Experts discussed the bill on the provision of social services. Government Commission on Legislative Activities Example of a state social order for the provision of services

Feedback from public experts, representatives of public organizations on the bills: “On the state (municipal) order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere and amendments to certain legislative acts Russian Federation" and "On amendments to Article 31.1 of the Federal Law “On Non-Profit Organizations” (N 7-FZ)

The Public Chamber of the Russian Federation will hold a zero reading of two bills. We publish reviews of public experts and representatives of public organizations about them.

The public and experts demand that these two bills be rejected with “zero” consideration in the RF OP on October 6, 2016 due to the fact that their introduction into domestic legislation will provide the opportunity for commercial and non-profit foundations and organizations to interfere in the private lives of Russian citizens and Russian families. including foreign, private entrepreneurs, vesting them with state powers in the field of social services to the population in the absence of stipulated responsibility for these powers, as well as financing NPOs from budget funds allocated for the social sphere, which will lead to the redistribution of budget funds allocated for social sphere and will reduce the funding of state and municipal institutions, citizens, will create certain risks of imposing social services under the guise of social support, falling into a sect, into corruption schemes, with the subsequent gradual privatization of the state sector of social services.

Law “On social services» officially allowed to involve commercial and non-profit organizations in the field of social services. At the same time, the state pledged to help them. In 2015, 168.5 million rubles were allocated from the federal budget to subsidize private social initiatives.

For organizations providing social assistance to the population, a zero income tax rate is provided until January 1, 2020. The law has put forward certain requirements for such organizations.

It was assumed that commercial and non-profit organizations would reduce the burden on municipal and government agencies. This led to a reduction in the number of government social workers. In 2014, 143 social service organizations were liquidated or reorganized; by 2018, another 260 organizations are planned to be cut in 33 regions.(1)

Since NPOs with foreign funding operating in the field of family and childhood are not subject to the Law on Foreign Agents, transnational organizations can and are already entering the social services market, profiting from the provision of social services and gradually privatizing the public sector.

This is what V. Putin said regarding the issue of benefits for NPOs at the “State and Civil Society” forum: “We need to define what a non-profit organization is, what it is political activity. Today, socially oriented NPOs are rather vague definitions; we need to figure this out somehow before we can take any step towards preferential treatment.”(10)

Then the president noted that in order to organize benefits, including tax benefits, for non-profit associations, it is necessary to first define the concept of the activities of such associations.

Therefore, before talking about financing NPOs from the state budget under state orders, it is necessary to first determine “who is who” and formulate at the legislative level a clear definition of what is “political activity” and what is “social activity”, develop criteria for which can evaluate their work from these positions.

We consider it necessary to insist that NPOs, even those involved in the field of motherhood and childhood, when providing social services if they are involved in politics, do not consider them already socially oriented NPOs, as is stated in the American law on NPOs, which states that if an NGO directly spoon-feeds the poor or changes diapers for old people, then this is a social activity. And if an NPO interacts with any officials to create or change the state system (for example, even changing diapers for a group of people) - this is already politics.

The lack of prescribed responsibility for public activists, as well as large and not clearly defined powers, and subjective evaluation criteria create corruption mechanisms.

The introduction of juvenile technologies with the direct participation of NGOs in the formation of family policy gradually formed an artificial sphere for the protection of the rights and interests of children - the prevention of family troubles from abuse and social orphanhood.

One cannot ignore the possibility of penetration into the ranks of NGOs and totalitarian sects.(2)

The technology for replacing the public sector in the social sphere is described in article (3) using Norway as an example.

“So, in Norway, the sphere of once public child protection services in Norway has today been turned into a gigantic private multi-billion dollar business in children. And the main ones characters in this story - transnational corporations that simply make money off Norwegian families and children.

