Annual increase in rents, low pensions, unemployment, rising prices for medicines, looking at which you cannot do without validol. All these are the realities that our compatriots are now facing. The reason for this is the government's ineffective social policy.
According to an all-Russian opinion poll, 57% of Russians are dissatisfied with it. At the same time, 39% of respondents place the main responsibility on the president, 36% on regional authorities and 17% on the prime minister.
Study participants were offered several options for assessing the government's social policy - “successful”, “rather successful”, “generally normal”, “rather unsuccessful” and “needs serious changes”.
“5% are full supporters of “successful”, 5% rate it “rather successful”, 29% are a neutral zone, which believe that in general everything is fine. Thus, the positive base is around 40%. Critical zone - 15% of respondents rate it “rather unsuccessful”, and 42% believe that social policy needs serious changes. Our critical, negative zone is 57%,” Alexey Firsov, General Director of the Center for Social Design “Platform”, presented the results of the survey.
Moreover, predominantly young people - Russians from 18 to 24 years old - have a positive assessment of the “social sphere”, while older citizens - 45-59 years old - are dissatisfied with the work of the government. Thus, the lion's share of survey participants (73%) believe that, first of all, structural changes needs medicine, 52% of respondents named the pension system, 39% - housing and communal services, 38% - education.
“The fact that the majority of Russians are not satisfied social support not surprising at all. We have serious problems with this on all fronts. Cumulative part pensions are frozen (although 83% of Russians are interested in it), the distribution part is calculated according to principles that are incomprehensible to many. And not everything is going smoothly with medicine: the number of beds is decreasing, queues to see doctors and mortality in hospitals are growing. At the same time, about 17 billion rubles a year are spent on maintaining insurance companies. medical institutions, which in fact do nothing except distribute funds from insurance fund to hospitals. And the development of housing and communal services is often slowed down due to complex connections between the population, management companies and service providers,” director of the Institute of Contemporary Economics, political scientist Nikita Isaev comments to MK.
But if there are problems pension provision have an objective reason (deficiency federal budget), then housing and communal services and medicine are the direct responsibility and area of responsibility of the ministers supervising them. “Resources for modernization in the form of eliminating ineffective spending in these areas exist,” explains Nikita Isaev.
According to the survey, 39% of Russians believe that the main responsibility for social policy carried by President Vladimir Putin. “This indicator is significantly lower than his political rating, which can be interpreted as a factor that the population relieves the president of responsibility for the problems that arise in the social sphere,” notes Alexey Firsov.
However, 36% of our compatriots are confident that regional authorities should be responsible for problems, 33% named ministers in charge of various areas of social policy.
At the same time, 17% of citizens singled out Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. According to general director In the center, such figures indicate the formation of a “void of responsibility” around the figure of the chairman of the government.
The topic of the day
The Russian economy has found its bottom. This phrase actually became a catchphrase in 2016 thanks to the former head of the Ministry of Economic Development Alexey Ulyukaev. He said it in February. This was repeated after him like a mantra by officials of the Ministry of Finance, managers of the Central Bank, and even the celestials from Old Square. Ordinary citizens did not feel any bottom. They rather drowned in an attempt to get to the surface, greedily swallowing the remaining air.
Everyone hoped for the best - after all, if they had found the bottom, then it was time to push off from it. But almost a year has passed, and the number of those who felt afloat, contrary to the optimism of officials, has decreased. According to the latest monitoring of the socio-economic situation prepared by RANEPA, in the first month of this fall alone, the share of those who see a noticeable deterioration in their lives and the country’s economy increased from 17% to almost 25%.
Officials are surprised: what is the population dissatisfied with? After all, real wages in September increased compared to same period last year by 2.8%. So live to your heart's content. But that’s why government functionaries are created to juggle facts and figures and abuse statistics, turning them into an incoherent set of political speculations. During the same time, the fall in real disposable cash income of the population exceeded 5%, and the real size of pensions - 3.6%. That is, wages may be rising, but their purchasing value is declining.
