Secondary – HK$85,000 ($8,500 x 10 months) – an increase of 2.91%

These fees are subject to approval by the Education and Manpower Bureau.

Fees will rise

The ESF Executive committee met on 24 April, and have confirmed that there will be fee increases again this year (minutes of the meeting on the ESF website here). The exact figures have not been announced.

According to the minutes, a letter will be sent to parents explaining the need for an increase, and a reply will also be sent to Parents for ESF.

Fee increase?

Parents for ESF are concerned about a possible fee increase:

The ESF plans to raise school fee again in Sep07.

The ESF had an annual surplus of HK$26m in 2005-06 and projected HK$40m in 2006-07. There was already large scale fee rise in Sep06.

There were fixed assets of HK$704m in 2005-06 (according to the ESF website).

We expect further significant expenditure reduction from efficiency cost saving / salary cut.

Therefore we do not see the justification for fee rise again. We sent a letter to ESF ExCom to express our view (attached). We encourage parents to express your views or offer any suggestion (you might use this as a forum) on this issue which has great impact to most ESF families, so that these could be reflected before ESF's final decision.

Parents for ESF

This is the letter:

Dear members of the Executive Committee

We note that fee levels were discussed at the Executive Committee meeting on 27th March and, although understanding that a final decision has yet to be made on this issue, are concerned about the possibility that fee levels might rise in the 2007/08 school year.

The members of our group are receiving a number of queries from parents. Several areas of concern are beginning to emerge. These can be summarised as follows:

► whether with the ESF’s assets and income a fee increase is necessary this year; and

► what other funding options are being explored by the ESF.

In order that we have an understanding of some of the contextual issues, might we be permitted to enquire about the following:

1 What proportion of the ESF’s fixed assets of $M 704 in 2005/06 were property assets and how much annual income do these generate for the ESF?

2 Following the fee rise in 2006/07 and the expected drop in staff costs during the same year, what is the projected surplus for 2006/07?

3 What other funding opportunities is the ESF exploring to fund its major building projects?

4 Is the ESF making use of capital grants from the government? And what is the basis for the remark in the ESF Annual Report that government assistance with building projects is “less likely to happen in the future”?

5 What is the level of government subvention for 2007/08 and does this represent a similar level to last year?

6 What is the ESF doing to restore the principle of parity?

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Yours sincerely

Parents for ESF
Alex Chiu (SJS), Stephen Fong (SIS), Sarah Rigby (QBS), Ana Wei (SIS), Audrey Wong (KJS)

Some comments from parents:

I am most surprised to learn that ESF is considering raising school fees again this year after a substantial rise of school fee last year! ESF is already having surplus so there is no reason at all for raising shcool fee. As for big projects like building new schools ESF should seek alternate funding rather than rely on raising school fees as this is unfair to parents of existing students.

I do believe school need to think whether the rising of school fee is reasonable and responsible to the majority, do think whether it is fair to parents or far away from the spirit of eduction, do hope the managment thinking of the necesary before coming to a decision.

I have 2 kids in ESF. I chose ESF for my kids, with reasons like some of you. After so many years, I viewed ESF as a big family, rather than an organisation, a service provider.I believe the kind of close and harmonious relationship with school and parents can provide the optimal and favorable circumstances to nuture our next generation, who are successful with achievement, alongside with character of integrity, honesty and being responsible to the community.

In the past 3 years, the audit report, the salary cut and the fee rise in 2006 (9 % rise without our notice), these series of event, all tossed up turbulence in ESF circle which has wounded our relationship.

Our feeling is hurt by knowing the possible fee rise again.

We are not convinced by Headquarter for another fee rise !!

Please voice out your opinion before it is too late!!

I am a parent from one of the ESF school in the N.T.

I know for sure that there are lots of mums like myself that volunteer every week at the school on regular basis.

So, actually the school is saving a lot on manpower which we don't mind to contribute.

And I have always felt that school, students and parents are like a community. But now after all these issues coming up, I don't feel confident and trust in the future with the ESF.

Now, I feels that ESF are becoming more and more selfish and too greedy.

Another thing, most of the new teachers are from Australia and New Zealand. I am not trying to be prejudice but I assume that it cost cheaper for the ESF to recruit from these countries. May be we should ask for a good explanation and clarification about that.

Legco Education Panel discusses the new ordinance

[From Alex Chiu Chi-Suen of Parents for ESF] The Education Panel meeting on the new ordinance was held on 22 March. It went well. The only Legco member who mentioned the Subvention issue was Cheung Man-kwong - and he thinks it is justified / fair for ESF students to have similar level of subvention compared with local school students once the new ordinance has been passed and ESF reform has been successfully completed.

