We're gonna talk about a few things.  Two K followers is under my threshold. Scamming content creators. And there's the re-roll. Tax fraud. So it appears that our boy Noah hasn't been paying his taxes. Abusing employees. I'm scared of him. Like he's done, I've seen him do horrible things to people. And stealing intellectual property. Not done by a company, but all done by a single person. So in case you haven't heard, yesterday was the pinnacle of all scuminess. A small streamer named Kia Pia was the winner of a PC giveaway being hosted by a company called Artesian Builds. You may have heard of them. They pay a lot of big streamers to partner with them. Some big ones being Mizkif, S-Fan, Amaranth, I believe, and Aiden Ross. Now this wasn't just a normal giveaway. This was an ambassador giveaway, which means as long as you advertise Artesian Builds on your social media platforms, you were eligible to win the PC. However, on this stream, apparently the rules changed because Noah, the CEO of Artesian Builds, said that he would be doing his due diligence to make sure that the person winning the PC was deserving of it.  So this streamer, Kia Pia, is randomly selected as the winner of the PC and as they're doing a background check on her, Noah decides that she doesn't have enough of a following to be worthy of the PC, so they re-roll it. Here is Noah judging her social media. Two K followers is under my threshold. Three days ago, he's within my threshold. Long streams, which is good. See if you have redeeming, redeeming qualities. Here is Noah belittling her social media. Okay. All followers combined, still under 5K, even across multiple socials. I was trying to be generous. That's a tough one. And then here is Noah happily re-rolling the giveaway winner. And there's the re-roll. Here's the reason, chatterbabies. This person has three months of ambassadorship and not a single click. Not a single click. Not even once. Urged.  The guy is literally checking to see if his ambassadors, which is basically a shitty name for an affiliate program, has enough clout before he gives away the computer. First of all, that's no longer legally a giveaway anymore. But there is so much more to this story that no one else has talked about. Before we get into it, I just want to say this. Artesian bills is not bad. Noah Katz, the CEO, is. Let me start from the beginning. I bite my tongue a lot. As a matter of fact, I tweeted about it and it was actually received pretty poorly because people thought that I was implying that content creators should always work with me for their PC needs, which is actually not the case at all. I want people to do well. If you're one of my creator friends and you get sponsored to use another PC from a company, I am genuinely happy for you. What I'm not happy about is having to bite my tongue about the practices of the company that you are being paid to promote. And that's not your job. It's not your job to know as a creator what those PC companies do. You're busy and there's no way for you to know all of the issues with computers like I know. For example, last month I drove down to LA to a professional League of Legends players house to fix their $5,000 gaming PC. That PC was from a company that currently sponsors a lot of my streamer friends. The problem with this PC is that it was overheating to the point where every single time this computer launched a game, it would just shut down. The problem I went and saw that they used really cheap thermal paste and they used a bad case. All of this could have been solved for less than $100 for a $5,000 computer. Long story short, PC companies suck. But I get it. They have employees, they have to pay overhead and in bulk orders, things are gonna fall through the cracks. It comes with running such a large operation at scale. But Artesian is one company that I've had multiple run-ins with behind the scenes.  In my experience, they are the PCs that I've been asked to fix more often privately than anything else. I've taken a look inside a few of them now and some of the issues that are caused in there are not issues that are caused by shipping. So naturally I've slowly been building up a negative impression of them in my mind. And then one day I decided, you know what? I'll stop by their live stream. I type in chat during a build and Noah sees the message and the first thing he says is to the effect of, oh Christopher Yee, I saw you did a collab with Linus Tech Tips. How much can I pay you to get me in a room with him? Ew, nobody does that. I know people are ugly and think what they can get out of others but that's stuff that they do privately behind the scenes. No one is just upfront and weird like that. So from that point onwards, every time I would see them work with a creator, I would just privately sigh.   That's what people post on social media, all their big moments. And of course, naturally we start to compare and get a little bit insecure. Whenever I see Tanner from high school posting pictures of his trip to the Caribbean, I start to think, damn, I'm not doing enough or damn, his life is so much better than mine. Naturally I compare and I feel a little bit worse. That's not the entirety of social media but I would be wrong to say that that isn't a thought that a lot of people have. What Noah has done by measuring and evaluating the worth of a person based upon their number is something that content creators already do to themselves and they don't like it. I would be very interested to find a content creator that has not had the thought at one point or another that their value is tied to their number. It is not a healthy or happy thought to have. Like I get it, right? If you're a company looking to work with other people to advertise your product, naturally you are going to look and evaluate numbers to see if this person is worth the amount of money you're willing to pay. However, all companies at least have the decency to do it privately before they even choose to interact with you. This isn't like a special protocol or anything. This is just human decency. Noah somehow lacks all social awareness and does this to kia-pia live on stream as well as multiple other streamers. All while denying them a free PC as well as humiliating them in front of other people. Now someone who understands the United States sweepstakes law a little bit better than I do in the United States needs to look that up because I'm fairly certain what they're doing is illegal. But if that isn't somehow, I know what definitely is. Artesian builds in the merch section of their website are selling stickers with intellectual property that does not belong to them. Tesla, Ryzen, Gur from Invader Zim. God, my age is showing. Super Mario from Nintendo. Do you have the rights to any of that, Noah? Because I would be very surprised to hear that Nintendo of all companies somehow allowed you to monetize their stuff. Coming back to the original point of the giveaway, I'm actually very surprised that Noah is denying people free computers based on Clout.  On top of that, if Clout is such an important thing to him, I don't understand how he lives with his YouTube channel. Like I said, they have partnered with big streamers and uploaded those videos onto YouTube. And yet, even with how insanely large some of those creators are, they're only able to pull 2,000 views on S-Fan's custom PC?  S-Fan, the holy pallet of Twitch, an OG streamer. That's the best you could do.   And by the way, artesian is something about wells.   Artesian is a word that has something to do about water wells. You took 120 millimeter fans and put them in an oversized open-air toaster oven. Custom does not mean good.  S-Fan is a creator with so much history and the fact that this is the best you could do is humiliating. He's either the only one or one of two streamers to ever be able to partner with the NFL to live stream the games. How is that reference not incorporated into this build? This whole collab just strikes me as you just wanted to interact with someone who had big numbers so that hopefully your stream would get more viewers, which is something I'm gonna come back to later. And if Noah does happen to watch this video and it seems to be getting personal, it is. I was recently sent this DM as I'm working on this video when I announced it on Twitter. Just to bring it to your attention, Noah has said on his stream how he specifically dislikes you. This was an old stream a few months ago where you were attending Mod Monday with Intel where Noah said something along the lines of you not deserving to be on the panel of Mod Monday and said that Noah himself would have done a better job. I tried to look through their VODs to find a clip but their VODs only go back about two months. Feel free to include this in the video but I prefer not to be named if possible. I worked with them previously in the past to source GPUs and I'd like to avoid any possibility of retaliation. You sound like a pompous, cocky, egotistical human being that doesn't have the ability to empathize or relate to another human being. And I'm not sure if you know this but you kind of need that. What else I find interesting is that at the end of this message, this individual shares a sentiment that is something everyone else who has come forward to me about their experience working with Noah Katz. I fear retaliation. I was approached by someone who has contact with an ex-employee of Artesian builds who indicated that she would like to talk.  