People are starting to withdraw funds from the last of their money. But from an economic point of view, such money boxes are savings that people expected to use to grow, but are now forced to use to cover their immediate needs. Citizens withdraw money from bank deposits, have long stopped thinking about securities, where just two years ago you could win even a penny. These, judging by the monitoring, have decreased by almost 4%. There are also very sad trends - farmers have reduced the purchase of livestock. And this is in the midst of import substitution! This means that Turkish broilers are waiting for us again, or we will be forced to turn into vegetarians.
It’s not worth mentioning other benefits of civilization. Russians are increasingly less likely to think about buying a new car. The share of those who have not yet given up such a dream has halved over four years - to 12%. There is a growing army of workers whose wages are being delayed or sent on unpaid leave.
It is not surprising that three-quarters of the population, once again hearing the phrase “economic crisis,” begin to get nervous and frightenedly sort through the bills in their wallet. For one in four, these words are worse than flood or fire.
But people do not give up hope of somehow swimming out. Some, as noted in the study, are saved by personal plots and creates food supplies for the winter. The number of those who began to grow vegetables and fruits in large quantities in their gardens increased by 10%.
Many take a second job, looking for regular or at least one-time part-time work. Others consider the most successful way to increase income to be “going into the shadows” in order to receive salaries “in envelopes” and save on taxes. At the same time, every third Russian believes that shadow business can be beneficial.
However, it is unlikely that even such tricks will bring tangible results. Already, about 70% of the population feels poor. By the way, official statistics show that about 23 million people are below the poverty line in Russia, that is, about a quarter of the working population.
And if someone expects that next year will be better, then they should abandon these hopes, so as not to be upset again later. The State Duma adopted in the first reading a bill on increasing minimum size wages from July 2017 to 7,800 rubles. That is, 300 rubles. People's representatives They believe that this amount can easily last a month. Despite the upcoming increase in housing and communal services tariffs, an increase in property taxes, as well as excise taxes on gasoline, tobacco and alcohol.
True, the head of the Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, is confident that in 2017 it will be possible to reduce inflation from the current 6% to 4%. But why, when inflation rates fall, real income populations fall along with them, and prices on the shelves continue to rise? Do officials not go shopping? Or do they go to other stores that match their calculations and forecasts?
Maybe we really have reached the bottom, but feeling for it does not mean pushing off. You can get entangled in algae or bury yourself in mud. It very much seems that this is the case. So stock up on potatoes and forget about buying a new “iron horse”. All the same, he won’t get further than the garden.
Inflation and unemployment are becoming the main problems for the population
The overwhelming majority of citizens - about 90% - have some kind of complaints against the current Cabinet of Ministers of the Russian Federation. The government cannot cope with inflation and the fall in incomes of the population - these are the most frequently mentioned complaints. Russians are also concerned about rising unemployment.
Only 10% of citizens surveyed by the Levada Center currently have no complaints about the current cabinet of ministers. Sociologists came to this conclusion after surveying 1,600 people over 18 years of age in 134 localities in 46 regions of the country at the end of February.
The rest, that is, approximately 90% of respondents, have a wide variety of complaints against the government. The most important of them is related to the fact that the Russian government cannot cope with rising prices and falling incomes. This was stated by 55% of the citizens surveyed. Just a year ago, 41% put forward such a claim to the government, and in 2000 – 39%.
It is worth recalling that in 2000, price growth in the country reached 20%, however, judging by sociologists, then this caused less dissatisfaction among Russians than now, with annual inflation of about 17%. This paradox can be explained by the fact that at the beginning of the 2000s, economic difficulties were perceived by citizens as temporary adversity. The population hoped that under the new president, life in Russia would soon improve. And it won’t be worse than during the 1998 default. These hopes were not groundless, because in the first half of the 2000s, real disposable income of the population grew by 10% per year, or even more.
Now positive sentiments citizens seem to be on the decline. Today, many Russians think that the near future will only bring worsening problems. Many citizens do not see that the government is effectively solving problems that arise. One example is an emergency increase key rate The Central Bank in the midst of a currency crisis. Finally, the current double-digit inflation is no longer accompanied by faster growth in income, as was the case at the beginning of the last decade. On the contrary, today real incomes of the population have gone negative for the first time since 2000.
In second place on the list of complaints is the lack of a well-thought-out economic program. This was indicated by 29% of respondents.
Citizens also blamed the government for its inability to deal with economic crisis, do not care about the social protection of the population, cannot provide Russians with work, that the authorities are corrupt and act in their own interests - each of these options received approximately 20% of the votes.
