of implementing the decision, according to the state is around NIS 65 million only (US $16,250,000). 2) "Budgetary allocations for minority education should be transparent and amenable to external scrutiny" This provision is extremely important. Israel, for example, does not regularly release official data detailing how much it spends in total on each Arab student compared with each Jewish student. The failure to release such data greatly hampers advocacy work aimed at securing equality in budgetary allocations and perpetuates the current state of inequality and under-achievement. The lack of information provided in this area indicates a lack of a genuine commitment to achieve this equality, particularly in light of data provided released by the Central Bureau of Statistics in 2004 which revealed that for the academic year 2000-2001, state investment in Arab school students totaled on average 534 New Israeli Shekels per student, compared to 1,779 per Jewish student; i.e. over three times as much. The result is more students per class (almost 30 students per class in Arab schools as compared to 26 in Jewish schools); fewer teaching hours per class (48 in the Arab education system as compared to 50 in the Jewish education system); and fewer teaching hours per student (1.62 teaching hours per Arab student as compared with 1.95 teaching hours per Jewish student), to cite just a few figures. In addition to recommending transparency in budgetary allocations, additional language is required specifying that budgetary allocation should also be disaggregated according to gender to allow for scrutiny of budgets for girls from minority groups. Section IV - Equal Access to Quality Education for Minorities In Adalah's opinion, the language in this section should be strengthened as well: 1) "Adequate resources should be provided so that education is a financially viable proposition for members of minorities" The current wording of the following provision is inadequate. Adequate resources are not necessarily equal resources, and as it currently stands this provision would not contribute to the efforts of many minority groups for equal rights and opportunities in education. 2) "Members of minorities must have realistic and effective access to [quality] educational services" This language is inadequate and vague. This provision is unlikely to act as an impetus to states, since what constitutes “realistic and effective” access to education is subject to wide interpretation. As noted in the ICESR and General Comment 13, accessibility has three overlapping dimensions: Non-discrimination on any of the prohibited grounds; physical accessibility; and economic accessibility. 3) "Barriers to educational access may be the result of single or multiple factors, whether physical or social, financial or pedagogical. States need to address all such factors in order to promote effective access, especially in cases where barriers to