It's hard to cover everything that happened during that two and a half hour talk but essentially she had to work a bunch of different jobs primarily handling the art and the special PCs that creators who were partnering with Artesian builds were a part of. There was a lot of pressure, stress and rush that was coming from Noah. And just so you get an idea of it, I will play a clip here and show one of the texts so you have an understanding of what that relationship was like. I'm scared of him. Okay.   Fortunately, she's no longer working with him but unfortunately a lot of the art that she created that is still being sold on that website she is no longer making money from. So in the description, I am putting a link to her website where you can check out her art and her projects so she can properly get the credit that apparently she was never given at any point while working with Artesian builds. Obviously, as you can see from the interview this isn't an Artesian builds problem. This is a Noah Katz problem. I don't want people attacking like they already have been on Twitter, the other employees of this company. They were wrapped up in the narrative of someone else who knows how to talk and sell the other people working with him a pipe dream. Now I know some of you might be thinking, okay, well, why not just quit the job if it's that bad? It's not that easy. For three years of my life, I worked for somebody else I believed in helping them build up their dream. They always told me how I would grow and there'd be these great opportunities and how I was becoming a better person.  Eventually what happened was is that my dad got sick with cancer. That is what drove me to the point of realizing I needed to leave that situation. My point is that it is not easy to get out of situations like that when you have someone above you who is manipulating you. What's interesting is that as I've been making this video, there have been other ex-employees that have reached out who are still trying to talk to me about their experience with Noah Katz. They have asked to remain anonymous but I will read quotes from the phone call. He manipulated employees in the company to believe the problems and issues were external to him. Yeah, I think part of that came in.  But when you see the actor off camera and how those things don't align, it very quickly becomes someone trying to fake a narrative. Whenever there is criticism that he can't worm or gaslight his way out of, he goes silent. On top of that, I've been close to creators who have decided to partner with artesian builds. One of them I was particularly close to when I got heavily involved with Grand Theft Auto Role Play. It's cute because as we got closer, she was still too shy to ask me for help to build her a new computer because she didn't want to overstep that boundary of being friends. So she took an artesian builds offer and casually over the last seven months, I have been roasting her about her choice. Hey, look, Luna, a working PC. Michael, you can't say that. I got approached about a partnership. I partnered with them and that's where things got kind of, basically at the time I had 3,000 current viewers, which is a lot. This is during my big RP boom. Basically what our teaching does is they go to smaller streamers that don't know their worth or newer streamers that had a boom such as myself and they approach them with deals that aren't great at all. Well, let me ask you this, what were you offered? What was the number that they came at with you originally? There was no number. I was approached with half off of a PC. What was your deliverables? What did you have to do? They asked every week or every two weeks you throw like an artesian promotion tweet out. They would come into my chat every so often and just plug themselves. Did you have to put any logo or branding anywhere? Yeah, I also had a logo on my stream. For how long? Oh, for all six months. It had to be on there. It had to be on every stream. So let me get this straight. With 3,000 concurrent viewers, they asked you to pay them $3,500 and they got to advertise on your channel for six months with a very intrusive logo. Yes. You know what's funny? You know what'd be actually crazy is if you were a person who needed a new PC and then you were friends with someone whose content was primarily that and then you chose to work with a company instead. Oh, do you know anyone? That'd be funny, dude. That'd be funny. Wouldn't that be crazy if you were a person who did something like that? Sorry, do you know any? I don't know anyone. Oh, really? Oh, wait, you used to do that but then you became an RP streamer. Anyways, thanks so much for your time. Good luck with your stream today. This was great. On top of that, once I announced on Twitter that I would be working on this video, the CEO of V1Tech Hassan who I have worked with multiple times and other collabs for big partner builds was aware of Artesian builds because privately during conversations I had mentioned that they have a similar product that they charge double for. And on top of it, some of the art on their websites are literal exact one-for-one copies as V1Tech. You know what the best part is? The guy has $150,000 BMW i8 and couldn't bring himself to give away a $2,000 if that PC. That's funny. We should give one away now. Do you want to? I was gonna ask. That was one of the other things I was gonna follow up on is like, do you wanna do a giveaway like off of the momentum of this? Cause I'd happily. Yeah, let's do it. Okay. And let's do it like this where whoever wins it gets to pick the theme and we'll work with them on a video on actually going through and designing it just the way you would do it for like Ludwig. So it doesn't matter if they have one follower we're gonna give them the same treatment would give one of the offline TV members. Okay, I'm down. Super gracious of us on for sponsoring this PC giveaway which I will be promoting on my Twitter as well as my Twitch streams. So if you're not following either of those please do so now unless you don't like free computers which is totally fine just sign up for my ambassador program. And last but not least one thing I wanna know is this the vibe that I am getting is that Noah doesn't even like PCs. He just really enjoys the clout. Whenever you've done creator builds on your stream you have asked and implied that those creators should host or rage you after they are done with their live streams that is weird in and of itself even creator friends don't talk about that type of stuff. You never ask for a raid you never ask for a host that is completely against the etiquette. That's like saying, hey, give me a shout out but you've also tried to milk their respective communities for more money. And these streams are basically a way to show the partner build but also for them to get subs and stuff. And they encourage this by putting those milestones that people do during subathons.  That is wildly inappropriate. You don't do that. If you are sponsoring someone by providing them a PC or you've already worked out the deals in the terms of your trade you don't further the deal by now exploiting the community that that creator has built for themselves. You don't have a right to that.  You will still only lose money by upgrading that person's graphics card because of the cut that Twitch takes after a gifted sub. That's even if you had the better Twitch contract which I can definitely assume that you don't. You just wanted to flex a bigger number. You wanted to use PCs and others, creators or not to get a bigger number to become a creator or an influencer yourself. And nothing makes that narrative more clear in my mind than this clip. NeoJudai, great question. Artesian Builds was started a couple of years ago when I had too much cactus juice and wanted to become Linus Tech Tips. And now we sort of are. Sort of. We're the PC company Linus Tech Tips would have started if they were also a PC company. No, no, you're not. You go live with your peak content at most pulling 400 viewers.  I've even heard from some of your old employees that you think you are a better PC builder and more knowledgeable on the topic than Linus, Jay's Two Cents and Steve from Gamer's Nexus.  Even in your third apology now on Twitter, you sound so reluctant to be having to even say that you made a mistake. So going forward, any ambassador is eligible to win the PCs. The last thing that I want to say about this topic is this. Do not hate Artesian Builds. There are plenty of people at that company who are just doing their job. This is not about a company. This is about a person who led people astray to help fulfill his own dreams and narrative. The people that work there are not bad people.  To be honest, I don't see this company continuing to work unless Noah himself steps down as a CEO. I do not want to believe that he's an evil person despite all of these actions pointing towards that, but there is no way any amount of change could have happened in him as a person in this short of time. Do not work with or buy Artesian PCs so long as Noah is there. As it is, that business does not deserve any support.