However, the press service of the Levada Center explained to NG yesterday that in fact the level of citizens’ dissatisfaction with the government’s actions is always at approximately the same level. Over time, only the reasons for this discontent change. Thus, in 2001, 20% of respondents accused the government of being unable to ensure stability in the North Caucasus. Now only 1% of surveyed citizens indicated such a problem. Another example: in 2007, 47% of respondents said that the government does not care about social protection of the population. But this was the last pre-crisis, fat year. Now the frequency of mentioning this problem has almost halved.
Finally, Russians told sociologists what worries them most. In first place was price growth, reported by 82% of respondents. 43% of respondents reported poverty and even impoverishment of the population. The third most pressing problem is the rise in unemployment, which is worried about by 38% of respondents.
Let us clarify that the new year 2015 really began for many Russians with layoffs or transfer to part-time work. Previously, the Ministry of Labor already reported that in February the number of officially registered unemployed in Russia increased weekly by 19–20 thousand people, or about 2% (see “NG” dated 03/01/15). Yesterday, the Ministry of Labor reported that the number of unemployed citizens who applied to employment services exceeded 990 thousand people.
True, Maxim Topilin’s department boasted that the weekly growth rate of registered unemployment began to decline: “From March 4 to March 11, the number of unemployed citizens registered with the employment service increased by 0.6%.” “For the second week in a row, a decrease in the growth rate of registered unemployment has been recorded,” Topilin explained.
Experts interviewed by NG admit that there is a direct connection between the state of the economy and the level of support for the authorities. "On this moment the population generally supports the political course, but if inflation continues to rise, then the views of ordinary citizens may change,” says Lionstone Investment Services analyst Ani Kruzh.
In turn, Timur Nigmatullin, an analyst at the Finam holding, points out that “the population of democratic capitalist countries is primarily interested in the level of unemployment, and not in inflation or the tax regime.”
The unemployment rate, according to the methodology of the International Labor Organization (ILO), in Russia is still close to historical minimums since the collapse of the USSR, the expert notes: “In January 2015, the figure was 5.5%, and the historical minimum was reached in August 2014, when unemployment was 4.8%.” And against this background, inflation, according to Nigmatullin, will not greatly worsen the attitude of Russians towards the country’s leadership. Discontent will begin to grow, apparently, only with mass layoffs.
Meanwhile, as follows from VTsIOM data, Russians now approve of the president’s actions, but many are skeptic towards the government. In early March, 80% of Russians approved of the president's actions and only 45% approved of the government's performance.
Only 7% of Russian citizens are satisfied with the work of the Cabinet of Ministers of Dmitry Medvedev. Photo from the official website of the Russian government
Russians are not delighted with the activities of Dmitry Medvedev's cabinet. This is evidenced by the results of Levada Center surveys regarding the main complaints against the government. Only 7% of Russians had no complaints against the ministers. But slightly less than half of the respondents blame the authorities for their inability to cope with rising prices and falling incomes. Every third person is dissatisfied with the level of care government officials take about the social protection of the population. And accusations of ministers of corruption and working only in their own interests have reached their highest level since the beginning of the crisis.
Today, the main complaint of Russians against the authorities is the inability to “cope with rising prices and falling incomes.” This is evidenced by an August survey by the Levada Center among 1,600 respondents.
More than 42% of respondents indicate their inability to “cope with rising prices and falling incomes.” Last year this was stated by 55% of respondents. Today, one in three (34%) complains about the government’s lack of concern for social protection of the population. It should be noted that dissatisfaction with the level of social protection of the population is increasing - a year ago, just over 20% of Russians pointed to this problem.
A significant proportion of citizens believe that the Cabinet of Ministers of Dmitry Medvedev “cannot cope with the crisis in the economy, the decline in production.” 25% of respondents say this today. Slightly less (23%) blame government officials for the lack of a “thought-out program to overcome the crisis” and the inability to “provide people with work.”
Another conclusion of sociologists is also noteworthy. According to the Levada Center, today 27% of Russians are confident that the current Cabinet of Ministers is “corrupt and acts primarily in its own interests.” For comparison: a year ago only 19% of respondents thought so. In the early 2000s, less than 10% of Russians thought so. Only 7% of Russian citizens have no complaints about the government’s activities.
