Paul
Goble
Staunton, April 6 – In yet another
reflection of the declining importance of regional legislative assemblies and
of the ruling United Russia party’s desire to control their work, ever more of
these legislatures are reducing the number of full-time and fully-paid deputies
and increasing the share of those whose primary employment is elsewhere.
In today’s “Novyye izvestiya,” journalist
Ekaterina Dyatlovskaya says the ostensible reason behind the cutbacks is saving
money but the result has been a reduction in links between voters and their
representatives, increasing corruption among the latter, and greater control by
United Russia (newizv.ru/politics/2016-04-06/237340-zakonotvorchestvo-kak-hobbi.html).
According to incomplete data, the
journalist continues, “on average in Russia’s regions, only a quarter of
deputies receive pay” for their work as legislators, a figure that has been
falling and one that is forcing them to maintain employment elsewhere and reducing
their ability to represent their constituents.
In a few places, St. Petersburg and
Chechnya, for example, all the legislators are paid for their work and are
expected to be fulltime; but even in Moscow, more than half – 27 of 45 – are part-time
at best. And the fact that there are
some paid slots and many unpaid ones is triggering a new kind of political
fight.
Where there are only a few paid
slots, United Russia has worked to monopolize them, thus increasing its
influence over the legislature because its deputies can afford to work there
fulltime while those representing other parties are forced to work at their
non-political jobs in order to live.
That has another consequence as well,
Dyatlovskaya says. It inevitably sparks conflicts of interest and corruption
because those who are now paid by the government for their legislative work may
be more inclined to take money from interested parties to promote this or that
legislative initiative.
As of now, all seats in the national
legislature are paid; but this trend at the regional level suggests that there
may be increasing pressure to a return to the Soviet-era practice when
legislating was truly a part time job and when the CPSU chose milkmaids and
others to try to present itself as a democratic institution.
To the extent that this trend
continues – and Dyatlovskaya’s article suggests that the situation in this
regard is getting worse rather than better – legislative activity in Russia may
become the latest to be described as a “hybrid,” that is, as something that is
ostensibly one thing but that in fact is something else entirely.
No comments:
Post a Comment