Good morning. This is February 9th. And this is the first day post our traditional town meeting recess. And this is the Vermont house human services committee. And we are today going to finish for and our work, marking up. Oh, it's March 9th. Sorry. We are, we are going to finish marking up h 171. The bill around childcare. Overtown when people have been following this on the Friday before town meeting recess, just as we were adjourning a small group of committee members representative from stead representative small representative. Whitman. And I believe Amy Schoenberger and Morgan, Amy Schoenberger from after school. Vermont and Morgan Crossman from building bright futures and I don't know. Sarah Kenny if let's go kids that you were not involved in this part. The small group worked on re taking our feedback and rewriting the work. We're redrafting making some more changes in these studies. And that is the major part of work that was done over the break. Not counting the work that joint fiscal did in terms of presenting a fiscal note. And the draft. Version five went out Thursday or Friday, the committee all got the draft on Monday or Tuesday. Thank you representative McFawn. You indicated that you had gotten it. The interested parties got the draft on Thursday or Friday and I've had those days to look at it. So that I believe is where we are right now. Katie. Good morning. Good morning. So I will pull up my document. I don't know if you remember how to do this after recess. There we go. Are you looking at section nine. Yes, we are. Okay. And I thought I would just address I know the document that circulated to members last week and other folks with draft 5.1, and we're looking at draft 5.3 today. There are not any major changes, but JFO pointed out a few minor corrections that needed to happen so that's why the number has changed but with regard to the sections we're going to be looking at there are no significant substantive changes that were made between 5.1 and 5.3. Maybe I'll just step back for a minute because it's been a little a couple days since we've looked at this to remind you what the last sections of the bill are. So first in section nine we have the advisory committee. This is an existing committee that will have altered membership to provide advice to both the child development division. This is the agency of human services and it lists all different items that the committee is to provide advice on. There's also in second 10. I'll go back and look at this in more detail, but in section 10. There are there's the systems analysis study in section 11 we have what we were calling the mini study. This is a report on two different items the attendance based model, and also reaching the co payment so families are not paying more than 10% of their gross annual income on childcare and then the last piece that I think we're looking at this morning is the financing study section 12. So those are the four pieces that are kind of in play here and I'll scroll back up to section nine. So as we were leaving on Friday afternoon, the conversation had a lot to do with what age group are each of these pieces focused on. Are we looking at children and families zero through age five are we looking a broader at families with children zero through age 12. And so one of the things that the small group was discussing on Friday afternoon was the age range that applied to each of these pieces. So you'll see with regard to this first piece the advisory committee piece. We have a definition at the very end of this section. So that highlighted piece. But there is a definition section here what do we mean by child care and early childhood education in this particular section. And here, we're saying that it has to do with children. I'm going to highlight children from birth through 12 years of age. I don't know if you can see my pointer but that's on lines 11 and 12 so with regard to this section, we're referring to a broader swath of families for through children 12 years of age. And I'm going to scroll back up to point out to you this highlighted language in yellow. This has to do with the report that is coming there to annual reports that are coming to the relevant committees. And this new yellow language specifies that all the findings and recommendations provided under this subdivision are to be divided into two first birth through age five years of age, and then six through 12 years of age so it makes a distinction of how the data will be presented in these reports broken out broken out by age. So that's the advisory committee. I'm going to keep scrolling down to section 10. And this is the systems analysis. And the conversation here was what age are we looking at. I have systems highlighted throughout because as we were leaving. This was called the governance study and we changed it to systems so I just highlighted everywhere where that change was made. And then you'll see this language with regard to the analysis and recommendations that's being submitted pursuant to this section on systems. It's the same language that the findings and recommendations are divided in the manner that they're presented, birth through age and then six through 12 years of age. And then again we have a definition section that is specific to this section 10, and it is the same as the previous section, and that when we say childcare and early childhood education, we are referring broadly to children birth through 12 years of age. So the definition is section 11 and I don't believe we made any changes in this section since the last time the committee looked at it so scroll past that. That was the mini study for lack of a better phrase for it. And then we have section 12 which was the financing study. So here is where there was a lot of conversation about who, who are we referring to and we're talking about childcare and early education. So the small group decided to handle this by removing the definition of childcare and early education, all together that you've seen in the previous sections that we just reviewed. So we said in the introductory language in this first subsection a specifying that we're looking at Vermont's existing childcare system for children from birth through 12 years of age. So in the introductory language we're setting up that we're kind of taking a big picture of you we're looking at zero through age 12. But then we go on to list the following goals that this financing. The report is going to be looking at. And one of those goals we're specifying that we only want data from birth through five years of age. So even though the big picture for everything else is birth through 12 years of age, as set up in this introductory language, when it comes to a family not spending more than 10% of its gross annual income on childcare. It's for children from birth through five years of age so we're kind of creating a carve out from the general rule that you've set up in subsection a. And then that language is mirrored further down. So we're in subsection C. We're talking about what is in the consultants evaluation, the committee chose to add language that this would take into consideration. The work of the Blue Ribbon Commission, and also the report issued by the universal after school task force and doing this work. So that's new language, and then here it is. So you have language in subdivision to on page 20 that the consultant is to submit a report, and it goes on to detail what is in the results of that report. And again, with regard to identifying and determining the feasibility of implementing a stable long term funding source for affordable high quality early child care system, we're doing it. We're adding another kind of carve out from the rule of zero to 12. And we're saying that this is specifically applies for birth through five years of age, given the childcare is rolling post pandemic stimulus and economic development. So, let me just restate so in subsection at the very beginning of this entire section we're kind of setting out as a general rule, the financing study is looking in all aspects at families with children zero through age 12. Except for when we have a specific carve out with regard to certain areas and those are the carve outs that I pointed out, and those apply to only families with children birth through five years of age. And then you'll notice that I don't have the strike through but there had been a definition section here and that definition section has since been removed to reflect the other changes. So that's it for those four sections, why don't I stop the share. There we go. Thank you. Thank you very much Katie. I am wondering. Representative from stead if you or someone in your in the group that you were part of and refresh our memory, because you were the group. I made some suggestions to the, all of the reports, building bright, the report related to building bright futures, as well as the financing report and the financing report that came in the bill as introduced was very specific around modalities used and how to do the assessment and those kinds of things and those were taken out so to refresh our memory around those two sections while the change that happened between 10 days ago and now 10 days ago Friday and now really had to do with how we balance the fact that after school is part and parcel of the childcare system. Jessica represent brimstead I see that you're, you are no longer that you're ready to speak. I'm muted. Yes, I am. I believe that we did that because we didn't want to narrow what we didn't want to say to the organizations that would be conducting both joint fiscal and building bright futures by naming the specific ways that they could do the research we would be narrowing what they there might be other opportunities and so we took it out but honestly I don't remember us having a long conversation about that as a small subcommittee I just remember us talking about it in the big committee so if anyone in our little committee could remind me I'm wondering honestly if Morgan might have something to add to that as someone who was going to be working on one of these studies and pulling this together. For the record Dr Morgan Crossman executive director of building bright futures and I apologize there's so much work happening in my office so you're going to hear a lot going on in the background. And one of the things that I would mention specific to the, the committee, the advisory committee is that we did include language in the membership membership section so I believe in draft 5.1 on page 12 lines five through nine. We tried to provide some flexibility in studying membership and as I mentioned to this committee. This is an existing committee that is part of a series of committees that advise the