Note that other sociological centers show a different picture. According to the All-Russian Public Opinion Center (VTsIOM), the majority of the population (55%) is confident that the government has a well-thought-out plan to overcome the crisis. And a third of respondents spoke about the absence of such a plan (this survey was conducted in the spring of 2016). Russians, according to VTsIOM, also assessed the government’s capabilities positively. Almost half of respondents (49%) believed that the government would soon be able to change the situation in the country for the better. Only every fourth Russian had the opposite opinion. By the way, sociologists voiced the same data a year ago.
According to the same VTsIOM, in 2015, Russians rated the government’s activities at 3.67 points on a 5-point scale. For comparison: in the more or less stable pre-crisis year of 2013, citizens rated the work of the Russian Cabinet of Ministers at 3.21 points.
NG experts associate the existing complaints about the work of the government with a general decline in the standard of living of Russians. Levada Center survey data also perfectly demonstrates the dynamics of ups and downs Russian economy over recent years, economists continue. “The mood in society is formed under the influence current state economics: when no help is required from the authorities and everything is fine, then the people are happy. But in the event of a crisis, the population begins to count on state support, and this support often does not come,” states Alor Broker analyst Kirill Yakovenko.
“The survey results reflect general economic trends occurring in the country. The decline in quality of life and dependency sentiment have become so strong that most Russians rely only on government funds,” agrees the head of the department of the Russian Economic University. Plekhanov Konstantin Ordov. “Lack of full indexation of pensions to the level of inflation, “freezing” wages public sector employees, the decreasing availability of free healthcare, initiatives to increase taxes with a simultaneous reluctance to reduce the costs of the bureaucratic apparatus convince Russians that the government is not solving the problems of the budget deficit at the expense of economic reforms and internal optimization of their expenses, but due to the deterioration in the standard of living of the population,” notes the director of the center economic research University "Synergy" Andrey Koptelov.
Citizens notice the obvious ineffectiveness of government decisions, which can only be explained by the presence of severe corruption, experts continue. “The public is increasingly aware of the growing gap between rich officials and poor doctors, teachers, and ordinary workers. In addition, the persistence of corruption is facilitated by “clanism”, nepotism and non-functioning social elevators, which is also clearly felt by the majority of Russians. In such conditions, the presented survey data looks quite logical,” continues Yakovenko.
In turn, a series of high-profile anti-corruption scandals both at the federal level and at the level of regional leaders shows that corruption is present at all levels of government. “And although corrupt officials are often punished, Russians understand that there are still people in power for whom personal interests are above state interests,” explains Koptelov. “Moreover, citizens associate the Prime Minister’s revelations about the lack of money with the corruption of specific officials, and not with the state system of economic management, which has led to the fact that about 70% of the Russian economy is formed by state-owned companies and companies with state participation, which precisely creates the basis for corruption government,” says Ordov. And Vera Zakharova, associate professor of the Academy of National Economy and Civil Service, associates such sentiments of Russians with ineffective state and municipal governance, as well as with the lack of a high-quality system for training personnel for public administration.
“The population perceives media reports about the successes of the fight against corruption as a sign that there are more corrupt officials and security forces,” says Natalya Milchakova, deputy director of the analytical department of Alpari.
Some of the experts surveyed doubt the correctness of sociologists’ formulations. “The study’s authors equated corruption with the elite’s desire to act primarily in its own interests. This is an obvious substitution of concepts,” notes lawyer Oleg Sukhov. According to him, corruption should be understood as the use of official position contrary to the interests of society and the state in order to obtain material benefit. “At the same time, it should be recognized that an increase in the number of Russians dissatisfied with the scale of corruption would be quite natural,” he agrees.