It began with the fact that guardianship authorities, orphanages, social rehabilitation centers began to actively become the property of heads of municipalities and other government officials. Each of those who had the opportunity to integrate into the business chain privatized a state company or created their own private company “to provide services to families and children.” These companies, providing a variety of services “to protect the rights of children to prevent abuse and family dysfunction,” receive money from the state for the provision of these services at established rates. The development of these companies is carried out at the expense of funds invested by foreign investors! That is, after the privatization of the services market began, mega-corporations began to invest in it. foreign investors, together with government officials, create their capital at the expense of Norwegian citizens and the Norwegian budget, essentially building a full-cycle business out of thin air.

The cycle includes the following services:

Family monitoring services, identification of troubles,

Family social patronage services,

Psychological assistance services,

Social rehabilitation services,

Mediation service services,

Services for removing a child for reasons possible risk violence

Child placement service in a private orphanage,

Replacement family selection service,

Placing a child in it.

Since 2003, small private companies providing care for selected children have grown into large private companies selling child protection services, and then they have been bought up by large multinational monopolies.

Although at the government level it was formally stated that only reliable government decisions could become an alternative to the privatization of child protection services, but:

“Since 2005, local authorities have begun to purchase much more services from private foundations and private organizations,” writes the Dagsavisen newspaper in November 2009

Tariffs of private companies and non-profit organizations for services in all areas of “child protection” taken away from parents are growing rapidly, but local authorities are forced to buy them, since there is no public sector left. They purchase services directly from private companies and private organizations. Local authorities purchase child protection services from private guardianship authorities.

Norway's largest newspaper, Aftenposten, writes: “Child protection in Norway has become a billion-dollar business... Everything from the British investment fund from London to the wealthy Swedish Wallenberg family, realized that protecting children's rights could bring in billions in profits. It was for these billions that they came to Norway in last years largest transnational foreign financial corporations."

Argan Capital is a London-based investment company created by Bank of America, which describes its business model on its website: "Argan Capital seeks to maximize profits by carefully selecting its businesses." It turns out that the sale of child protection services is the very carefully selected commercial environment for making super profits?

Who is there to take care of the child and the birth family?

In Russia, representatives of the Moscow Department of Social Protection are in close cooperation with overseas “partners” and at their numerous press conferences supposedly dedicated to “family protection”, for some reason they are silent that the department’s seminars are led by representatives of foreign business dealing with children - for example, the Finnish juvenile corporation Merikratos Group. They monitor the situation with Russian orphans and mothers at risk. They employ “experts in the method of evolution of parenthood” and “sellers of child rights protection services.”

They teach our social workers to determine which parent is correct and which is not, and how to make a profit from this difference, “increasing the efficiency of providing public services to families with children.” Don't be fooled by the words "government services"! Private companies received the right to provide “public services”. This is exactly what visiting and unexpected foreigners teach them.

The international organization "SOS Children's Villages", in which branches operate throughout Russia, the lion's share is financed from abroad.

The main partner of USAID in Russia, the NGO “National Fund for the Protection of Children from Cruelty,” with representative offices in all 83 regions of Russia, conducts extensive activities to introduce Western standards of those same services for “protecting children’s rights,” and at the same time conducts paid seminars for 2,500 government officials a year.” (1).

In Russian legislation, there have already been attempts to push through bills affecting the work of NPOs in the social sphere with the gradual displacement of government structures from its sphere in 2012, but they were rejected.

Thus, in 2012, the State Duma rejected two such bills:

1 - N42197-6 “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation on the implementation of social patronage and the activities of guardianship and trusteeship authorities” http://asozd.duma.gov.ru/main.nsf/(Spravka)?OpenAgent&RN=42197 -6, (where the decision was made: to reject consideration of the bill by the State Duma and remove it from further consideration on 01/22/2014)

2 - N3138-6 “On public control over ensuring the rights of orphans and children left without parental care” (consideration postponed indefinitely).

Where, in order to monitor the activities of institutions in which there are orphans and children left without parental care, the law on public control involves the creation of an institute of public observers, the formation of Public Monitoring Commissions (POC).