governor the legislature the administration on a range of different topic areas. This one is specifically the early learning and development committee but we do have six other committees that support broader efforts in this air in this arena, right so we have a families and communities committee we have a professional preparation and development committee, both of those groups have a series. Sorry, we also have a child outcomes accountability team. Those groups also address some childcare related barriers challenges and concerns so what we tried to do in this section is include broader language to say at the very end lines eight and nine, that the membership of this committee shall engage the following members. And there's a series one through 21 of folks that would be engaged in this work, it doesn't necessarily mean that every single committee will be brought into this committee but that we'll work to make sure that we are engaging those other committees and all of the groups represented here to make sure that we have consistency and alignment across some of our work there. With respect to the addition on page 14 lines six through nine, where there's a section saying all findings and recommendations will be divided by these subsections that is completely acceptable based on our work. Our work is broad in terms of the early childhood spectrum we actually operate prenatal and in some cases through age 12. It makes complete sense for us to have that breakdown of zero to five and six to age 12 and we're happy to do that in all the different areas of our work. Thanks for again, I wonder maybe Nolan could help them on this question of why we took out all of the. I'm just looking for the actual language that's not there in some of my older versions. Clarification Madam Chair are we were you asking about section 12 and the resources or tools that were expected that the committee would use because I think I was removed from the larger committee discussion we really focused on the language of zero to 12 and other group discussion following Friday's committee. Okay. Thank you for that clarification represents small. I was. I was asking about the. The broader discussion and partly to set the stage for. To bring us back as to why we did that so that when we hear from. Let's grow kids and sort of their suggestion and wanting to put it back in. Why we did what we did. And I. I am remembering the representative Rosenquist. I see your hand and break into that I just wanted to make a comment on this section here because okay go ahead. Before that I thought we should include the associated industries of Vermont. As far as one of the businesses because they represent. A broader spectrum of businesses not necessarily the larger businesses like the business round table. But they represent a key sector of our smaller businesses in the state of Vermont. So I believe they should be included in this group. Thank you representative Rosenquist representative Wood. Thank you madam chair. I was recalling the same thing that represents small did and represent from said in terms of our broader discussion, not wanting to limit the people who may bid on these studies. And the question was, I'm still struggling a little bit with section 12 and trying to understand the birth through 12 years of age so we have that broad, you know, introductory paragraph that Katie spoke to. And then we narrow it down so any of the financial reports deal with it seems like it's, it seems odd to me. That we go from this broad and but yet then we only want information for this carve out of children birth through five years of age in the financial I realize the other studies include both age groups. But in the financial part, it seems like we're only asking for birth through five years of age. We're asking for birth through five years of age on the financial side of things and any changes we make in birth through five will impact after school. So I am having a hard time understanding why we aren't asking for the birth through five and the six through 12. And it's kind of like, you know, we push in here, it is going to pop out here so I'm not sure how we can ask for one without understanding the implications for the other. Excellent question. And Amy Shullen, burger might help may be able to help this was one of the pieces that we all struggled with for a while after our meeting like how to limit how broad the study is but yet also get all the information that's necessary in order to make sure the after crowd felt that we were doing we were pulling the right information. Can you help Amy a little bit and how we came down to this. Is that okay madam chair. Absolutely we're having we're in the committee room and we're having a discussion. I'm Amy Schullen burger and I'm here representing Vermont after school today and again Holly more house since her regrets she's at the summer tasks task force meeting with the governor staff so a lot going on in this area. So first of all, I want to say I'm not 100% sure this is the right answer. It's the best to try to sort this out so I'm going to leave it to the committee's wisdom, but the idea that I was trying to get across was I know that originally, this study was meant to look at the early childhood, the whole system and the after school task force universal after school task force which rep Paula is co chairing is looking at the whole after school system. Also, and so I thought that rather than duplicating what the universal after school task force is doing that this study maybe could focus on just zero to five for the financing. And if I understand the language right this is not only CCF AP financing but the whole system which that's why my suggestion was to limit it to birth to five just for that particular area. But again if I misunderstood that or if the committee, obviously if the committee disagrees that that's up to you all. And that helps me in terms of understanding maybe what the intent was and see representative pile is got her hand up, but I think that if that's what the intent is because it seems like it's an when reading this it feels like there's an omission. And so, if that is the intent that maybe we need to put something in here about the after school study or something you know that this would be combined with the right and I know that said earlier in earlier parts of the of the bill, but maybe around this financing piece we also need to reference that if the the groups that represent pile is chairing is going to deal with financing as well. We have. Yeah, sorry. Yeah. No as we say we have lots of hands up. And for the discussion and just what I am under. When we began this journey, several weeks ago we were focused on zero to five and we were focused on what was and what is our law. What is our North Star or not our North Star being that no Vermonter with children would pay more than 10% of their income on childcare. We weren't ready to go there completely until we have a study, a financial study. And that that's, that's when we, some of what representative would and the after school program and others and representative would brought brought up or identified that.  That's, that's where I believe where we sort of are right now. Representative by yellow small and McFawn. I just wanted to echo that what Amy had said about the fact that we were recognizing that the long term financing study. She was talking zero to five and that there's a separate discussion going on around long term financing for after school. And that we, we didn't want to duplicate efforts, but I like Teresa's thought that having another clarifying sentence or something. Making that a little bit more clear is a good idea. I think that the, the overlap of the two is really CCF AP but because that's only what 20% of the people utilizing the overall system. That isn't the solution to the whole problem for both for all age groups so and I think that the after school task force doesn't doesn't want to be in competition with zero to five in terms of whatever the long term financing mechanisms are. I just wanted to toss that in. It's likely to be likely to be different sources of revenue to to go to each system. Okay, thank you. Representative small and then representative McFawn. Thank you madam chair, three quick things I promise. The first is agreeing with representative wood and including that language so that it doesn't seem like we are leaving out use the six to 12. The second is clarifying for representative Rosengfest that we have three representatives from the business community in the building bright futures larger group and it's on the Vermont business round table Vermont business for social responsibility and then the application of independent businesses. I didn't necessarily touch the exact one that you were hoping for but wondering if it was one of those three. And the last is adding in, I think it would be great to hear testimony again from Nolan on the pieces to why we remove those tools in the first place from the financing study and those are my pieces. Thank you thank you representative small I think the man thank you for pointing out who is on who has been identified as members of the group. We went to organizations as opposed to lack of a better term industry specific because each of those organizations one has has on some level a different political bent. As one might say so we have. And each has as their members, a diversity of industries. And so that may not be what you are looking for representative Rosenguist that is I believe the impetus for how that was and there were if you recall there were no members in on this committee in the bill as introduced, and it was at the request of the business groups that we added them, and they're, you know, that there was a choice. There was a choice in terms of doing it by size or doing it by industry, or doing it by organizations that will that represented diversity and so that we certainly can revisit that if you like representative Rosenguist later, but that I I understand and I had forgotten representative small pointed out that representative of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, and I've forgotten that on this list and they probably would satisfy the concern I had about some smaller businesses being represented. So thank you representative small. Thank you. Representative McFawn. Thank you madam chair. I want to put my two cents in on the language. If we're going to get a comprehensive financial report. I think we have to include the six through 12. Number two. I don't know what authority by what authority, the after school group is doing their study. I don't want to see things going at cross purposes. I don't want to engage a consultant to do this to do all of this. And that