Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
GSIS and Ma On Shan
- Thread starter genome
- Start date
I can see that it is not as easy for the Board to back down as one might think. Once the Board has taken the view that it is in the best interest of the school to do the renovation and to move to MOS (and I think they have indeed committed to such a view), then they will have to justify any change of mind on their part. They can't justify it by merely saying that the parents vote against the "compromise proposal" in the 1st EGM. As to the resolutions proposed by the requisitionists in the 2nd EGM, the Board is more or less saying that they have no legal effect as the Board alone has the final say on the matter. Looking at the survey result itself, 41.45% of the respondents voted against the move. On the other side, 38.2% voted for it and 18.81% left it to the Board to make the decision. So if the Board decides to make the move, they can say they have 57% of the respondents supporting them. Of course, there is one big problem with this survey as well as the EGM. In the case of the survey, only 49.2% of the parents gave a response. In the case of EGM, I expect the number of parents who are going to turn up will even be less. So how can one say in the circumstances that the survey result and the EGM result represent the view of the majority of the parents?
but is this not the case in all votes? If you have an opinion and care about something is it not worth excercising your vote? or taking part in a survey regarding a particular subject?
Regarding the board. They are the ones that have found themselves in this particular situation and should not be looking for excuses or hiding behind some vague statement that not everyone has voted. They should have been more in touch with the school and the feeling within the school. After all they are the board of a school not some company that produces widgets.
Everyone that has the chance to vote should vote or else in my opinion they have given up their right to take part in the decisoin making process.
Regarding the board. They are the ones that have found themselves in this particular situation and should not be looking for excuses or hiding behind some vague statement that not everyone has voted. They should have been more in touch with the school and the feeling within the school. After all they are the board of a school not some company that produces widgets.
Everyone that has the chance to vote should vote or else in my opinion they have given up their right to take part in the decisoin making process.
genome,
Don't be upset by what I said. I am just put forward points for people to consider. Going back to your point, I guess there are millions of reason why people do not bother to take place in the survey or to vote at the EGM. Taking the EGM for example, some may think that they do not really care whether the "compromise proposal" is passed or not. One way or the other, it won't affect the decision as to whether the school is going to move to MOS. As to the 2nd EGM, they may think it's a waste of time because the resolutions won't have any legal effect anytime. The gist is that we have never been asked to vote yes or no to MOS. Furthermore, the Board has never said the final decision is going to be made by the parents at EGM. So it's not exactly right to say that those who fails to vote or even turn up have given up their right to take part in the decision making process because the decision is with the Board and not us.
Don't be upset by what I said. I am just put forward points for people to consider. Going back to your point, I guess there are millions of reason why people do not bother to take place in the survey or to vote at the EGM. Taking the EGM for example, some may think that they do not really care whether the "compromise proposal" is passed or not. One way or the other, it won't affect the decision as to whether the school is going to move to MOS. As to the 2nd EGM, they may think it's a waste of time because the resolutions won't have any legal effect anytime. The gist is that we have never been asked to vote yes or no to MOS. Furthermore, the Board has never said the final decision is going to be made by the parents at EGM. So it's not exactly right to say that those who fails to vote or even turn up have given up their right to take part in the decision making process because the decision is with the Board and not us.
Not upset in anyway. I am just saying that parents have been given the chance to express their opinion through voting they should do so. It does no good if you take the attitude that "whether I vote or not the decions is not up to me anyway so why should I bother."
In respect to if the board decides to recognise this or not that is up to them. It would however be a very strange sitution if the board decided to go ahead if the vote for Ma On Shan was a resounding NO from the parents at the EGM. I have been told by one of the board members that he would want no part of the board if they decided to go ahead with MOS if the parents had voted NO.
Like all things in life we make choices and live with the consequences of those choices.
Hope you have a good weekend.
In respect to if the board decides to recognise this or not that is up to them. It would however be a very strange sitution if the board decided to go ahead if the vote for Ma On Shan was a resounding NO from the parents at the EGM. I have been told by one of the board members that he would want no part of the board if they decided to go ahead with MOS if the parents had voted NO.
Like all things in life we make choices and live with the consequences of those choices.
