Trying to overcome a coalition mine: The ministerial team appointed by the government in order to formulate a new and agreed map of national priority areas, decided today (Tuesday) to extend the existing map by another six months.
The decision was made last week but due to the political sensitivity of the issue it has not yet been announced.
The proposal to keep the map valid was raised by Minister Zeev Elkin (New Hope), who heads the team together with Minister Issawi Frij (Meretz).
Sources who participated in the discussion told Israel Today that representatives of all parties supported the proposal.
It was also agreed at the hearing that Elkin and Fridge would discuss how to implement the map in the various offices.
The decision actually reflects a victory for the right wing in the government, since the current map was formulated during the Netanyahu government.
This is the second time that the government has postponed the decision on the issue, which is hotly debated between right and left, since the current map has many elements that help Israeli settlement in Judea and Samaria.
Minister Michaeli, Photo: Yehoshua Yosef
Following the previous postponement, the current map is due to expire tomorrow (Wednesday), so the new summary is subject to renewed approval by the government.
The Labor Party is attacking the consent of Minister Merav Michaeli "to extend the validity of the map approved by Netanyahu."
The party's secretary general, Eran Hermoni, addressed a scathing letter to Michaeli, saying that "the practical significance is clear: to continue implementing Netanyahu's map, which includes many dozens of isolated settlements that will enjoy various budgetary and financial privileges that many localities do not enjoy - all under our auspices."
"Unfortunately, such a decision would be a great victory for the Messianic right. Although we know that this government will not advance the two-state solution, we should in no way agree that it will in fact lead to the reality of one state. The continued massive investment in isolated settlements leads. So he concluded.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us