The bill stipulates that members of the PMC and other persons provided for by law will receive the right of access to these institutions without special permission and prior notification of administrations (1.19), the right of access to information containing personal, family and medical secrets of children and persons staying there, and the right to copying (5.19), the right to contact the prosecutor's office and executive authorities if information is not provided; the right to talk without witnesses with children and persons in organizations (3.19), as well as the right to work to place them in organizations for orphans and children without parental care; activities to find other forms of placement for children (a.b.1.2.6), to promote cooperation between public and other non-governmental organizations, other legal entities, as well as individuals with the administrations of organizations for orphans and children without parental care (4.8) , to solve other problems (5). department. It is planned that it will be public (probably, such as the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and the Commissioner for Children's Rights under the President), and that it will consist of social activists delegated to this responsible task by their organizations, who will have to bear the burden of material costs for their work (which immediately narrows the circle of applicants to a specific list). The department will consist of Federal and regional commissions, as well as attracted experts and trusted specialists. Any person over 23 years of age without a criminal record can be a member of the PMC. The PMC will not be legal entity, and therefore will not be held responsible for their actions. POCs will be formed by Public Chambers on a federal-regional basis, i.e. building a vertical line. Vertical of the next power.

Members of the PMC will receive unlimited powers and unspecified responsibilities, they will be able to copy personal documents not only of children, but also of “other persons in orphanages” (it’s hard to even imagine how this could be), but the main thing is that they will receive nothing and no one unlimited access.

Domestic and foreign “friends of the children,” out of “compassion” for their unfortunate fate, are trying to place these children in families abroad. (So, Mrs. Fratti, for example, took 1,260 Russian children to Italy, whose traces were somehow lost. But she wanted “what’s best”?)

Is it right to transfer the constitutional functions of the state to protect families and children to public structures? Who is really responsible and accountable for the children?

President V. Putin, coming to the 1st Congress of Parents in the Hall of Columns, supported the demands to the Government and deputies about the inadmissibility of:

Introduction of social patronage (social support),

Preventive early intervention in family affairs, when parents have not yet done anything,

Introduction of regulations for interdepartmental interaction (5-B), thereby eliminating

the possibility established by these bills of interference in the private life of families by commercial and non-profit foundations and organizations, including foreign, private entrepreneurs, vesting them with state powers in the field of social services for the population and financing from budgetary funds

The bills were rejected, but despite the support of the president and the collection of 140 thousand signatures against juvenile innovations, the Federal Law “On Social Services for Citizens of the Russian Federation” was later adopted, where all the innovations were again included in the legislation: social terms. support, preventive early intervention, regulations for interdepartmental interaction. Another reason for the rejection of the law by the general public was the document’s transfer of part of the burden of social services from the public sector to the commercial sector (which was regarded as the beginning of the process of eliminating state power in the field of social services).

“The Federal Law “On Social Services” establishes control over each family - social patronage (in the law it is called social support), which is imposed on citizens under the guise of social assistance. A system of intervention by organizations of a wide range of people into the private lives of families is being legitimized, with the possibility of removing children from them at the discretion of officials solely on the basis of poverty or need for state assistance. But the greatest concern is caused by the provisions of the law that allow for early intervention by the state and the public (NPOs) in family affairs on an exploratory basis for the purpose of prevention, when citizens have not yet done anything (clause 6 of Article 3, Article 29 of the Law).

The Law also contains blatant standards in the field of preventing the need for social services, for the purpose of which the bill allows you to come to absolutely any family without any reason or signal, and conduct checks there in search of reasons that may lead to the emergence of a need for social services. An attitude towards the parental function as a normal type of entrepreneurial activity is imposed, and social workers family technological cards.

