From Trench to Classroom: Kast’s Excavator Begins to Dismantle Public Education

These include the Public Education Support Fund, the School Feeding Program, School Reintegration, and PACE. These are not unnoticed offices or distant expenditures for most people. They are crucial supports that ensure schools function, prevent students from dropping out, and facilitate their entry into university.

In simple terms: the cuts do not start from the top down but from the bottom up. They affect meals, public school support, the reintegration of those who left the system, and one of the most recognizable bridges between high school and higher education. This is where the heart of the issue lies.

Hard Facts About Education Cuts

The Hacienda annex identifies 15 Education programs in the category «Discontinued».
The School Feeding Program is listed in that category with $1,061,029 million allocated for 2025.
The Public Education Support Fund is also targeted, amounting to $167,777 million.
School Reintegration is marked as “Discontinued” with $1,887 million.
PACE, a well-known bridge to university, is listed with $20,793 million.
The document itself clarifies that «Budget Adjustment» implies a reduction of at least 15%.

In simple terms: the cuts do not target an isolated program. They affect multiple supports that uphold educational pathways, from school meals to access to higher education.

Thus, the title is not an exaggeration. The very image of force that José Kast sought to establish with the trench in the north now appears in a different arena. Only this time, the excavator is not removing dirt at the border; it is beginning to dismantle supports, pathways, and programs within public education.

What the Communication Actually States

Circular communication No. 16, signed by Minister Jorge Quiroz and sent to ministries for formulating the 2027 Budget and the 2028-2031 framework, establishes a clear criterion. There is a supposed «fiscal constraint» and a need for a «paradigm shift in the management of public resources».

Within this framework, the ministries «must prepare their budget proposals for a five-year period», with a maximum expenditure cap and prioritizing legal and contractual obligations. They must also incorporate the permanent effects of fiscal adjustments already applied in 2026.

The attached memorandum goes even deeper. It states that ministries must review «all spending subtitling to find efficiency spaces via management, understanding that in the medium term there are no fixed costs and unavoidable obligations.» It further emphasizes that «ministries must find restrictive expenditure spaces that allow them to finance Government initiatives.»

This means that the adjustment is not an accident or a forced reading of the document. It is the document’s central theme.

They Are Not Cutting an Isolated Program: They Are Impacting a Complete Route

The annex from the Ministry of Education reveals something that does not always make the quick headlines. The programs marked for discontinuation do not all belong to the same office nor serve a single function. What emerges is a broader map.

In the Public Education Directorate, the Public Education Support Fund is under scrutiny. In Junaeb, the annex lists the School Feeding Program, the Teacher Support Scholarship, and Open School as «Discontinued». In the Subsecretariat of Education, School Reintegration, National Reading Program, National Writing Plan, School for Directors, and others also appear in the same category. Moreover, in the Subsecretariat of Higher Education, the list includes PACE.

Put simply: they are not cutting a single piece. They are impacting various parts of the same educational path. This path starts with minimal conditions for sustaining school life, follows with support to prevent students from falling behind, and concludes with mechanisms that facilitate access to university. If multiple segments are cut simultaneously, it does not just harm one program. It weakens the entire trajectory.

The School Feeding Program is categorized as «Discontinued» in the Hacienda annex, putting a spotlight on one of the most concrete aids sustaining public education.

And Where They Don’t Close, They Cut

The document not only recommends closures. It also leaves dozens of lines categorized under «Budget Adjustment». The annex explicitly clarifies in a footnote that this means «a budget reduction of at least 15%» should be applied.

This affects programs from the Public Education Directorate; lines from Junaeb such as Medical and Preventive Services, Student Homes and Residences, Indigenous Scholarship, School Supplies, and Territorial Integration Scholarship. It also impacts programs from the Subsecretariat of Education like School Co-existence, Bilingual Intercultural Education, Rural Education, Evaluation of Youth and Adults, and Free Grant. Additionally, several lines from the Subsecretariat of Higher Education are affected, such as Research Funding, Direct Fiscal Contributions, Technical Excellence Scholarships, and Institutional Contributions to State Universities, among others.

Translated: where the government does not label a closure, it applies a cut. And this trimming also affects programs that help maintain access, retention, training, and funding within the system.

What Is Really at Stake

The key issue here is not just how much Hacienda wants to save. The crux is where it decides to cut. This is significant because budgetary documents also reflect political priorities.

In this case, the cuts hit the network of supports that make studying under less unequal conditions feasible. If support for public education falls, if school feeding programs are threatened, if reintegration efforts weaken, and if bridges to higher education are cut, it is not just an abstract ministry that is eroding. It is the minimum foundation that ensures studying does not increasingly rely on one’s finances, social background, or mere endurance.

That’s why the analogy with the trench is not unwarranted. In the north, Kast displayed excavators to create a political signal of control and borders. In education, the Hacienda communication reveals another version of the same logic: creating trenches within the state, separating what the government chooses to sustain from what it deems expendable. In this operation, public education begins to fall on the wrong side.

This is not just about numbers. It is about a method of governance. One that does not begin by dismantling a distant excess, but rather a concrete network of support for students, schools, and educational communities. And when the excavator enters here, the message is severe: the adjustment does not strike the periphery of the system; it directly impacts the very elements that prevent education from becoming, even more, a privilege.