«

»

WAS THE YEAR 2003 SO FAVORABLE FOR THE BELARUSIANS?

The mouthpiece of the presidential administration, newspaper Sovetskaya Belorussia has these days pompously praised social and economic results of the previous year. According to the state statistics, the growth of working efficiency in the real sector of economics has made 10-12%, profitability has increased by 10-12%, the number of non-profitable enterprises has decreased by a quarter and an average salary in the real sector has reached $150 in equivalent. The figures are impressive! Yet, what has really improved in the living of an average citizen who the authorities, as the official propaganda claims, take care about day and night? The newspaper also gives the answer to this question, although a modest one: “According to sociological data, about half of the population estimates the precedent year as a good one.” Such modesty as well as anonymity of the sociologists mentioned raise distrust. The results of our latest nation opinion poll witness that not in vain.

Let us first examine how the population estimates changes in its financial position over the past year. As it can be seen from Table 1, those who admit its aggravation (44.4%) are 3.5-fold more than those who state its improvement (12.7%). In other words, the public opinion doesn’t share the bravura of official reports. In fact, almost all demographic groups estimate the situation in the negative. Veterans (aged 50 and over) are the only group that fell in two equal parts admitting one – improvement and another – aggravation of their financial state.

Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question “In your opinion, how has the financial position of your family changed over the past 12 months?”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
Has deteriorated
44.4
46.3
42.7
45.8
49.2
27.8
35.5
46.8
48.0
Hasn’t changed
41.0
37.5
43.9
34.4
37.2
43.1
51.1
37.7
37.2
Has improved
12.7
14.5
11.1
19.0
11.7
27.5
12.0
13.0
12.9
By presenting answers of respondents to the question on their per capita incomes, Table 2 once again proves that negative estimates of socio-economic results of the past year are prevailing in the mass thinking. Thus, comparing to autumn of 2002, estimation of income position has worsened even more: a year ago 82.2% of citizens lived beyond simple reproduction (minimum consumer budget) and in November of 2003 their number increased to 89.8%. By the end of 2003, over half of adult population (51.6%) lived beyond the poverty line (living wage budget). Also, the number of citizens with the per capita income above minimum consumer budget has gone down considerably. In other words, in the opinion of the population, no improvement of socio-economic conditions of living has taken place in Belarus over the past year. Contrary to Sovetskaya Belorussia‘s assurances, the situation has even worsened.

Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question “Would you please indicate the average per capita income (including salaries, pensions, welfare payments and other extra-earnings) your family had in the past month:”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
09’02
11’03
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
Under the living wage budget ($ 52.4)
49.5
51.6
48.1
54.6
52.3
46.8
56.3
63.8
49.7
45.1
From the living wage budget to the minimum consumer budget ($ 84.2)
32.7
38.2
37.6
38.6
35.4
39.4
38.3
34.2
40.2
38.6
From the minimum consumer budget to $ 100
12.2
5.8
7.6
4.1
4.6
9.1
3.0
0.5
5.9
9.3
Over $ 100
5.6
3.7
5.7
2.1
5.7
4.3
1.9
0.5
3.5
6.2
Distribution of answers to the question about per capita incomes represented from the demographic viewpoint indicates that incomes of men continue to exceed those of women. They go down with age and grow with higher level of education.
Furthermore, the citizens don’t believe the state-run mass media in that “a common man” lives better in Belarus than in Russia. Table 3 shows that respondents’ answers to this question have fallen into three approximately equal groups. But from the demographic viewpoint, distribution of answers differs greatly. Thus, most men think that people live better in Russia. A greater part of youths, middle-aged and highly educated people adhere to the same viewpoint. Veterans and poorly educated persons have an opposite standpoint. Remarkably, there are almost half of those who think that people live equally (equally bad or equally well?) in Belarus and in Russia in all groups.

Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question “In your opinion, do people live better in Belarus or in Russia?”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
In Russia
31.4
35.8
27.8
38.0
37.8
20.8
17.4
37.3
35.3
Equally
31.6
31.2
31.9
31.4
33.1
30.0
36.0
30.1
32.9
In Belarus
28.2
26.2
30.1
24.5
22.8
36.3
35.7
25.4
25.9
Respondents’ predominantly negative estimation of the socio-economic aspects of life in Belarus accounts for their aversion of country’s general development course. As Table 4 shows, almost half of respondents (49.1%) estimate this course as wrong and only a third of them (32.9%) admits it right. As usual, the first are mainly young and educated citizens while the second are veterans and poorly educated citizens. There are by a third more men (56.7%) disapproving the current course than women (42.8%). Data comparison of Tables 2 and 4 reveals an important regularity: the current course is approved by the groups having the lowest incomes. Evidently, the source of income and not the amount itself is crucial here: these are different kinds of transfers and not earnings. In other words, citizens in those groups don’t earn money but receive it from various state sources. They more depend on the state and therefore support the current course.

Table 4. Distribution of answers to the question “In your opinion, is the country in general going in the right or wrong direction?”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
In the right
32.9
30.8
34.6
17.4
23.9
51.4
51.5
28.2
24.6
In the wrong
49.1
56.7
42.8
63.6
60.0
29.2
27.8
55.1
58.0

Table 5. Distribution of answers to the question “Are you satisfied with how the current authorities of Belarus solve the problems of the country?”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
Satisfied*
25.2
22.6
27.3
12.0
15.2
43.3
42.6
18.7
19.5
Dissatisfied**
69.5
72.9
66.5
84.6
80.8
48.7
47.1
77.7
76.7

* This answer incorporates answers “Satisfied” and “Rather satisfied”
** This answer incorporates answers “Dissatisfied” and “Rather dissatisfied”

Table 5 indicates that seven out of ten adult Belarusians (69.5%) are to a different degree discontented by how the authorities solve the problems. Even among veterans and poorly educated there are more discontent citizens than satisfied. Especially large is the number of dissatisfied among younger and highly educated citizens, that is quite clear.
Discontent with the activity of the authorities is projected at the head of state. In his turn, A. Lukashenko constantly distances himself from the government and local authorities blaming them of all political and economic failures. Also, the citizens are strongly affected by his peculiar charisma as well as by his image of the defender of the poor and weak persistently supported by state propaganda. Nevertheless, respondents’ direct assessment of his activity over the whole period of government indicates prevailing of low marks (See Table 6). Thus, his average mark on a five-point scale doesn’t reach even “three”. In fact, it greatly depends on the demographic parameter. Low marks prevail among the men and higher – among the women. Youths and highly educated citizens assess president’s work in lower marks while veterans and poorly educated respondents – with higher marks.

Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question “In general, are you satisfied with how A. Lukashenko has been ruling the country over the past nine years? Give your mark on a five-point scale, where 5 is “absolutely satisfied” and 1 – “absolutely dissatisfied”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
M
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
1
23.0
29.7
17.2
32.5
26.9
13.3
11.3
25.7
28.4
2
20.5
21.5
19.8
26.8
27.1
10.0
10.1
23.1
25.2
3
21.2
19.3
22.8
25.1
22.5
17.7
15.3
25.0
21.7
4
21.2
17.7
24.1
9.9
16.3
33.1
33.5
17.2
16.7
5
12.4
10.1
14.4
3.0
5.7
25.0
27.7
7.9
6.3
Average mark
2.79
2.56
2.99
2.22
2.46
3.47
3.57
2.58
2.46

Table 7. Distribution of answers to the question “Do you think A. Lukashenko understands problems and concerns of the people like you?”, %

Variant of answer
All population
Among them:
Sex:
Age:
Education:
М
W
Under 30
30-50
50 +
Below secondary
General secondary
Above secondary
Yes
44.6
37.9
50.2
25.9
33.6
67.0
67.3
39.0
34.4
No
44.2
51.0
38.5
61.1
54.4
23.5
23.1
50.0
53.1
Thus, discontent of most Belarusians with socio-economic results of 2003 generates dissatisfaction with the work of the government. However, faith of the citizens in good intentions of the president remains strong. According to Table 7, almost half of country’s adult population (44.6%) is convinced that A. Lukashenko understands their problems and concerns. Naturally, this ‘faith rating’ has greatly fallen for the past two years since the presidential election and anti-rating has reached almost the same level (44.2%). Although A. Lukashenko still has a certain reserve before he reaches the “margin of safety”, it can appear too little to prolong his powers beyond the term stipulated in the Constitution.