These provisions violate the basic democratic rights and freedoms of citizens, such as the inviolability of home and private life, the constitutional principles of the presumption of innocence and good faith of parents. And the absence of any legislative criteria for early ill-being leaves unlimited opportunities for arbitrariness and corruption of officials.

The Law allows public authorities to attract private individuals, commercial and non-profit organizations, as well as funds, including foreign ones, for these purposes (the Law does not contain a prohibition). But the actions of these persons cannot be appealed in court and they are not subject to official liability in case of abuse of state powers vested in them, which can also lead to arbitrariness and corruption in this area” (5-A).

ALL public activists (NPOs) ARE NOT SUBJECT TO OFFICIAL LIABILITY in case of abuse and are INTERESTED in the provision of services.

The lack of stipulated responsibility for these powers creates certain risks of imposing social services under the guise of social support, falling into a sect, or becoming involved in corruption schemes...

Financing NPOs through the redistribution of budget funds allocated to the social sphere will reduce funding for state and municipal institutions, orphanages, and citizens.

The law allows the public (NGOs) to come to any family without any reason or signal and conduct checks there at a time when the parents have not yet done anything. This violates the basic democratic rights and freedoms of citizens, such as the inviolability of home and private life, the constitutional principles of the presumption of innocence and good faith of parents, and non-interference by anyone in family affairs. And the absence of any legal criteria leaves unlimited opportunities for arbitrariness and corruption of officials.

Intervention in the family by outsiders, persons with family and spiritual and moral values that are unconventional for our country can lead to the breakdown of the system of basic family and moral principles, the absolutization of individual freedom, an imbalance between human rights and freedoms, the breakdown of state sovereignty and external control.

It will allow turning our people and state into a population of controlled individuals, LGBT communities, breeding service people for the needs of the global elite (7).

According to the bills on NPOs proposed for consideration, on the basis of rights delegated by the state (guardianship) (by state order), NPOs will benefit a large number of families in a socially dangerous situation, who will need to be proactively identified for need, provide social services or social support. It is proposed, under the guise of placing a child in a family, to place him with foster carers for money. Moreover, this is planned to be done through NGOs, which do not bear official responsibility for their actions, but are given the exclusive right to place children they have selected in new families, that is, to work “to order.” This is planned using budget funds intended to finance social orders and provide real assistance to families.

The powers of guardianship and trusteeship over orphans and orphanages themselves, since the beginning of the Federal Law “On Social Services”, have been transferred to the jurisdiction of social protection authorities since 2015. With privatization, these powers may end up in the hands of for-profit and non-profit organizations, leading to greater risks without accountability.

The ability to collect confidential information about adults and minors, create and enter confidential data into the register of social assistance recipients, create a unified register of social service providers, which will include NPOs with already established infrastructure, methodologically supported and equipped, well-funded not only from the state budget, but also from sponsors (including foreign ones, which is not prohibited for NPOs serving this area) create serious risks for recipients of social assistance.

The need for social assistance is planned to be carried out preventively, collecting confidential information about citizens and families, according to interdepartmental interaction, from clinics, schools, clubs and sections, anonymous calls, and from neighbors.

Failure to inform the guardianship authorities (according to the voiced proposals of the head of the Investigative Committee, Bystrykin) may result in criminal or administrative punishment in the future.

Today, based on an anonymous call or message, a “flying team” leaves, which, without permission or notification of the owners, conducts an inspection of the living space, collects information on all family members, and makes an assessment of the parameters of the family’s functional state based on diagnostic criteria using a set of methods: observation, questioning , interviewing, patronage, document analysis, use of expert assessments, where experts can act as wide circle persons The degree of social tension in the family and the presence of a threat to minors are determined. Family members are forced to undergo psychological testing based on Western juvenile methods, where in most cases, when interpreting test results, if desired, one can find conflict situations between family members and impose social support for the family (patronage). In case of refusal, the family is registered and sued for restriction or deprivation of parental rights.