consultant is going to use certain tools to come up and they're going to be involved with certain identities, gathering this information for us. If we've got somebody else, taking, you know, approximately half of the people that may be in these daycare centers, or these childcare centers. I'm just searching out this information with a different tool all together. I'm just wondering whether or not that would run, you'd be running across purposes. If you understand what I'm saying you got two groups studying the day, day, day, the childcare program. One affects the other there's no question about it, because daycare a, if they have zero to six, and then people coming in after school. You're studying that particular business, you're going to, you understand what I'm saying you're getting facts from different places, and using a different tool. I would rather see the consultant do the whole thing. I think then you get, you get that. If they want to coordinate with somebody that's looking into it. I don't know if there's an official thing that the after school program is doing a lot. So representative McFawn, I'm going to put representative by Ella on the spot. And if she needs consultation from the after school group, or, or joint fiscal but she is the co chair of the after school, something group. And that she's going to be better than I am at pinpointing the where in statute or in the white books, there was the authority to do to have this group. So I've set the stage for you. So I'll actually point to page 19 line nine to point out where under what authority, the after school task force is operating and it, the task force was set up in the, the budget, built the end of last year. And so we're what the task force is doing is, it is in parallel actually to this it's kind of looking at what the long term goal is of providing universal after school statewide is both by increasing access and more equitable programming everywhere I mean that they're much like childcare there are gaps in parts of the state where after school isn't offered at all and then their programs that know have challenges with the number of people they can serve and the types of people that they're able to serve and their transportation issues just like in the childcare sector so, you know, it's dealing with that other age group of kids but it is essentially doing the same thing I think that what we're trying to do is is lay out a roadmap for what the system for after school can look like to, to have it be a more universal program and looking at all of the different funding sources that go into after school, because there are several programs and programs often use braided funding streams so, but there's still not enough money right like in all things there's not enough money so we're trying to in parallel with this we're looking at what a long term steady funding stream could be to to increase access everywhere and at the moment, the, the stream that the after school task force is looking at is the most money that would be hopefully continuing to go to the prevention fund and that prevention dollars would be used to help fund after school. But of course that's several years out so there's, you know, what we're able to do now in anticipation of a long term funding stream coming online in the future. I don't, does that answer all of your questions representative McFawn. No, I appreciate that explanation. My question, the question that comes up to me is, there are certain dates that the universal after school task force. Do they have certain dates that they have to meet to provide certain information on that are they commensurate with the dates that this consultant has to provide certain information because if the consultant is going along. And let's say on November first, they have to come up with some information for us, and the after school task force is going along. Their date to come up with the information is January. That means that consultant doesn't have that information. Right, so the short answer to that is yes the timeline is fine we've been meeting since right before session started our last meeting is going to be on the 29th, and the report that we are working on is do on April 15. So all of the work that year of what year this year. Okay, so, so you're going to have that information by April 15, which this consultant probably won't even have started by then. Correct. So all of the information that we are working on will be finalized and available for the consultant to use. In this study and the, the, it is the report that is due on April 15 is mentioned. Again, on page 19 lines eight and nine. So that will be available to be used in this study so that it's not a duplication of efforts or Okay, so I'm going to. Topper, excuse me representative McFawn. Yeah, DCF financial director Sarah Truckel has been waiting patiently and the wings with her hand up and given the fact that she's the finance director I'm thinking that she has something to add to this conversation. So before we get. I'd like to have her insert her comments and then we can go back. You asked me, you're asking me to relinquish my time. I will reserve some time though. I'm sure you will thank you represent McFawn. Sarah please. Thank you madam chair Sarah Truckel DCF finance director for the record. So that was important to bring up that in the governor's three year plan. So this year in our FY 22 budget we are actually moving to that family co pay in the CC FAP program, which means that we are including after school and school age children age six through 12 in that family co pay who are attending regulated care. In fact sheet is you may recall we did have some examples of families who are currently using the birth through five system for their younger children but are not accessing after school care for their older children and that now that family co pay would mean that they're not going to pay any more to access that care. So that's a really important part of where we're moving and that in addition to that from a data and payment methodology and as we're designing this first module of the new BFIS system. We are basing that off of the methodology of this family co pay which would be inclusive of those school age children in the regulated system of care. I don't know if Melissa would add any more of the programmatic elements but from a financial end, it is that family co pay that we've shifted to and in year three. Thank you Sarah Melissa did you want to add something to what the finance director was saying. I think the only thing I would add is that the after school world encompasses many different program types and the CC FAP program our purview really is regulated after school programs. So the report that's coming in April is looking at financing a full system of after school and CC FAP is included in that analysis, but if we're going to be studying a universal system using a CC FAP mechanism. So that does include children of families that are choosing our regulated system, and it would, it would be a bit of a false, I think, separation if we don't include after school and that financing study. Thank you. Representative Wood. And committee. I just want to say we have 15 minutes. We go on the floor and representative Wood has her hand up and represent McFawn and. Yeah. So I want to say we have 10 minutes before we need to break to go on the floor. Thank you Madam chair, I'll be brief I think that with the addition on on page 18 if there was another thing that followed after paragraph number one on online 13 that deals with birth through five if we right underneath that, but the reference to the after study that will inform this financial study that we're looking at. It feels to me like that would satisfy my, my concern as well as hopefully represent McFawn's concerned about looking at the whole system from birth to age 12. Okay. Hi. Yes, go ahead. Yes. I'm okay with that I just have one more question. What we just heard from the finance director does that include the piece where we're going from up to up to 350% of the poverty level. Yes, it does. It does. Then Madam chair. Thank you very much for having me back on. I agree with representative Wood. Completely satisfied. Oh, thank you representative on appreciate that. At the risk of I'm not quite sure what to be provide really not quite sure where we are. In terms of the studies joint fiscal Joyce Manchester you're you have your hand up to rescue me. Thank you. I do thank you for the record Joyce Manchester from the joint fiscal office. So I wanted to raise some parallels between what this study looks like to me, and the higher education study of the Vermont system and so forth. So at the time that we put together the RFP for that study. We knew that there were other groups that were working on some of the very same problems. So there was a board of trustees effort underway there was a advanced Vermont or some such name that was working on it there was another group of union folks that were working on the problem. And so what we said in the RFP is that the consultant would, would work with or would recognize these other groups and and and basically not step on their toes right, but take into account their, their findings and so forth. And it seems to me you would do the same thing in this study you would say, yes, the consultant should recognize the findings of this after school task force. And, you know, work along those guidelines, but certainly you want the consultant to be able to think on its own on his or her own, in terms of the best methods of financing. If you think about the entire zero to five and six to 12 systems together right there may be a way to, to put those financing sources together I don't know but you don't want to preclude that necessarily. So it seems to me that that adding some sentence right up front that says, yes, the primary emphasis may be on zero to five but we want to include the financing and the impacts and so forth of the six to 12. After care after school system would make a lot of sense. Thank you. Would that change and will direct this choice both to you and or Nolan. There is right now a figure that we have for what the what we are what we are suggesting is the needed appropriation to do the study. Does that change that needed appropriation. I don't know if no one wants to pipe in or not I will, I will say I don't think it should change. I think $500,000 is quite a lot of money going to a consultant to do the work that is prescribed here. And yes we want to get a very competent consultant to do the work because we don't have to, we don't want to have to go back. Five years down the road to say we botched it the first time. Let's do it again. So I think the 500,000 would be sufficient to look at the zero to five system primarily. You want to think about financing you want to think about how much it's going to cost to pay the providers reasonable wages and compensation and so forth. You want to think about the cost of the CC fat program.  