Hello Bernard, Sorry for my delayed response. Please find below the answers to your questions 1. Core studies The following published positions do not establish a shared policy on whether school funding should depend on teaching the full core curriculum, scale with the amount taught, or remain a matter of community choice. They reflect three distinct approaches of the top three voices of our joint list who see eye to eye on this issue: Yaron Zelekha’s Economic Party supports financial incentives for Haredi schools teaching core studies; Yoaz Hendel links institutional funding to participation in military or national service; and lastly Dr. Wilf advocates state funding and the advancement of national, Zionist, Hebrew-medium schooling for all sectors of Israeli society for the advancement of Israel’s national ethos, without specifying a core-curriculum funding formula. These are separately attributable positions and should not be interpreted as confirmed, officially adopted joint-party policy. 2.⁠ ⁠*Religion and state, in detail. We do not have an identified or published joint-list platform on this issue, so the partners’ positions, although they align on much in their outlooks and agree in principle, should be attributed separately rather than presented as an agreed joint platform. Yoaz Hendel in the past has supported local decision-making on Shabbat transport and a civil marriage alternative for those unable to marry through the existing system. Dr.Wilf personal stance advocates separating religious services from state authority and funding, leaving them to community choice, and has argued for Shabbat public transport without specifying a detailed transport or marriage framework. Lastly, Yaron Zelekha, as a current economic party position, proposes opening kashrut certification to competition under government oversight; he has also previously supported Shabbat transport where there is demand and allowing citizens to marry in their own way. These are separately attributable positions, not a confirmed joint-list commitment on civil marriage versus civil unions, nationwide versus local Shabbat transport, or the Rabbinate’s authority over marriage. 3.⁠ ⁠Same-sex couples. Our party has no official platform on this issue in our platform, but Dr. Wilf’s personal position is that she supports LGBTQ rights in Israel, including Sagi Laws. 4. The Nation State Law Our party has not adopted a position on this specific issue. However, In her personal capacity, Dr. Wilf, who contributed to the law’s early drafting, supports retaining the Nation-State Law but favors a limited amendment to its settlement provision to explicitly affirm equality. 5.⁠ ⁠The courts. Yes, your reading is correct: in its response to Ynet, our party supports an override requiring more than 72 MKs and a balanced Judicial Selection Committee whose composition would be established by Knesset legislation. This is an attributable joint-list statement and can be interpreted as our stance. 6.⁠ ⁠Gaza after the war. Our Joint list currently does not have a unified platform, and no single civilian administrator is endorsed across the two parties' published platforms. What both parties agree on is that Hamas is not a viable option and must not be left in any type of civilian administrative capacity, let alone as an option for leadership in the Strip. The Economic Party leaves Arab-state, international-body, and local non-Hamas administration open, provided any arrangement ends incitement in education; the Reservists prioritize Israeli control of strategic locations and freedom to conduct security operations, without specifying who would manage civilian affairs. These two positions do not reflect Dr. Wilf’s stance on this issue, which, as previously mentioned, calls for splitting Gaza into three (Annexation, Gaza of War, and Gaza of Peace). Furthermore, I recommend you watch Dr.Wilf on her recent appearance of Eylon Levy’s election podcast on English for more direct information. Best regards, Yonatan Lui