Hope you have a good weekend.
genome,
DGS is also undergoing a major redevelopment. They are constructing classroom wings, a new assembly hall, a library, a new school hall, a new swimming pool....etc (see DIOCESAN GIRLS' SCHOOL). They are raising $380M which is a figure not too far away from the construction cost estimated by GSIS. But it will only take them 2 years to do and complete the construction works. If you know any board members, can you ask them why it will take us 4 years to do the work?
To be honest, I think the parents' wishes are just one of the factors to consider. What is most important and perhaps the only consideration is that the board is under a duty to act in the best interests of the school. I must emphasis that "the school" in this context goes far beyond the existing students. It also includes the future students. It is wrong for any board member to resign solely on the ground that the board's decision is not in line with the existing parents' wishes. He must decide himself what the best interest of the school is. After using his best endeavours, if the school still decides to act against what he thinks is the school's interest, only then should he resign.
If the board merely acts according to the wishes of the existing parents, then I can see a problem eg. what would happen if say after 10 years there is still no acceptable site available? Who is to guarantee or even know when one will become available? Shall we wait indefinitely? Another problem is that the identities of the parents keep on changing over time. If we shall keep on asking the approval of the parents every year, then in 2 years time, all those parents whose kids are now in the upper primary will not care anymore because their kids will then be in the secondary. However, all those whose kids are now in kindergarten and lower primary will take up the opposition. Who wants to sacrifice when, after a delay of 2 or 3 years, the problem will no longer be yours? When is this going to end? It won't end unless and until there is a nearby site available and God knows when, if ever, it is going to happen.
I really wish that the board members are reading this thread. I think they must tell the parents in detail all the facts and information and explain to them clearly what the board thinks is in the best interests of the school and why it is so. Once decided, they must act accordingly. It's scary to read in the history of redevelopment plans that the architects appointed by the school already concluded back in 2001 that a new building is the only solution to address space needs. The board must decide whether the lack of space is now an urgent problem that needs to be fixed. If yes, discharge your duty and do something about it! If no, shelve the plan! Whatever happens, please make sure that the high quality of education will be maintained! I guarantee that you will see loads of people jumping ship as soon as there is any sign of deterioration. If that happens, even the best campus in the world would not help.
DGS is also undergoing a major redevelopment. They are constructing classroom wings, a new assembly hall, a library, a new school hall, a new swimming pool....etc (see DIOCESAN GIRLS' SCHOOL). They are raising $380M which is a figure not too far away from the construction cost estimated by GSIS. But it will only take them 2 years to do and complete the construction works. If you know any board members, can you ask them why it will take us 4 years to do the work?
To be honest, I think the parents' wishes are just one of the factors to consider. What is most important and perhaps the only consideration is that the board is under a duty to act in the best interests of the school. I must emphasis that "the school" in this context goes far beyond the existing students. It also includes the future students. It is wrong for any board member to resign solely on the ground that the board's decision is not in line with the existing parents' wishes. He must decide himself what the best interest of the school is. After using his best endeavours, if the school still decides to act against what he thinks is the school's interest, only then should he resign.
If the board merely acts according to the wishes of the existing parents, then I can see a problem eg. what would happen if say after 10 years there is still no acceptable site available? Who is to guarantee or even know when one will become available? Shall we wait indefinitely? Another problem is that the identities of the parents keep on changing over time. If we shall keep on asking the approval of the parents every year, then in 2 years time, all those parents whose kids are now in the upper primary will not care anymore because their kids will then be in the secondary. However, all those whose kids are now in kindergarten and lower primary will take up the opposition. Who wants to sacrifice when, after a delay of 2 or 3 years, the problem will no longer be yours? When is this going to end? It won't end unless and until there is a nearby site available and God knows when, if ever, it is going to happen.
I really wish that the board members are reading this thread. I think they must tell the parents in detail all the facts and information and explain to them clearly what the board thinks is in the best interests of the school and why it is so. Once decided, they must act accordingly. It's scary to read in the history of redevelopment plans that the architects appointed by the school already concluded back in 2001 that a new building is the only solution to address space needs. The board must decide whether the lack of space is now an urgent problem that needs to be fixed. If yes, discharge your duty and do something about it! If no, shelve the plan! Whatever happens, please make sure that the high quality of education will be maintained! I guarantee that you will see loads of people jumping ship as soon as there is any sign of deterioration. If that happens, even the best campus in the world would not help.
