Poverty

How regional authorities are fighting with “imaginary” poor

In the eight regions of Russia, a pilot project to combat poverty is in force, suggesting a new approach to determining the criteria for need. The authorities seek to increase the targeted social support by excluding the so -called “imaginary” poor from the recipients of the so -called “imaginary”: people with additional property or shadow income (including loans, income from the garden, etc.), but formally falling into the category of poor. The project is tied to the execution of the May decree, one of the points of which is the reduction in the share of people beyond the cost of living by half (now the official poverty level is 12.9%, or about 19 million people). The “new” learned from the experts whether this initiative would turn into another statistical manipulation and what are the chances of the successful implementation of the presidential instructions.

Sergey Smirnov

Economist

-The idea, in addition to income to evaluate the property complex of the family, arose for a very long time-somewhere in the mid-90s, and since then it has been discussed from time to time. If you have a second apartment or a relatively new car, it is permissible to ask why, under these conditions, you are applying for a need for need for aid and try to be among the poor. For example, if you sell your second apartment and put the money in the bank, this will allow you to exist relatively comfortable.

People in Russia, not trusting the state, if possible, are trying to receive those social payments that they are laid by status, but without which they can live quietly.

At the same time, no state structure can completely catch the income of those who want to hide them.

Accordingly, the state proposal is to try to mobilize the property complex of the family and bring these people out of the shadows. Of course, errors are possible here, but since the manuals are not assigned at the federal level, but at the level of the local administration, there is some public control: people in the field know who hides something, lives well and claims to the allowance, and who really lives on water and bread. I am against taking the poor benefits from the poor, but it is really necessary to determine poverty correctly. At the same time, in addition to the property complex of the family, it is necessary to take into account the social status, health status and other factors. If this is not done, we will not come to anything good.

Recently, the RANEPA conducted a study according to which more than half of the recipients of targeted manuals are actually not poor. But here another question arises: in what size do you provide this assistance? If you really solve the problem comprehensively, then you need to increase social support measures for those who really cannot become wealthy.

I do not think that the authorities will tighten statistics to achieve the necessary indicators of the poverty level. There are approved methods that, of course, can be criticized, but it is unlikely that anyone will be manipulated by numbers. Nevertheless, now there is control over statistics, and people simply will not believe that in the current situation, poverty has been reduced twice.

Lilia Ovcharova

Director of the Institute of Social Policy of the Higher School

- The topic of identification of the poor, of course, exists, but is not key and targeted for the poverty reduction project. There is no task to recalculate real estate objects and delete certain groups of families from among the poor. According to our estimates, mainly real estate objects are concentrated in people with income above the subsistence minimum. Perhaps, among those receiving benefits, such families will be identified, but there will not be many of them. We have a fairly high level of poverty, and above all, we must help those who have really low income.

In Russia, the relatively weak inclusion of the poor in the support program, and on the return echelons of the authorities, it was decided that this task will be solved using a tool called a social contract ( *an agreement by which, in exchange for help from the state, a person undertakes to get a job or commit other actions to overcome a difficult life situation - editing *. )

Analysis of the poverty profile suggests that in a large number of poor families there are non -working ones. What to do in this situation? If you try to increase income at the expense of social benefits, then it will be unfair to those who work, but receive a little. During the testing of such technologies, it became obvious that there are small groups of households that have several real estate objects or support from other relatives. But this does not mean that according to these formal signs with them, one must immediately stop working. It is necessary to offer them a source of income, and if they already say that they do not want to work for a “penny” in the amount of the subsistence minimum, then this is an indicator that they have the opportunity not to do this.

As a rule, if a person really does not have enough money even for food, he agrees to any work.

Of course, you need to figure out why it is a person who refuses work. There is an option that the proposal is not convenient for the family, and, for example, does not allow combining children's care and the proposed employment. Then you need to change the proposal. But if the family refuses without a good reason, then this usually means that they have hidden income.

If the regions consider it necessary to take into account informal income before the appointment of benefits, then there is nothing reprehensible in this. A number of regions have no way not to pay attention to the “imaginary” poor, but the administrative costs of identifying additional income are quite high. You still need to figure out whether the game is worth the candle.

Then the question arises of what to do with families who work, but receives a low salary, or with large families, the process of raising at the same time three or more children - this is a serious socially significant work. Therefore, our proposal was like that. If poor people work on socially significant work or carry out a socially significant activity for society, then, within the framework of a social contract, it can be given the right to receive benefits without changing their labor or socially significant activities.

I was at several meetings related to this issue, and at the highest level they said that due to a change in the account methodology, we will not change poverty indicators. The goal of reducing poverty by half by 2024 is quite achievable. We have already reduced poverty from 30 to 15% in the 2000s. Now the question is only that we do not fully know the content of projects to reduce poverty and have not seen regional programs. Of course, this goal cannot be easily achieved, because, as a rule, poverty is reduced due to economic growth and due to social support measures. The social contract combines both economic growth and social support. If you rely only on economic growth, then it will reduce poverty by 60% of the desired value. If our indicators are below 3% of GDP per year, then these are risks for fulfilling the plan to reduce poverty.