Last month a group of Hong Kong business leaders attending the South China Morning Post's Third Business Leader Briefing sat down to discuss the predominantly gloomy assessment of local schools and universities revealed in a survey of the opinions of decision-makers carried out in October. Together with the SCMP editorial board, they cautioned against reading perception as fact and balanced the negativism with a reminder that Hong Kong education had achieved much over the years, expanding provision and raising quality at all levels. An edited extract from the report of that forum, which appears on E5 this week, reveals a number of the recommendations made to further enhance the quality of education here. The way ahead, leaders argued, required vision and a series of bold measures. The proposed kindergarten vouchers scheme was cited as a step in the right direction. But they also expressed concern about the top-down approach taken by the government on reform. There is no better example of the cause of this concern than the implementation of the voucher scheme. The measure, which gives parents HK$10,000 dollars a year towards fees at non-profit-making kindergartens, will now be discussed at next week's meeting of the Legislative Council's Finance Committee, but only after more than a month of wrangling and time-wasting. Education secretary Arthur Li Kwok-cheung withheld the proposal from an earlier committee meeting because there was opposition to his 'five principles', including excluding profit-making preschools from the scheme and termination of a recommended pay scale for preschool teachers. The proposal had general cross-party support and the consensus was that it should go ahead, even though there was opposition to the exclusion of profit-making preschools on the grounds that it limited parental choice. Professor Li disagreed and said he would not put the measure forward without acceptance of the principles. After a meeting on Thursday night at which representatives of profit-making preschools dug their heels in and reaffirmed their opposition to the conditions, the Education and Manpower Bureau said the measure would be put to the finance committee after all. So what was achieved by the demand that a government measure win everyone's unequivocal agreement before it go ahead? Nothing. At best it wasted time. Discussion of and opposition to government proposals are part of the lifeblood of a free and open society. If a top-down attitude to the implementation of reform is bad enough, a failure to embrace diversity and discussion is worse.