Charging students just for a sip of hot water—doesn't that money feel hot in your hands? | Beijing News Quick Comment

▲A student at a certain school is getting water. Photo/IC photo

According to the Southeast Morning Post, recently, a netizen posted about a drinking water fee issue at a private middle school in Quanzhou, Fujian, which has attracted attention. In response, the Quanzhou Education Bureau made it clear that schools are not allowed to charge students for drinking water and will conduct special inspections. If any violations are confirmed, the school will be ordered to refund the improperly collected fees immediately.

According to netizens, students at the school must pre-charge to drink hot water, and a certain percentage is deducted; otherwise, they cannot drink hot water and can only buy bottled water at their own expense. The school responded that the drinking water machines are operated by a third-party company, and the charges only cover the cost of water production, which is far below the market price of bottled water, and the 20% “deduction” is actually a deposit for the water card. Furthermore, the school has never forced students to use the drinking water; students can choose their own drinking method.

The school’s explanation does not hold up to scrutiny, and the problem lies in the “voluntary choice.” The campus is a relatively closed environment, and drinking water is a necessity for students during school hours. The school upgraded its facilities, discontinued the free water buckets that posed health risks, but told students that they could choose not to buy a water card, but then they wouldn’t have hot water to drink—this is hardly a voluntary choice; it is clearly a market operation replacing the basic service that the school should provide.

Moreover, even if it is a deposit, does that mean it is not considered a fee? This action has already crossed the “red line” of policy. In 2010, the National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Education jointly issued a notice regarding the regulation of service fees and fees on behalf of primary and secondary schools, clearly stating that drinking water should not be included in service fees or fees on behalf of the school. For many years, various educational fee documents have continued this regulation.

This means that regardless of whether the school is public or private, and regardless of whether the fees go into the school’s account or a third-party company’s pocket, charging students for drinking water is a clear violation.

Some voices suggest that charging reasonable costs can be understood. This idea reflects a concerning “commercialization” mentality. The tuition and accommodation fees paid by students should cover the basic learning and living needs during their time at school. Drinking water, restroom access, and classroom lighting are basic provisions for running a school and are responsibilities that the school must fulfill, not value-added services that can be charged separately.

If even a sip of hot water requires additional fees, where does that leave the public nature of education and the basic responsibilities of schools? Shifting the cost burden to parents and transforming students’ basic needs into business opportunities not only increases the financial burden on families but also undermines the responsibility of education.

In this incident, the quick intervention by the education department is commendable. The special inspection should not only clarify the facts and order the refund of the improper fees but should also use this as an opportunity to further define the boundaries of campus services. The responsibilities of schools cannot be easily shirked by terms like “third party” or “cost.”

Maintaining the bottom line of not charging students for drinking water preserves not just the rules but also the essence of what education should be.

Written by / Chen Guangjiang (media professional)

Edited by / Xu Qiuying

Proofread by / Li Lijun