I just want to make this perfectly clear to everyone that is reading this thread.
All parents that are against Ma On Shan want the GSIS to stay the top premier school that it is. We all want the school to develop and attain its potential. We all believe in the school and its community is the best in Hong Kong and are proud to be part of it. We also all care about the future History of the school in that we want to be part of it and want to reap the benefits of the future and sacrifices that we may have to put in to it. This does not however mean that we should just standby and let a board make a decision on our behalf that we feel is wrong. On the small issues it is no big deal on the larger ones it would be reckless of us as parents not to say anything. .
There are too many stake holders in other institutions that have done nothing and just let the board decide for them and look at the consequences. Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citi Bank, AIG and many more which we are all aware of.
The people that are against Ma On Shan do not think that Ma On is the correct answer to the decanting problem and feel that there must be other solutions to finding and appropriate site. This after all is Hong Kong a place that has always prided itself on "If there is a will there is a way"
Happy Hour if you are interested to find out why it is going to take four years to rebuild the school feel free to post this question to the board in person this friday in that they will all be there. Also may be worth asking them that if they knew in 2001 that the school needed space why are they only doing something about it in 2010/11 almost a decade later.
All parents that are against Ma On Shan want the GSIS to stay the top premier school that it is. We all want the school to develop and attain its potential. We all believe in the school and its community is the best in Hong Kong and are proud to be part of it. We also all care about the future History of the school in that we want to be part of it and want to reap the benefits of the future and sacrifices that we may have to put in to it. This does not however mean that we should just standby and let a board make a decision on our behalf that we feel is wrong. On the small issues it is no big deal on the larger ones it would be reckless of us as parents not to say anything. .
There are too many stake holders in other institutions that have done nothing and just let the board decide for them and look at the consequences. Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citi Bank, AIG and many more which we are all aware of.
The people that are against Ma On Shan do not think that Ma On is the correct answer to the decanting problem and feel that there must be other solutions to finding and appropriate site. This after all is Hong Kong a place that has always prided itself on "If there is a will there is a way"
Happy Hour if you are interested to find out why it is going to take four years to rebuild the school feel free to post this question to the board in person this friday in that they will all be there. Also may be worth asking them that if they knew in 2001 that the school needed space why are they only doing something about it in 2010/11 almost a decade later.
Since happyhour mentioned the redevelopment plan of DGS, I believe that they are not even half way in achieving the fund they targeted even at this moment.
When even DGS is having a hard time rising the fund, I really wonder how GSIS can do the job when the decanting issue is raising so much frustration in the community. Are parents going to make their donation?? Are there any more BIG funding from BIG Corp? Are there that many expects' children willing to go MOS? The reason that only 49% did the survey is that most secondary parents are not interested in the issue. And, we cannot take that view from the school. No matter what the result is, do not waste the right to vote that we have. Let's all go vote this Friday.
When even DGS is having a hard time rising the fund, I really wonder how GSIS can do the job when the decanting issue is raising so much frustration in the community. Are parents going to make their donation?? Are there any more BIG funding from BIG Corp? Are there that many expects' children willing to go MOS? The reason that only 49% did the survey is that most secondary parents are not interested in the issue. And, we cannot take that view from the school. No matter what the result is, do not waste the right to vote that we have. Let's all go vote this Friday.
Just quick question by moving the Primary out to MOS does that not take the school way out of any kind of catchment area that would be appropriate for the school if it were to follow government catchment guidelines? I am sure that those guidelines are there for a reason and would not be surprised if they had to do with travel times, learning benefits ie children not showing up at school worn out due to journey. Safety and a whole slew of other vaid valuable reasons.
If anyone knows would be curious of the answer.
If anyone knows would be curious of the answer.