It is a substantial piece of work. That's going to take some money there's always a question about whether you put the 500,000 in the legislation which tells the bidders bid at 499,000 right, or do you just put the bid out there with with no dollar amount and see what you get which is what we did in the higher education study. We've got a huge range of bidders from 150,000 to 900,000 so I'm just I like your idea we will take the money out and then our bill will will will be less when we go through appropriations. That's that's someone else's decision not my decision but it is worth considering. Okay, thank you. Thank you for that idea madam chair. Of course now we're on YouTube so people can go and, yes, and look and whatever. I'm nervous, Nolan, in that we only have. It's 952. In terms of moving to the fiscal note I don't know that we have enough time right now. I think. I can do it quickly but probably not in seven minutes so maybe until you come back. Okay. Okay. We also we we also have some a work in progress of suggestions from let's grow kids who have been talking with the treasurer because they have some concerns about what about how we have written the finance the language in the finance and how we took away some of the specifics and if you recall I began the conversation at one point with. Okay, why did we why did we make such a significant change in that section and as I have said on numerous occasions on the people person, not the money person. So taking out money stuff is fine with me, but I think there was a rationale. I mean I do think there was a rationale. Nolan. The major rationale was that the old language was too prescriptive. So it's one thing to tell us what you want us to do but when you start telling us how to do it, it starts making it more cumbersome and harder for the consultant to do their work. So I think that was a big part of it. That was the main part of it. You know, we were talking to Joyce earlier and and mentioned how Joyce's previous job not put there on the spot which you work for the congressional budget office and I remember we tell rational budget office how to do a study. So there was a, so there's, there were some limitations on, on thinking in terms of like, it's important to tell us what you want to get out of the study. When you start saying who we have to speak to who we need to include who we need to consult with. It gets a little bit more cumbersome. So that was the rationale. Okay. I don't give Sarah Kenny and let's grow kids the opportunity to go oh and you're misconstruing. Thank you madam chair. The only thing that I think is misconstrued is the idea that we didn't support the work that the committee has already done because we definitely do. I just want to say that we bring this language forward in this truly the spirit of a friendly amendment we actually really support the work that you all have done on this. I just want to make it better. I get it. And Madam chair as you were saying and convert when my colleague was talking to the treasurer last week she was just talking about her experience of putting these kinds of studies out to bed and that it was helpful for her to have some guidance in terms of the specific roles for all the entities with whom the bill already says the consultant shall be consulting just to give those folks an idea of sort of what their role might be in working with the consultant on this. So that's and it's truly a you know we're not went into any of this language we really do bring it in the spirit of trying to support folks seeing with themselves you know seeing what their role might be in this so not at all went into it. And the other component that I did want to highlight was in a conversations with the committee and folks at DCF around the questions about what does compensation commensurate with their peers mean, and what are the components of a cost of care model. Some of the language that's in here specifically in subsection six that was trying to address that and provide a little bit more framing around some of the national organizations and the state folks in the state who are thinking a lot about this and those conversations similar to the universal after school task force there are conversations happening that we would want the consultant to be, you know tuned into they're not at the place of having a report, handily this spring to inform it but just wanting to provide some guidance and so there may be language that could be, you know, just from all of this into a sentence or two just referencing that work moving forward so. Thank you. Thank you. Representative McFawn you have the last word in one minute. I can't hear you. Thank you madam chair. I only have one question. Up until this point, I know we'll look at let's go kids, their information this afternoon, their suggestions, and we might look at something else, but up until this point. I want to thank all of those people from the administration and Amy and all you people that have come into this process to help us. One question is this. How do you feel about where we are now up until this point. Hello. Hello. Okay, well we've, we've heard from Sarah. I got I heard from, and I heard let's grow kids say up until this point. We're okay, but we do have a suggestion. Right. And we'll look at that suggestion. I'd like to know where the other people that are going to be really affected by this, like the administration. Like the after school. I want to know how you feel so far, because we've done a lot of good work. Okay. Okay. Amy of after school I believe is okay and Sarah Truckel for the finance director. You now have a minute. I guess I would say I think we've identified some areas where we still see where we've pointed some issues in prior testimony and if it's helpful for the committee we're happy to have, you know, come back after your floor and go through those but we recognize the significant progress of the bill and the number of suggestions that you've included in our very appreciative of that as well. So, we're moving closer. Would it be helpful for us to identify those areas. I think it would be helpful. And, and without any promise, just as without any promise to let's grow kids that we will embrace all of the ideas but we absolutely will consider them. We are on the floor folks, and then we have caucuses and then we have lunch. So I you know and then we're back on the floor at one. So I would say we will be back at committee. At to ready to work so it if you have any time if any of you have any time between now and then to work on. Suggested language or to connect with relevant members of the committee of the administration to please do that between now and then. And if it turns out that the floors five minutes we will do that. Okay, I've now gotten the third notice that we're supposed to be on the floor. So this ends the morning session.


And so instead of having four, I had six people running around helping the children and the ones who already did their assignments started helping the others as well. So at the end, everybody could finish within an hour because they were helping each other out. And that's, indeed, that's something really nice if you could create that too. Okay. Yeah, definitely. I do think it's something that we need to start up within the Blender community, starting with people from the Blender community. I hope also teachers would like to join. And I really think about how we could approach this. I've been talking about time to set up a website already where at least we could gather material that to have something that we could give to kids already. But I think underneath there still needs to be a discussion on how do we effectively do this? How do we approach this? That's true. And yes, we need to work on the funding, see if we could get some crowdfunding for that as well. Okay, cool. Nice. That was unlawful for us. And when we scale it down and take interface, which is much possible, it will be a lot easier. It's the only one way to get all the funding. And in terms of all funding, I think the Ph.D.O., you guys just signed the code back. Come here and have a talk with us. It's... It's indeed. Now, Ph.D.O. is also depending on subsidized... I think subsidized money. And so that's also... I know some people emailed me, like, okay, maybe we can look for some European subsidies to fund this initiative. And yes, together with Ph.D.O. I know the people from the Code of Dojo's, they also are very interested in this. If we could get some more lessons, they also want to do Code of Dojo's. So that's why, blended teachers, are there blended teachers here? Now, I think I'm running out of time a bit. I really would like to continue. See if you can have a meetup, something somewhere upstairs for people interested. And just discuss this a bit more, like, how can we do this? How can we approach this? I'm really glad to see that a dad of one of the girls is here. Because that's really the response I got from a lot of girls. They go and parents as well, because I also talked to a few parents. The girls go home and they're way enthusiastic. And it's like, ah, I want to learn, I want to learn. And now we need to take the next step, see how we can learn kids about 3D and a bit of coding. Sure, indeed. Yeah, and that's what we need to talk about and discuss. Because now I couldn't even find anything online for children. So we need to really think about, OK, how do we set something aside where kids can come and they can learn? They can ask questions. They can show off their work, something like that. Just thinking out loud at the moment. OK, thank you very much. And I hope to see you guys in, I don't know, what shall we do? After lunch? In lunch? During lunch? And have a discussion with you guys. Thank you very much. I think you need to plug in this. Hey, how are you? Finally. I think we've seen each other quite often. We can go over and discuss something online or something like that. How is this going? It's going. I didn't show the website, because I already had a topic on about this. You got some answers from the European Union? Not yet, it's like four or five months. Maybe we'll have to wait for five years or so. Yeah, but Ton and I, we did a proposal and it's just now waiting, waiting, waiting answers. I got some feedback from Holland also and our teachers already interested in teaching the kids in school. Oh, really? Yeah, they really tried some new ideas or so. Yeah, really, really good. And they already asked me how to do it with children.


