In Russia it is necessary to develop a single standard of quality of life of citizens, a base level which must be guaranteed throughout the country. With such offer the Chairman of the Federation Council Valentina MatvienkoO. His initiative, she announced in St. Petersburg at the meeting of the Council of legislators, which was dedicated to the 110th anniversary of Russian parliamentarism, reports news Agency TASS.
Matvienko emphasized the fact that “today in the regions there is a significant disparity in the level and quality of life of people in terms of income, access to education, health care, situation on the labour market. While there are problems associated with principles and methods for assessment of needs and material security of citizens.” What is hindering social support truly targeted, aimed at those who really needed it.
Therefore, the speaker of the Federation Council considers it appropriate to develop a specific standard of quality of life for the citizens of the country. Or, as she put it, “the standard welfare”.
“His basic level must be guaranteed throughout the country”, — said Matvienko.
But how to standardize the quality of life? And why this is an issue our government has attended to now?
— We are without these standards do indeed live twenty-five years. This is the rare occasion when I can understand our government of the nineties, although not very fond of them, to put it mildly, — says CEO of the Institute of regional problems, Dmitry Zhuravlev analyst. — Because at that point, any standard would be a mockery.
“SP”: — please Explain?
— In the period of initial accumulation of the capital to declare anything. But only what will be. In this sense, the Yeltsin government was honest — that she, in General, not peculiar.
And in the “fat years” were late. Standard it was possible to introduce in 2003-m to year. But why did not sent, is also understandable. At that time the standard of living began to rise. It seemed, still slightly, and it increased so that no standards are required.
But not increased. And most importantly, was unstable. Followed by a wave of crises, and it hit hardest precisely in terms of life. Therefore, it was possible to introduce a standard at the beginning of the two thousandth.
“SP”: — Now true?
In any case, there is an explanation of why Valentina Matvienko has taken this initiative. We have, in General, in the economy, it’s not so bad. And that’s just with the standard of living is quite difficult. And so she answered today’s inquiry.
The main question — will it help? Here everything is quite difficult. It can help, but under one condition — if the performance standard will be mandatory, not aspirational. And for that we need clear parameters. So they can’t be interpreted in different ways.
On the one hand, it’s not as hard as the standard is a quantitative phenomenon. And the number, it definitely — or four cows or three. And know exactly what four more than three.
On the other hand, the standard of living — enough three-dimensional concept. It and consumption of goods and consumption of services. And consumption of services are not of a material nature, and environment. For example, the ability to read books is a standard of life or not? And security — personal and of the state? This standard is quantitatively not count. Safety one way to count — you weren’t killed… I mean that itself is very difficult standard to define. It should be very clear. But only a simple clear. And we have not a simple task.
There is another problem: where to get the money to implement this standard? I can already hear the Finance Ministry’s position — at the expense of regional budgets. However, at the expense of regional budgets a single standard consumption you should never do. The different regions, and standard of living are different.
We have now all the activities of the Ministry of Finance comes down to the fact that no money was asked for. But if you follow this logic, then you have the standard also will not work. Not because you will not be able to calculate — you just do not have anything to implement it. Because most of the money will need to give just the poorest regions.
How this contradiction be addressed? It is clear, at the expense of the Federal budget. And the Ministry of Finance will go to the bones, in order not to give money.
And, third, the accountability mechanisms for the failure. If it will be only to scold, then most likely, nothing will come of it. Mechanisms of control and execution is also a very difficult task.
In short, the task is set right, but the difficulties arising on this way, very large. And the main question — whether they do not exceed our capabilities?
“SP”: — it is Necessary to understand the quality of life and standard of living is still different concepts?
Let’s just say the quality of life is not the same standard of living. This quantitative and qualitative criteria. But without quantitative criteria, quality will not install. Qualitative and quantitative cannot be reduced. Simply put, if you have no level of consumption, you quality too, will not create. But if you have the number, it does not necessarily turn into quality.
“SP”: — But in the Soviet Union the standard of living was lower than in the West, and the overall quality of life is the same…
— I have been to the West in the Soviet era and can compare. But, say, how to compare life medieval France and modern France? Then there was no TV. But the products were better.
So here. Yes, not every Soviet citizen was a car, for example. But we had almost free housing.
With regard to the qualitative component… Undoubtedly, in the Soviet Union such areas as security, culture, education, were better than in the West. On the streets of Moscow in the seventies it was possible to walk at night. On the streets of London night and you gonna get it.
We now have security for sure is not higher than in the West. And in Soviet times was higher. Same and culture. But on the other hand, the level of our free medical services was lower than the Western.
Therefore, it is difficult to compare different scales. It is very difficult to compare the quality of life of Soviet and non-Soviet — are two different companies. Here post-Soviet and Western you can compare.
“SP”: — In the West and its standards?
— The standards are there. For example, the money that receive refugees, this is the result of standards. That is, a person who, for example, France should have a “bottom bracket” certain possibilities. He is paid the allowance. A benefit — this is the result of the availability of standards. Therefore, in Europe all run.
Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Institute of demography, migration and regional development Yuri Krupnov , called the initiative Matvienko “an important, but very belated”:
— Quality of life is a key parameter in the evaluation of management efficiency in the modern state. And I want to remind that in the Soviet Union, according to respected international organizations such as who, UNESCO, etc., quality of life, in fact, was at the global level. Not the standard of living — he was behind about half to two times. Namely, the quality of life. That is, all together security, level of education, access to quality health services, etc.
Today our chief objective is to ensure that every resident of the Russian Federation the global quality of life. It’s not a question of the payment of all wages, as the United States or in Europe. And the question for the whole population, where the same security and quality education are no less important than the level of income.
In this sense, Matviyenko’s absolutely right. Including it is certainly right that today wild differentiation in the quality of life in different territories. Completely marginalized, in fact, as a separate state, is Moscow. And fifteen to twenty cities.
Therefore, the head of SF, in this case formulated the strategic task of the state. It should be supported. Then there is a matrix of indicators of quality of life — they can and should argue, to develop Federal. But we need the law about the quality of life of the citizen of the Russian Federation.