I have just come cross a section called? Allocation of a School? in the Education Bureau?s website (see EDB - Allocation of a School). In the Press Release (see SED: Move to develop vibrant international school community), it said that there were 15 schools competing for the 3 school sites awarded in 2008. Four greenfield sites (in Kowloon Bay, Lai Chi Kok, Sai Kung and Tuen Mun) are now being earmarked for IS and 31 parties have already expressed interest. So apart from us, there are many schools out there looking for school sites. In fact, I would say that we are probably handicapped by the fact that we have already been given one site at Pokfulam Road. The Press Release also said that one school premises in the Eastern district was not allocated to any school because the proposals submitted ?fell short of the School Allocation Committee's expectations?. So even in the unlikely event that a perfect site which meets all our requirements becomes available and we are the only school applying for it, it doesn?t mean that we will get it automatically as we must still meet the School Allocation Committee's expectations (whatever they means!). Perhaps we should ponder this question "could it be that securing a school site might not be as easy as we think?"
Genome, you said that ?the people that are against MOS do not think that MOS is the correct answer to the decanting problem and feel that there must be other solutions to finding and appropriate site.? But my question is ?what are the solutions?? When is the solution going to appear? I know how strongly you and others feel against MOS. But wouldn?t you agree that nobody really has an answer to these questions or even has an vague idea as to what and when, if ever, the problem will be solved.
I also look at the ?compromise proposal? made by the school. I understand that the school proposes to keep the Y1 and Y2 kids in Pokfulam premises. What it actually means is that instead of having 6 levels (Y1 to Y6) affected each year (which make it a total of 24 levels over 4 years), we shall now have 4 levels (Y3 to Y6) affected each year (which make it a total of 16 levels over 4 years). Furthermore, in the original proposal, those who are in Y1, Y2 and Y3 at the start of the redevelopment will stay in MOS for the whole period of 4 years. In the compromise proposal, only those who are in Y3 at the start of the redevelopment will stay there for 4 years. I know that some parents may think it is not good enough. But I think we still ought to look at it before coming to a decision.
Friday is coming. Nevertheless, I don?t expect to see the argument coming to an end soon. If the requisitionists fail, then they may vote with their feet. If they win, then there will be 3 scenarios. First, the Board may back down in which case they will have to explain to the school community why it is no longer in the best interest of the school to move to MOS. The second possibility is that the Board may maintain its position in which case the dissenting parents may say goodbye to GSIS or they may start a legal action. Thirdly, the Board may just call another EGM and try to get Friday?s decisions overruled. As I see it, the rift will just get bigger over time.
In any event and regardless of what may happen, I think the Board must not shun its duty and responsibility, that is, to act in the best interests of the school. Please consider all the factors carefully and make the decision which you think is the right one in the circumstances.
Genome, you said that ?the people that are against MOS do not think that MOS is the correct answer to the decanting problem and feel that there must be other solutions to finding and appropriate site.? But my question is ?what are the solutions?? When is the solution going to appear? I know how strongly you and others feel against MOS. But wouldn?t you agree that nobody really has an answer to these questions or even has an vague idea as to what and when, if ever, the problem will be solved.
I also look at the ?compromise proposal? made by the school. I understand that the school proposes to keep the Y1 and Y2 kids in Pokfulam premises. What it actually means is that instead of having 6 levels (Y1 to Y6) affected each year (which make it a total of 24 levels over 4 years), we shall now have 4 levels (Y3 to Y6) affected each year (which make it a total of 16 levels over 4 years). Furthermore, in the original proposal, those who are in Y1, Y2 and Y3 at the start of the redevelopment will stay in MOS for the whole period of 4 years. In the compromise proposal, only those who are in Y3 at the start of the redevelopment will stay there for 4 years. I know that some parents may think it is not good enough. But I think we still ought to look at it before coming to a decision.
Friday is coming. Nevertheless, I don?t expect to see the argument coming to an end soon. If the requisitionists fail, then they may vote with their feet. If they win, then there will be 3 scenarios. First, the Board may back down in which case they will have to explain to the school community why it is no longer in the best interest of the school to move to MOS. The second possibility is that the Board may maintain its position in which case the dissenting parents may say goodbye to GSIS or they may start a legal action. Thirdly, the Board may just call another EGM and try to get Friday?s decisions overruled. As I see it, the rift will just get bigger over time.
In any event and regardless of what may happen, I think the Board must not shun its duty and responsibility, that is, to act in the best interests of the school. Please consider all the factors carefully and make the decision which you think is the right one in the circumstances.
About this archive
This is an archive of over 20 years of GeoBaby and GeoSchools knowledge and discussions, kept online as a read-only reference.