“Throughout the 2000s and at the beginning of this decade, the impact of this factor was offset by the increase in the well-being of the population: people were ready to turn a blind eye to abuses by officials, since the increased indicators of quality of life compensated for the losses incurred due to the fault of unscrupulous government officials. However, after the onset of the structural crisis of the economy, the situation changed radically. The level of well-being of the population fell, and the state tried to impose an additional burden of taxes on both business and ordinary citizens,” the lawyer recalls.
https://www.site/2017-12-12/obchestvennaya_palata_uvidela_chto_rossiyane_silno_nedovolny_privilegiyami_elity
"Citizens protest against class"
The Public Chamber saw that Russians were very dissatisfied with the privileges of the elite
The authorities hope that NGOs will be able to smooth out the discontent of citizens opposed to injustice and inequality Nail Fattakhov/website
The Public Chamber presented an annual report on the state of civil society and the non-profit sector in Russia in 2017 (the text of the report is at the disposal of the editors). In it, the OP offers concessions for foreign agents and records the risks of protest: citizens are dissatisfied with the spread of “class privileges” and social inequality.
According to the Ministry of Justice, in 2015-2016, the total number of non-profit organizations in Russia remained stable, with an upward trend. If at the end of 2015 there were about 226 thousand non-profit organizations in the Ministry of Justice register, then in December 2016 there were just over 227 thousand. But at the beginning of November 2017, there were more than 223 thousand registered non-profit organizations in the Ministry of Justice register. Thus, the number of NPOs per Last year decreased by almost 4 thousand organizations.
Independent studies and sociological surveys show that of the registered NPOs, 15-20 continue their real activities. The report also states that the Ministry of Justice has not yet removed such large state corporations as Rostekhnologii or Rosatom from the NGO register. This register also includes all political parties, including regional offices.
With socially oriented (SO) NPOs, the statistics are even more confusing, the report’s authors note. Rosstat maintains statistical records of the SO NPO sector. According to Rosstat, the number of such NPOs continues to grow: if at the end of 2015 there were 140,031 SO NPOs registered in Russia, then at the end of 2016 there were 143,436. This is about 63% of the total number of registered NPOs.
"However, in in this case We should not talk about the growth of the sector, but about the fact that more and more NPOs formally fall into the category of socially oriented organizations - for this, it is enough to mention in the charter of the NPO at least one area of activity recognized as socially oriented. Thus, among SO NPOs - Analytical center under the Government Russian Federation, Agency for Strategic Initiatives, various government funds,” write the authors of the report.
Help for children and animals, but not for science and adults
Trend for activation social life Russians remain. However, not all of it is carried out through NGOs, since most people do not see the difference between NGOs and the activities of civil activists (for which it is impossible to keep statistics at all).
According to the FOM survey cited in the report, 31% of Russians do not participate in any social activities, 21% participate in the life of the church parish, in charity, in parent committees, in monitoring the progress of elections, in protecting environment, in the activities of professional communities, trade unions, 13% help strangers, 19% help their “inner circle” (colleagues, friends, relatives), 7% participate in solving public problems at their place of residence and/or in the activities of NGOs, 4% are students of educational courses, lectures, and/or clubs, interest groups, and/or participants in sports clubs and/or fitness centers, 3% participate in human rights initiatives, mass actions, demonstrations, strikes, rallies, processions.
In 2017, two thirds of Russians (67%) participated in charitable activities.
More than half of Russians (53%) made monetary donations, and the volume of private donations for charitable purposes in 2016 amounted to 143 billion rubles, which is 0.34% of the country’s GDP.
Charitable children's foundation "We are together"
The greatest growth is observed in the transfer of money to the accounts of specific people in need - from 4% in 2007 to 32% in 2017; the share of those who transferred funds to charitable foundations grew a little slower (17% in 2017 versus 4% in 2007 ). Most often, the donation ranges from 101 to 500 rubles (24% of respondents) or from 501 to 1000 (17%).
“The core of the development of the charity sector is charity projects implemented as an instrument of corporate social responsibility. Along with traditional donation collection formats, new types of so-called “smart” fundraising are being added: contactless payments, interactive billboards, the use of QR and bar codes, as well as geomaps and mobile applications. Separately, it is worth highlighting the development of charitable communities in in social networks and on interactive charity platforms (for example, Rusfond.Navigator),” the report says.
According to the Center for Research on Civil Society and the Non-Profit Sector of the National Research University Higher School of Economics, since 2013, trust in the sector of charitable organizations has begun to grow. Today, 59% of Russians are more likely to trust charitable organizations, and 11% of respondents speak of unconditional trust. But at the same time, only 8% of respondents are convinced that all charitable organizations conduct their activities selflessly.