The SCMP also had a report from its education correspondent:

Chief vows ESF will keep tight rein on spending
LIZ GOOCH

The makeup of the English Schools Foundation's board of governors and the organisation's auditing system were among issues raised yesterday when lawmakers discussed amendments to the ESF's Ordinance bill.

The bill, which contains substantial changes to the ESF's governance, will be proposed as a private members' bill by Abraham Razack, legislator for the real estate and construction sector.

The bill will replace the ESF's 130-member foundation and executive committee with a 25-member board of governors. The board will consist of 10 independent members, seven parents, three ESF staff representatives, three school council members and two legislators.

At the meeting of Legco's education panel, accounting sector legislator Mandy Tam Heung-man asked how ESF management would prevent a repeat of the excess spending that had occurred in the past, such as seafood banquets. ESF executives made headlines in 2004 when they tried to claim a lunch bill that included oysters and wine.

The foundation's chief executive, Heather Du Quesnay, said the organisation was in the process of implementing an internet-based financial system that would show how schools spent their budgets.

"We're very strict over things like expenses," she said. "You can't put through a claim for expenses that you're not entitled to." She said the ESF hoped to do an internal audit of schools every two years.

Social welfare legislator Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung questioned why the new board would not include a position for parents of children with special needs. Ms Du Quesnay said the board and school councils would be encouraged to invite experts as the need arose.

Catering sector legislator Tommy Cheung Yu-yan, who is a foundation member, called for the positions allocated for Legco members to be given to stakeholders more closely related to the ESF. He said he was unable to attend many meetings because of other commitments.

But a parent representative, Alex Chiu Chi-Suen, said he hoped the board would include Legco members. "It's about monitoring the work of ESF because the ESF gets a subvention and Legco members are well-respected and they would act as independent monitors."

ESF chairman Felice Lieh Mak said the organisation hoped the bill, which was formulated after the Public Accounts Committee called for reform of its governance in 2005, could be passed as soon as possible.

"ESF bullies"

There's a letter in today's Education Post complaining about ESF plans to collect fees for the summer term in advance:

ESF bullies ignore struggling parents

The English Schools Foundation has revealed its latest bullying tactics ("ESF clamps down on summer exodus", Education Post, March 24).

Many thanks to Heather Du Quesnay and Chris Forse for a new stab in the back, as usual introduced without agreement from the parents. Many hard-working families who struggle to pay the high fees may be forced to forfeit their summer holidays in order to deposit their hard-earned money in the ESF's fat bank account in advance.

Ms Du Quesnay states that 170 students lost over summer is a "huge loss". Nonsense. With 12,000 students, that represents 1.4 per cent. There are two disturbing points to mention:

* Many families survive on large education subsidies from their companies, paid at the start of each term. Companies will not bring forward the subsidies to June, causing hardship.

* The ESF obviously presumes fewer empty seats will mean more fees and therefore more income. Will the school fees be reduced then? Will parents see the interest from the extra $75 million that will sit in the ESF's bank account all summer?

Parents should be given the financial facts to choose whether to maintain the current fee schedule or pay September's fees in advance and receive a discount.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Comment: I don't always agree with Heather du Quesnay, but this does seem to make sense. Other fee-paying schools in Hong Kong work in a similar way (and/or require parents to buy debentures), and as the ESF is a non-profit organization, the interest earned and extra revenue (from operating at capacity) must surely translate into lower fees or better services.

Parents who are lucky enough to have fees paid for them could surely ask their employers to pay the September fees in June.

As for letting parents decide, I believe this has been discussed with the JCPTA, and full consultation with parents would be time-consuming and expensive - and would most likely produce the same result.

ESF announces scheme for companies to pre-book places

From the ESF site:

English Schools Foundation (ESF) announces surety scheme for international employers)

In response to concerns about a shortage of international school places in Hong Kong, ESF has introduced a new scheme to enable companies to secure school places for expatriate employees before their arrival in Hong Kong. The scheme runs from 2 April until 30 June and allows an employer to secure places for the children of incoming employees for the next school year – subject to availability.

“Until now, parents could only apply for places at ESF schools once they had arrived in Hong Kong,” explained Chris Forse, Head of Parent and Student Services at ESF. “This added to the stress of relocating. Where places are available, an employer will now be able to remove that uncertainty.”

The Corporate Surety is a non-refundable payment equivalent to a maximum of three months’ school fees (if paid in April) or a minimum of one month’s fees (if paid in June). If a place is available in the required year group and in the relevant school zone, it may be booked ahead of an expatriate family taking up residence in Hong Kong during the summer months. Children are required to pass a language test upon arrival in Hong Kong.

It's also in today's SCMP (Companies to pre-book places at ESF schools)