This text is translated into Russian by google automatic human level neural machine.
EastRussia is not responsible for any mistakes in the translated text. Sorry for the inconvinience.
Please refer to the text in Russian as a source.
Civil forum: clicked on "repeat"?
The next dialogue of society and authorities in the Khabarovsk Territory: the opinion of the participant
Oleg Belozerovcandidate of technical sciences, member of expert-analytical council on socio-political and socio-economic development of the Khabarovsk Territory under the Governor of the Khabarovsk Territory
18 and 19 in October 2017 was held in Khabarovsk, the Civil Forum, which was held in the building of the Pedagogical Institute of Pacific State University. After registration, all participants went to the institute assembly hall. At the opening ceremony, traditional words were spoken. As a highlight, the participants were offered two small events to rally the team. As part of the first, it was necessary to raise up hands with the included flashlights of the phones to those who came from a particular, called the leading, district of the Khabarovsk Territory. In the process of the so-called "roll call", it turned out that a number of districts are represented very, very poorly. Perhaps this situation occurred because not all participants were able to drive directly to the top of the forum. In any case, I want to think so. As part of the second - it was necessary to make a plane out of a piece of paper lying on the seat of each participant, and, at the command of the leaders, launch it forward and upwards. As I understand it, it was a kind of curtsey to the governor of the Khabarovsk Territory.
After the opening, all participants dispersed along their "verticals". Unfortunately, I was a few minutes late on the vertical "Actual tendencies and technologies of intersectoral interaction", as a result of which I was not allowed to enter the discussion room. In part, this is rather strange, in my opinion, the format of such events should be as formal as possible. In order not to overburden the narrative, I would like to tell more about the work of two expert sessions, which seemed to me the most interesting.
Moderator of the session “Public councils in the system of state and municipal government. Improvement of activity ”was made by the well-known sociologist Yuri Berezutsky. Within the framework of rather informal communication, the speakers and participants of the session voiced a number of interesting points regarding the organization and control over the activities of public councils of executive authorities. The lack of permanent, albeit small, funding was voiced as existing problems, as a result of which the purchase of office supplies and the payment of travel expenses often fall on the shoulders of the council members. The idea of whether the executive authorities should evaluate the work of public councils was also interesting.
One of the speakers, who at the beginning of her presentation suggested to the participants of the session "to push their sleeping neighbors" and also shared her personal way of dealing with unscrupulous vendors who spread expired goods, caused considerable amazement among the attendees - she simply throws it on the floor.
In general, the discussion took place in a constructive manner. It was pointed out that it is very important to create councils from people who enjoy confidence in their field of activity. And to assess the work of councils is necessary on those acute issues that they raise before the executive authorities. Criteria for evaluating the work of public councils today are difficult to describe as ideal, but even in this form they significantly increase the objectivity of monitoring. In addition, as was repeatedly stated, the executive branch on this issue is open to dialogue and interaction with the public.
The moderators of the session "Political Activity and Civic Participation: Changing Reality" were two equally well-known doctors in the region, Leonid Blyakher and Ildus Yarulin. In the opening speech moderators of the session outlined the existing views on the process of interaction between society and government. From reports speakers we learned that in the province there are 44 political parties, 18 of them are members of the Council of Political Parties under the Governor of the Khabarovsk Territory. Of some interest was the question of where is the social responsibility of the state, if all structures (including schools and kindergartens) are gradually "transferred to the rails" of earning money.
Apart from political parties, NGOs, SONPOs, public youth organizations, bodies of territorial public administration and public councils were indicated as tools for increasing civic engagement. One of the problems of interaction between society and the authorities was the news background, divorced from real problems. Indeed, one can agree that the population needs to be told about the existing problems, about what ways of solving them exist. Young people should be spoken to in their language. We cannot exclude the population and business from the participants in the formation of civic engagement. Currently, he solves all existing problems directly with the authorities, and it would be nice, in order to form a civil society, to use public organizations as one of the possible tools in this process.
I liked the speeches of the representatives of the parties of the LDPR and the Communist Party. The representative of the LDPR clearly identified several problems in the province. I remembered the outrageous speech of Herman Gref at a forum in St. Petersburg, where it was almost plainly said that smart people do not need the country. It was very strange for me to hear that among those present there were people who adhere to Gref's position. There were also voiced problems related to ecology, bioresources, wage arrears, inaccessibility of housing. This topic was very displeased representatives of the party "United Russia", which looked from the side is also very ambiguous.
There were among the speakers and extreme optimists from the executive, who tried to explain to the audience that the country is developing and there are no problems. "Do not fall into criticism. All is well". This statement was commented by the representative of the Communist Party, which very accurately identified a number of important problematic issues: the authorities need imitation of civil society; The United Russia merged with the executive power; In the elections, the prevailing role is played by money and administrative resources, which the systemic opposition does not have. This point of view was personally close to me and understandable. The authorities do not really pay too much attention to civil society. I will say more, most often we are talking about the substitution of concepts. The purpose of power is not a real increase in the well-being of citizens, but only the final stage - the right vote. There is a grandiose substitution of concepts. After all, voting is a by-product of very different processes. Representatives of the "United Russia" did not agree with these promises, advising not to scold the executive power, because in Russia it is always the fault of one who does something.
The following speakers lamented that the government remembers the political activity of the population only before the elections. Quite reasonably, the idea was voiced that the media often do not sufficiently cover the work of such events. I try to compensate this gap with my note. Successful examples of civil initiatives in small settlements of the Khabarovsk Territory were cited. The idea that the old technologies are going away, and for the new authorities is not very successful, also aroused interest. And this imbalance needs to be eliminated.
It is necessary not only to deliver relevant information to the public, but also to implement the policy that it supports. An example was given of how the active citizenship of the Moscow population forced the authorities to make changes to the process of renovation that was being carried out thoughtlessly. In general, at the moment, the authorities need to be wary of making new mistakes. Too expensive they cost us all, and soon elections. Ultimately, the population will choose the one with whom it connects its expectations. I do not think anyone needs a revolution. In the final part of the session, the very correct words of a member of the Federation Council Viktor Ozerov sounded that something was needed to change something from the forum to the forum. After all, civil society is the tuning fork with which it is possible and necessary to adjust the political system.
As a small drawback, I would like to note the fact that a number of participants in previous forums saw a certain repetition of the problematic in a number of topics, which has remained without movement since previous years. It remains to wish the organizers for the future to try even more actively to promote the proposals developed by the working groups of the forum, improving the quality of the relationship between society and the authorities in the Khabarovsk Territory, and for this it is necessary to meet as often as possible. In general, the Civil Forum was held on a positive wave. A decent level of organization and a competent selection of moderators in sections made it possible to achieve the tasks set for the forum. And that's definitely a good thing.