What's up everybody, Jason here for jaspyscasebreaks.com. We just sold out 2223 Bowman Inception University, four box break, random letter first, letter first, name number six. And again guys, 19 total spots, we're getting a random letter from the list below. As an example, if you get randomized letter B and we pull a Bryce young, that would be your hit. And here we go guys, there's the dice roller, there's customer names and the letters. Click dice roll, three to three, six times. One, two, three, four, five, six. Six times Adam down to Ryan. And then we got six times here. One, two, three, four, five, six. Six times six XL versus down to C. So Adam XL, Tristan NO, Kurt with J, Nicholas with P, Jason with D, Brian Croft with K, Tristan with GI, as well as H, James Coo with W, Brian S with M, James S, Travis Dow with EF, Brian S with B, Jerry with T, Kurt with Z, Coverman, R, Robert V, Brian Croft A, and then Ryan Kason C.  Is that what you're talking about? No, he says it looks like Jason possibly lobbing him his shoulder.  I was lifting last night and it hurts. Looking at the side, for like top five star, that OMB. Yeah. So like obviously there's autos, numbering and stuff. Do you just take all of them and randomize it? Yeah, I mean it's up to us how we decide to do it. I personally like to distribute them out so like let's just say there's like four of them that are not numbered. I tried to probably, you can establish it before you start, like hey if we pull one, that's gonna stay at the spot one, spot two, spot three, so when you randomize it, number one gets that first one, number two gets the second one on the randomizer, or if you wanna make it fair, like the highest value hit goes number one and you can determine how you wanna do it. If it ends up being like two and you don't wanna separate them, you can just put it all together. But I usually like to separate it because it is one hit per. But yeah, you can determine that before you start, like if you get any non-nurricards, to the breaker's discretion, but that's how I like to do it. I know Joe sometimes combines them, but I think for some break like this, because there could be a lot, it's better to kind of spread it out. I mean I had that once with limited, where it was like the base cards. Yeah, it's the same thing, yeah. Yeah, or like if it's the base cards, you can always do that in one lot and get that out of the way and then the autographs can be separated if that was the case. Yeah, because there were, there's like all the base and like an insert, so I just did it all to the most part. Most people don't complain, I mean for the most part. Cool. All right guys, so no trades in I guess. Tebow, this is break number six. You were in one of them, but I don't remember which one. You were in, yeah break number five, but this is number six. All right guys, so again, one, two, three, let's see if we can generate one of those three numbers to determine which one we're gonna use here. And it's a three, one, two, three. All right, here we go, that's the first one. Khalil, where? Jordan Travis, Tyler, Wagner, and Dylan Gabriel. We got a number Dylan Gabriel, that's gonna letter D, Jason. Then we have a Jason Adem Lola, letter J, going to Kurt, and then Bruce Thornton, going to letter B, Brian S. All right, next box. Oh, there's a redemption here. Hooker, Derek Lively, and then Aiden O'Connell. Cade, out of number 199, letter C, Ryan. Race Thompson, letter R, going to Adam Coverman, and CJ Latham, going to letter J. What's up, Andrew? How you doing, buddy? All right, here we go. We got a base auto card of, we're getting Scoot Henderson. Scoot, going to James with letter S. All right, guys, a little bit of a teaser. All right, we got Caleb Williams, Jordan Walsh, Bryce Young, and Drew Timmy. Out of 25, Jalen Wilson, with a Phil Jacobic, letter P, going to Nicholas, and then Caleb Love, little patch auto, to 199. All right, last box here, guys. Seth Tremble, Will Anderson, Zach Eddy, and then Dejan Harris. Jalen Carter, to 153 out of 199, letter J, Kurt. We got Sean Clifford, letter S, James, and then Franklin Collins, letter F, which is Travis, EF, combo. I know, Scooby Scoot and Victor's cards out, I know.  All right, you guys. So there you go. Appreciate it, folks. Number seven is close to selling out. I'm sure we'll be doing that soon, but coming up next is for all of us, pick your team number one. Thank you, guys.


Welcome to English at the Movies, where you learn American English heard at the movies. Red Notice tells the story, in a funny way, of a plot involving two of the world's most wanted criminals. International law officers have placed a red notice on them, meaning they must be caught. John Hartley is a law enforcement agent on the case. He teams up with world-famous criminal Nolan Booth to arrest the world's biggest art thief, Sarah Black. Listen for the words, five-second rule.  Five-second rule. What do you think five-second rule means? A, everything is under control. Or B, something is safe if it is picked up within five seconds of falling. Listen again.  Five-second rule. The answer is B. People usually say five-second rule in relation to food. It suggests that food that has been dropped is safe from germs if it is picked up within five seconds. It is not a serious rule and usually said as a joke. And that's English at the Movies. See? Easy peasy. I'm Dorothy Gundy.