The authors of sometimes new psychological and educational concepts, methods, and tests treat a person not as an individual, but as a kind of “capital” whose effectiveness can be increased for the purpose of “economic development”, and to the parental function as a normal type of entrepreneurial activity, not taking into account that Russian traditions are still preserved and are protected by the National Security Strategy (approved by Presidential Decree No. 683 of December 31, 2015)

So, “according to K.N. Polivanova, head of the new project The concept of a system of professional assistance to parents in raising children “the essence of the modern stage is the erosion of the ideal of the family. According to D. Elkind, if in the middle of the 20th century. The ideal of a family was a complete nuclear one, and its image was a joint evening meal, then in the postmodern era it is the endless journey of a child.” I just want to add - from parent No. 1 to the orphanage, from the orphanage to parent No. 2, etc.”

The Foundation for the Support of Children in Difficult Situations has been introducing juvenile technologies in Russia for a long time. “In a study commissioned by this Foundation, “Become parents? Responsible Parenthood” (2015) reports: “It is advisable to develop a system of indicators that allows us to diagnose the situation in the family and the state of parent-child relationships. Experts believe that such a diagnosis can and should include a) the level of financial security of the family, its economic and consumer status, b) the degree of tension in the relationship between parents and children, and c) the frequency of use of physical punishment by parents."

In other words, we are gradually being brought closer to “licensed parenthood” - to the ban on giving birth to children without the sanction of “teachers”... The introduction of “responsible parenting” programs (as well as sex education for children, partner “gender” relationships, etc.) is being implemented with support from the MacArthur Foundation. This Fund was included by the Federation Council in the patriotic stop list, since the Fund’s participation in undermining civil society in Russia was recognized.

Western experience definitely shows movement in this direction. As Bridget Robb, head of the British Association of Social Workers, says: “Adults who have had learning difficulties are told not to have children because they won’t cope.” If pregnancy does occur, it is recommended to have an abortion” (9).

The Commissioner for Children's Rights in the Perm Territory, Pavel Mikov, complained at one of the conferences that foreign organizations, which in the early 90s successfully built a policy of helping our children, financed the creation of local organizations for such assistance, now, after the adoption of the Federal Law "On NGOs,” organizations receiving Western funding suffered undeservedly: “The Russian Children’s Fund came under sanctions as a “foreign agent” that cooperated well with UNICEF and this weakened the participation of non-profit organizations in helping children.”

For reference, it is necessary to recall that, following USAID, the Russian government demanded that the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) complete all remaining projects in Russia by December 31, 2012.

“The founder of the private United Nations Foundation for the production of a “humanitarian vaccine” (a hidden campaign to reduce population) is the American billionaire Ted Turner, who became widely famous for his fight for allowing abortion and limiting the birth rate. In particular, he financed UNICEF programs - the United Nations Children's Fund - aimed at reducing the birth rate in third world countries. This is what caused the conflict and the termination of UNICEF's cooperation with the Catholic Church. According to the Vatican, this international organization has become an instrument for implementing Turner’s inhuman ideas regarding population reduction through abortion and sterilization...” (4)

The National Foundation for the Protection of Children from Cruelty receives Western funding. The prosecutor's investigation confirmed this fact. The US Agency for International Development USAID calls the fund its “key partner” in documents. The Foundation also cooperates with UNICEF, the US Department of Justice, the US Institute of Social Services, and other organizations. Implements systemic programs and projects at the federal and regional level to develop legal and program documents, methodological recommendations aimed at optimizing management mechanisms, developing and introducing juvenile technologies to help families and children, preventive services and modern models of interdepartmental interaction, for a comprehensive analysis of the regional situation and ongoing activities in the field of child protection. The Foundation has developed 26 standards for services to provide assistance to children and the prevention of social orphanhood and technologies for the provision of preventive services for families and children to identify children in need of state protection, administrative regulations for the performance of state functions to identify signs of violation of the rights and legitimate interests of a child, and take measures on the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the child, the organization of social support for the family, the provision of emergency psychological assistance to children by the children's helpline service, standards for receiving information as a “one-stop shop”, planning the actions necessary to assess the child’s need for state protection; assessment of the child’s safety, the degree of risk of child abuse, assessment of the child’s need for state protection in the body and measures to protect the rights and legitimate interests of children and many others. etc.).