A feature of Russian charity is its limited willingness to help certain social groups.
Thus, the report cites a survey by the Public Opinion Foundation: “Who are you ready to help first?”, half of the respondents answer that age does not matter; 32% of respondents are ready to help children, 12% - elderly. Only 2 people out of 533 respondents expressed their readiness to help adults (in statistical terms this is 0%). Children are helped and ready to help much more often. Russians would be more willing to support an environmental project than to transfer money to a seriously ill adult. 20% of respondents are ready to help animals, but Russians are most reluctant to give money to support scientific research, human rights protection and mental health (all 1%).
According to the Center for Research on Civil Society and the Non-Profit Sector at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, in 2017, 66% of organizations used volunteer labor. Over the past year, 42% of Russians have been engaged in some form of voluntary, unpaid work, among which the leading activities are landscaping and cleaning the territory of populated areas, half of the respondents participate in it, as well as social work (36%).
The report of the Public Chamber provides “an image of a typical volunteer.” This is a girl of 17-24 years old, in the first place of her interests is helping animals - 82%, in second place - social sphere, 79% of volunteers are involved in it; volunteering at events closes the top three preferences: 79% of respondents also spoke about this.
About the mission to mitigate social inequality
In 2017, Russian society reacted sharply to conflicts in the cultural sphere, with a zone special attention housing and communal services problems remained, social protection, ecology, law enforcement system, the attention of citizens was drawn to the issues of combating corruption, write experts from the Public Chamber.
As for the tasks that arose in 2017, these are the fight against false charity, the development of legislative regulation, the fight against extremism, the need to develop regional platforms for dialogue, the fulfillment by NGOs of people’s growing demand for justice and the fight against social inequality.
“Recent sociological research shows an increased public demand for justice. No one considers wealth earned by one's own labor to be unjust.
! But people are extremely sensitive to the inexplicable and inaccessible to the common man luxurious life of officials and their relatives. Citizens are protesting against class everywhere - from medicine to justice, against privileges that allow someone to bypass general rules, violate established norms.The mission of civil society is seen to be precisely to eliminate such injustice, because unjust inequality has become a brake on the development of the country,” the authors write.
This thesis can be confirmed by the VTsIOM survey cited in the report, according to which 44% of respondents believe that in Russian society There is unity, however, among respondents with high and very high incomes, much more respondents hold this opinion than among Russians with average and low incomes.
The authors of the report note that the lack of dialogue between citizens and authorities leads to social tension and radicalization of protest. However, what follows is a strange passage that “in Lately there has been a noticeable increase in the number of groups trying to put their own interests above the interests of other communities and the entire society. The path of directly countering these attempts is ineffective and sometimes has the opposite effect: some communities become even more radical in their demands.”
Nail Fattakhov/website
The thesis is strange, to say the least, since civil society consists precisely of groups defending their interests, which often contradict decisions imposed by the authorities. And, of course, the interests of some groups regularly conflict with the interests of other groups - for example, the interests of citizens, as a rule, are opposed to the interests of developers. The interaction of such groups among themselves and their interaction with the authorities, which usually equate their own interests with the “interests of society,” is the development of civil society in Russia, which, in fact, is what the report is dedicated to.
The report also proposes to introduce a new term - “active patriotism” to denote positive social activity.
In defense of "foreign agents"
The report is divided into several thematic chapters devoted to the work of specific institutions or specific topics of NPOs; in each such chapter, individual problems and proposals are identified.
For example, it is proposed to give a quota when forming regional Public Chambers - a federal public organization - in order to make them more independent from the heads of regions. As for the Public Councils under executive authorities, it is proposed to begin selecting people there through a competition based on clear criteria.
Charitable children's foundation "We are together"
This proposal looks controversial. One of the most scandalous stories of this year was the formation of Public Monitoring Commissions under the Federal Penitentiary Service, access to which was denied to social activists and journalists, but included a lot of veterans of law enforcement agencies, although it is obvious that in protecting the rights of prisoners, a “non-core” social activist or journalist will work more effectively, than the former head of the colony. The development of criteria where, for example, preference will be given to people who have experience working strictly in their profile, can lead to total dominance of security forces in the same POCs. Although the desire to weed out random people who need a place on the Public Council solely for status is understandable.