Education is not sold. That is what JNU stood as an idea and today the fight is exactly that. Hello and welcome to People's Dispatch. Today we are here at the Jawaharlal Lehru University in New Delhi, India where massive student protests have been going on since the last few days. These began when the administration announced its decision to hike the hostel fees and impose curfew timings on the hostel. So on Monday, the students began a long march which started at the university campus and they had planned to end it at the parliament, but on the way the students faced multiple police barricades and violent police repression, many students got injured during the baton charge by the police. Our reporter Arun Kumar was also among the ones injured during the police violence. So talk more about this, these developments. What the movement is, we are joined by Aishri Ghosh who is the president of the JNU Students Union. Aishri, thank you for joining us today. So firstly, can you tell us what the movement really is about? What is this fee, the fee must fall movement and why the students so strongly opposed to the fee hike? So specifically talking about, I'll talk about the fees must fall movement which was started actually in South Africa in 2015 October, if you see and the president of then union was Shahira Kalla who started majorly. The idea was that educational institutions should be more funded by the governments, it should be public funded education systems where government spends a lot more on educations and there was exactly a fee hike happening in those universities at that time in South Africa. The movement went for an year and at the end of the year a student led protest which started with fee hike and public spending in education was all the demands were met where the government had to agree to all those points. Exactly we see in the Jawaharlal Nehru University something like that so far happened. In the month of October suddenly a hostel manual comes into place in public domain where it was told that fees will be hiked and suddenly we see more than 1000% fee has been hiked and JNU as in premier institute has been known for an institute which has always accommodated the whole of the country. It has accommodated students from distant part of this country giving deprivation points to those places which have not even been known to maybe the certain sections of the population of this country. There have been students from Kala and in Urissa there have been students from distant parts in Maharashtra, UP, Bihar, Bengal and the most quartile districts of this country and that is the beauty of JNU. The JNU has always been a university when it was built by the act of parliament. It was a university which gives education, higher education at an affordable price and education is not so sold. That is what JNU stood as an idea and today the fight is exactly that. That hostel fee hike will lead to thousands of students leaving this campus within a month. It's not even a month for the new registration to come up. It will lead to the maximum students leaving the campus and today this protest is about that that today we are not fighting for this generation who is still there in JNU. It's also about the fight of the upcoming many generations which would see look beyond that tomorrow if they want to get a research degree they would love to come to JNU, a space like JNU where a PhD degree is affordable at a rate of 283 rupees and that is where the sole problem lies at this moment in a capitalist world, in a world, in a global order where there is sectors which everything has been privatized. It's that education sector is left in some of the corners and spaces of the world which is trying to be preserved that they are able to preserve themselves as the last and the sole of the country's public funded education system and those are been in the sole attack at this moment that if these sole heart in these different countries are finished then the whole problem ends and it will be a win-win situation for the capitalist model. At this moment if you see in Chile, in Pakistan, similarly in India at this moment huge protest at the similar timing is going about fee hikes if you see. And can you tell us about the sort of response the administration has given to all these protests because we've also there's also been many reports that the VC the vice chancellor of the university has not really been engaging with the students at all. Today is the 24th day it's going to complete and there has been no response from the vice chancellor or the administration because this is the agenda if you see of privatized capitalist mind this is the agenda to slightly tire down movements to not respond to suffocate the movements into themselves but the GNU students have shown the way this time. They have been indomitable spirit and united spirit and struggle that this time we are not leaving the way whether it's fighting it within the campus people have gone out and this is not the long march only if you see GNU students have been out on the streets also on the 11th of November when our convocation was happening and when the M.H.R.D. minister was present we went there and brutal Lathi church happened that day also obviously lesser than the one which happened during the parliament but water cannons were also there tear gas was there but students didn't back out because this time it's the question of the survival of the students the right to study the right to existence within university spaces the first generation learners their right to even get an education first time in their family so the administration has been clearly deaf to our demands but what we have gotten response is by the higher power committee which the M.H.R.D. has formed and today the GNU SU had met the 46 member council of the GNU students union have met the ministry of human resource development's high power committee setup and we have clearly put up that the university should be listening and today if the crisis is going on and there's an 24 day crisis within the GNU campus it's only because of the incompetent vice chancellor and not because of the students because the students have been ready for dialogue from the very first day till the 25th day today and the students are still ready for the dialogue because of which they're waiting outside the vice chancellor office but the vice chancellor is continuously communicating through twitter or social media accounts which is not the way for communication if you have to communicate you have to talk to all these stakeholders of the university who are going to get affected by this policies by and large and this actually is not happening dialogue has no other way other than coming down on a table and discussing the matter in a large detail and finally why do you think that GNU particularly has been targeted so relentlessly in these past few years but particularly since this right-wing government bgp government came into power in terms of both as a part of both the attacks on public education and also because you know jnu has been your left space so uh exactly i would agree to it because if you see i will take a note from the recently passed comments on jnu that jnu has been hub of urban nuxels jnu should be shut down again the debate of shut down jnu going on and why is jnu been targeted is quietly because jnu has been seen as a left dominated space because this jnu has always talked about in free education for us jnu has always talked about affordable education because jnu students union has always talked about an education system which is just affordable for all accessible for all and that is something which is pricking the eye of this right-wing government that they want every space to be privatized whether we are breathing whether we are drinking water everything should be chargeable and that is what is not the idea of the left movements largely if you see the all if you have seen ever left movements or students movement across they have always talked about things which would be state-owned how state can provide more facilities to the student to the people if taxes are been taking from students from the people of the citizens of the country that people should be repaid back through other facilities whether it's health care whether it's education whether other facilities to the citizens but exactly opposite what the right-wing governments want that no people will be charged for everything my father is paying tax my mom is paying tax and there have been other citizens who are paying taxes and why should taxes been taxes are been used on futile things why are taxes been used on crores on statues taxpayers are also in support if you have been seen in the last two three days there was a trend in twitter taxpayers with jnu exactly my point there are students who are getting grf they are also contributing through hre to the university and the administration so those money should be used to life for the students by building more libraries more hostile facilities more books in libraries more journals but that is exactly not the idea of the government at this moment their idea is to take the money and to give it up to the corporate houses which are looting people at this moment if you see there has been no question by the current government to need of modi that thousands of crores of rupees have been taken by that person and have been fled away from the country but till now questions have been asked that why jnu students are studying at 238 rupees because i want to ask what time has a jnu student done by occurring a phd degree a jnu student questions and that is what they don't want that students will study students will get educated they will get empowered they will question they will question why does governments don't spend more on education why do governments don't spend more on health care and that is what they fear they are exactly doing what the capitalist system and the global order wants them to do they're actually succumbing to that system where more spending should be there on the capitalist tycoons and lesser spending on the public spending and the citizens of the countries and finally can you tell us about the larger attack on public higher education right now because apart from jnu there are also other Indian institutes and universities who are facing similar suffering similarly right now see when we started it as a movement it was a very jnu centric movement but today when i stand i feel that this movement should go beyond jnu and from the first day even i had that in mind that this movement shouldn't be stuck only to jnu because if it sucks to jnu the movement fails if it's a fees must fall movement it should be for all and jnu has been known for it the jnu has always spoken has been the voice for the voiceless and today when we are speaking we are speaking for every iit every iam every kind of aims medical colleges uttarakhand ayurvedic colleges which are fighting from the last 60 days doing an hunger strike we are talking for every other public funded education and today also when we spoke to the high power committee we told ki we know jnu is nothing special we exactly know that and that's why we want that thousands of jnu should come up in a country like india because students want to study there are thousands crores of students who want to study and exactly they are not able to study because there has been no funding there has been no fellowship the government doesn't encourage education in our country education is always seen as an alternative to job this is the problem education is never seen as a sector where you can learn it has been seen as a profit making sector where you study to get a job only and that is where the problem lies so at this moment it's a larger policy level attack and this fight has to go beyond jnu i'm really happy to see that at this moment iITs are fighting today solidarity notes from iIT delhi and goati has come out and there is a larger movement which is happening bhu is fighting du is fighting and there are namely other universities which is actually maybe it's not reaching out to me they're fighting for their fee hike and that is what jnu wanted to do this government should understand that students are not handful the whole youth of this country is wanting free public education wanting more funding of the government in public education and that's where the movement success is it's not only just to diet out here in jnu campus but to make a narrative to given solidarity not only in this country but outside the country that public education should be made accessible to each and every citizen of the countries thank you for talking to us today and that's all the time we have for today keep watching people's dispatch