Recently, the Ministry of Justice admitted that the purpose of RANiR’s activities is: “Influencing the adoption of decisions by government bodies aimed at changing their government policies,” that is, they actually admitted that they influence government demographic policy from the territory of Great Britain and Austria.

Since the 90s, RAPS has actively worked with government agencies, lobbying for various projects on birth control, including full access to schools. Gradually, when the true goals of RAPS became clear to Russian society, and also after scandals in the press, the “RAPS project” was closed.

In this regard, the question arises: Russian NGOs that created and financed foreign campaigns to build a juvenile policy of “helping our children” will protect the interests of which state? Is it possible for them to be allowed to influence government bodies in order for them to make government decisions in the field of family policy, in social, educational, medical and other areas, to entrust government functions guardianship authorities?

Further, if social workers find that parents, by their actions or inactions, do not provide normal conditions for the upbringing, mental and physical development of the child, then this is equivalent to leaving the child in a situation dangerous to life and health (or leaving the child without care), he is removed from orphanage temporary stay institution, and within a week the parents are sued for restriction or deprivation of parental rights.

When determining his status, information about the child is submitted to a regional data bank for the subsequent placement of the child under guardianship, in adoptive and foster families, for social education, including abroad.

Participation of interested parties (NGOs) in this entire chain from identifying “need”, as a result of which the family will be recognized as being in a socially dangerous situation (difficult life situation) and in need of state assistance - on the one hand, and the provision of “social services” by them - on the other, leads to a conflict of interests and possible abuses of social workers.

This is further aggravated by the fact that at the moment, in Russian legislation, families in difficult life situations (poor, large families, divorced, single, disabled, migrants, etc.) are classified into one group (socially dangerous) with asocial families, where parents drink, have addictions, and are in prison.

As a result, a system of strict tracking and control of families with children is being built using Western juvenile technologies. This is a self-sufficient new system for “protecting children’s rights” from parental abuse and family dysfunction, where the function of state power is minimized to funding and giving the “green light”. Branches of foreign companies are legalized, no longer risking being classified as “foreign agents” for initial financing and engaging in “political activities” with influence on the legislative, judicial and executive powers.

Due to the implementation of the per capita financing mechanism introduced in the social sphere, education and health care systems, NPOs are interested in removing children for a stable income and strengthening their material base.

This violates the principle of non-interference in family affairs established in Article 1 Family Code RF.

Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, in its ruling dated May 26, 2011 N 875-О-О, indicated that this principle is a concretization of the provision of Article 38 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the state’s protection of family, motherhood, paternity and childhood. That is, a violation of this principle conflicts not only with the family legislation of the Russian Federation, but also with this constitutional norm.

In addition, being documents of a subordinate level and of dubious legal nature, regulations on interdepartmental interaction, however, limit the constitutional rights of citizens, in particular the right to family protection, the right of parents to raise their children (parts 1 and 2 of Article 38 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), the right on the inviolability of home, private life, personal and family secrets (Articles 23, 25 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). This provision does not correspond to Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, according to which the rights and freedoms of citizens can be limited only by federal law and only to the extent necessary in order to protect the foundations of the constitutional system, morality, health, rights and legitimate interests of other persons, ensuring national defense and state security.

I would like to recall the words of V. Putin regarding the issue of benefits for NPOs at the “State and Civil Society” forum: “We need to define what a non-profit organization is, what political activity is. Today, socially oriented NPOs are rather vague definitions; we need to sort this out somehow before we can take any step towards benefits.”

