HOW DO "COMMON CITIZENS" LIVE?

The state propaganda has been praising socio-economic achievements of Belarus over lately and gave due to the president’s good care about common Belarusians.

What is the true situation in the socio-economic field? Is everything as good as the mass media inform? Has the living of a common Belarusian really improved over the past eleven years of A. Luka-shenko’s governance? What we presently have is well demonstrated in the data of December public opinion poll.

The polling results show that, in the opinion of most citizens, we haven’t approached the living standard of the neighboring countries which started Perestroika at one time with Belarus and which deliberately followed the path of fundamental market reforms. (See Table 1). Many Belarusians personally know about achievements of these countries so as to ensure worthy living standard of their citizens: every second Belarusian have been to Russia, every third – to Ukraine and every fourth – to EU countries. Hence, 55% of respondents are convinced that living standard in Poland is higher than in Belarus (only 6.6% – that it is lower), 42.4% – that it is higher in Latvia (10.5% – lower) and 40.5% – in Lithuania (10.9% – lower). These figures are fairly illustrative!

As regards attitude to Russia, the Belarusian public opinion also tends to think that socio-economic conditions of life are better in Russia than in Belarus. For example, six years ago 70.5% and now about 60% of Belarusians say that living standard in Russia is the same or even lower than in Belarus. The figure goes down despite regular mass media reports on how Russians protest against hard living conditions. By the way, similar protests in Belarus are simply concealed.

Quite illustrative in this regards are answers to the question if people can provide their families with their current incomes. (See Table 2). Thus, 50.7% of respondents said their incomes cannot or can hardly ensure normal nutrition, 73.5% said their incomes are not enough or are hardly sufficient to buy footwear and clothes. Only three citizens out of a hundred (!) can presently afford more expensive purchases like furniture, a car or an apartment.

Picture 1 shows the size of per capita incomes (including wages, pensions, allowances and other earnings) in the Belarusian families. Thus, two thirds of Belarusians have incomes below the level of social survival (so-called minimum consumer budget.) This means that two thirds of citizens of a “strong” and “prosperous” Belarus have to lead an almost beggarly life refusing themselves in the most necessary things! Although as compared to October of 2001 the situation has slightly improved, statements in the mass media about high social achievements are still far from reality.

As per respondents, welfare of 77.8% of Belarusians either aggravated or didn’t change over the past three months. This is the opinion of both men and women, young and elderly, i.e. almost all population groups.

One more thing indirectly characterizes the standard of living in Belarus. This is the fact that around 60% of citizens are going to spent vacations either at home or in the country. Another 13.6% of respondents hope to have a more comfortable rest in Belarus (sanatorium, holiday center, tourist center, etc.)

As the polling showed, 81.6% of Belarusians faced the problems of everyday living over 2005. (See Table 3). The most painful among them are low living standard, high and constantly rising prices, insufficient means of subsistence. Troublesome are as well housing problems, poor municipal service and growth of rates for utilities. Many respondents pointed out to crisis and decline of the enterprises where they work. As regards the other problems which are the source of concern for Belarusians, every fourth citizen noted expensive and poor medical services and every seventh – unemployment.

Clearly, most of respondents would rather have their problems solved than have a new national library, ice palaces or a TV tower built, new military jets and missiles purchased, etc. (See Table 4). In the opinion of 60% of respondents, these are the bodies of state government headed by the president who should solve their problems first of all.

The power really solved its problems in the first place and not those worrying common citizens, which can be seen from people’s opinion that socio-economic situation in the country hasn’t changed over the past year. Thus, almost 55% of respondents both in the beginning of 2005 and now say that nothing will improve but can even worsen in Belarus in the near future.

Perhaps, this is why every third adult Belarusian said he/she would like to emigrate from Belarus if there was an opportunity. (See Table 5). This is the opinion of citizens in a country which doesn’t have ethnic, religious or war conflicts. What’s more, the largest flow of migration moods goes not into Russia, a country close to Belarus in history and culture, but in Germany, France, USA, and other Western countries. Unfortunately, the situation almost hasn’t improved in this regards over the past year.

We should like to underline that less than 15% of respondents aged 50 and over would like to leave abroad while among the youth under 30 this figure is almost 50%. Can a country be called “strong” and “prosperous” if every second young man wants to leave it? What is the future of such a country?

Therefore, advertising of the country’s socio-economic “progress” is a typical example of the election propaganda intended for the people who don’t have true information. As our research has revealed, real life of common Belarusians is far from bright TV images.

Back   Top