As for local self-government, the report quite rightly notes that the mechanisms of interaction between government and society in the form of public hearings, referendums, public examinations practically do not work: as a rule, the only way to decide local problem— is to pull it to the federal level, for example, by getting on the “direct line” to the president.
The report again raises the topic of the need for legislative ranking of NPOs in order to give some of them preferences in taxes, reporting, and so on.
It is curious that the Public Chamber again turns to the concept of the activities of “foreign agents”.Several years ago, it was representatives of the Public Chamber who developed proposals for the State Duma on what exactly should be considered political activity in order to include NPOs in the register of “foreign agents.” As a result, the definition advocated by the Public Chamber affected the entire charitable sector. During the discussions, representatives of the Public Chamber (for example, Veronika Krasheninnikova and Elena Sutormina) quoted the biographies of American senators and shouted about a coup d'etat, demonstrating an exceptional lack of understanding of the activities of philanthropists and the entire sector. As a result, after a letter to President Vladimir Putin, charitable organizations managed to amend the bill and remove charity from the types of activities for which, if they receive foreign funding, one can become a “foreign agent.”
This year the report has the opposite direction and instead of proposals to supplement and expand the law “on foreign agents”, it is criticized.
“The law does not contain clear language about the need not only to receive funding associated in any way with foreign sources, but also to have the intent and act on behalf of an agent of influence. Today, legislation on foreign agents provokes the creation of holdings - one organization is registered for politics and Russian money, the other is for foreigners and “outside” political life. For some professionally operating NPOs, this law may be a barrier to the entry of their managers and employees into regional and federal public councils and chambers,” write the authors of the report.
Smart fundraising and open reporting
Regional authorities, in the face of a shortage of money to support NGOs in regional budgets recommend expanding non-financial support measures, primarily through the provision of premises or information support. As for the NPOs themselves, the report's authors propose teaching them how to earn money for new projects by providing services or selling goods, as well as teaching them how to engage in responsible fundraising.
It is also proposed to take measures to increase the transparency of public reporting by NPOs.
Schekinov Alexey Victorovich/Wikimedia Commons
“Access of NPOs to programs government funding, tax and other benefits and preferences involves the organization providing more detailed information about its activities, including financial flows, in other words, more stringent requirements for transparency. Therefore, the distinction various categories The NPO proposes to introduce a more flexible reporting system. Consideration should be given to developing NPO reporting standards similar to non-financial reporting standards commercial companies. This standard could become the basis for NPO communications with outside world— including with donors and grant-distributing structures,” the report says.
As for charity, the Public Chamber plans, together with the structures of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Investigative Committee, to work out a procedure for dealing with cases of fraud in this area, will publish recommendations for identifying fraudsters and finalize legislation.
Centers will come for volunteers
The report proposes to sum up another scandalous topic. We are talking about the initiative to adopt the bill “On Volunteering,” submitted to the State Duma back in 2013. The bill provided for the introduction of a volunteer registration system and caused an extremely negative reaction among volunteer organizations themselves, who drew attention to the fact that an attempt to regulate a developing area would lead to its destruction.
Now the Public Chamber proposes not to adopt this bill, but instead to finalize it current law“On charitable activities and charitable organizations.”
The Public Chamber proposes to introduce a legislative concept of organizers of volunteer activities, volunteer organizations and volunteer support centers. The latter can be either private, non-profit, or public and should be engaged in providing “resource, educational, information, consulting” assistance to volunteers and organizers of volunteer activities. The bill also spells out the rights and responsibilities of volunteers, in particular the right to life insurance and medical care. The right of volunteers to receive “public recognition and encouragement” will be specified separately.
There are no specific amendments yet, so it is difficult to judge them. In any case, abandoning the idea of adopting the law “On Volunteering,” which the volunteers themselves are protesting against, is the right decision. But the creation of “volunteering support centers” looks, frankly, like another useless initiative that will simply create a new network of sinecures for the children or wives of regional and federal bosses: a dust-free job with government funding. Rather than multiplying budget centers, it is better to develop consulting from already existing federal NGOs working with volunteers: by organizing seminars, lectures, distance learning, and so on.