The public and the expert community believe that it is necessary to take a number of legislative measures to bring domestic legislation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, namely:

Stop interference in the private life of Russian citizens and families, especially private entrepreneurs, commercial and non-profit foundations and organizations, including those with foreign funding;

Prevent the vesting of commercial and non-profit funds and organizations, including foreign (or working on juvenile methods), private entrepreneurs with state powers in the field of social services for the population and financing from budgetary funds;

Prescribe a ban on participation and work in the social sphere of commercial and non-profit foundations, organizations, individual entrepreneurs who work using Western juvenile technologies, are sectarians, sexual minorities or persons who do not adhere to family values traditional for Russia (prescribe requirements for candidates);

Prescribe the responsibility of persons working in the social (educational, medical) sphere in accordance with the powers exercised (including prosecutorial control); determine the grounds for liability for violation of the law, as well as the circle of persons subject to liability.

Correlate the principle of non-interference in family affairs with the objectives of providing social services;

Formulate at the legislative level a clear definition of what is “political activity” and what is “social activity” in order to separate politically oriented NPOs from truly socially oriented NPOs that help people.

The Federal Law “On the Fundamentals of Social Services for Citizens in the Russian Federation” is amended, developed by the parent community (8):

Exclude the possibility established by the specified Federal Law of interference in the private life of families by commercial and non-profit foundations and organizations, including foreign, private entrepreneurs, vesting them with state powers in the field of social services for the population and financing them from budgetary funds;

Abolish the contract system for the provision of social services, which allows social workers to arbitrarily interfere in family affairs and in the process of raising children under the threat of deprivation of the right to social security established by Articles 7, 39 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation;

Introduce guarantees for the protection of personal data of recipients of social services and members of their families.

Eliminate the possibility of unjustified interference by officials in family affairs (social support) on the basis of regulations for interdepartmental interaction, which allow, using evaluative criteria that are vaguely broad and not easily interpreted, to exercise control over families (social patronage), up to the removal of children from them;

Eliminate technologies for early detection of family dysfunction in order to prevent the possible onset of the need for social services (that is, when the parents have not yet done anything);

Introduce clear and justified criteria for recognizing citizens as needing social services with the necessary condition of being in a “difficult life situation.”

At the same time, exclude legal basis for the unreasonable recognition of citizens in need of social services in cases of any “intrafamily conflicts”, as well as “family violence” and other situations not defined by current legislation and that can lead to a broad interpretation of the law and interference in the private life of families;

Introduce guarantees for the protection of personal data of recipients of social services and members of their families.

In connection with the above, currently consideration must be rejected bills "On state (municipal) orders for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere and amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation"

And "On amendments to Article 31.1 of the Federal Law “On Non-Profit Organizations” ( N 7-FZ).

Head of the working group of the OP SO for monitoring the compliance of orphan organizations with the requirements of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 481 Svetlana IN Okhmyanina

Additional literature:

1. Federal_law_"On_the_fundamentals_of_social_service_to_Russian_citizens"

Federation": http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_156558/

The main objective of the two bills submitted to the State Duma by the Government of the Russian Federation is to improve the quality and accessibility of the provision of public and municipal services in the areas of education, healthcare, social protection, employment, physical education and sports. To achieve this goal, it is planned to open access for non-governmental organizations to the provision of state and municipal services in the social sphere. It is expected that this will not only ensure the availability of services for the population, but also improve the quality of work of state and municipal institutions. As the initiator noted, the currently existing tools for attracting non-governmental organizations to the provision of public services have significant shortcomings and do not ensure the unity of law enforcement practice. And the bill will create equal conditions for everyone, regardless of the type of organization.

To fulfill the state or municipal social order, competitions will be held, including with the participation of non-governmental organizations, and certificates will be issued giving citizens the right to independently choose organizations that provide them with this or that service at the expense of budget funds. It is explained that citizens will have the opportunity to participate in choosing the service provider, thus ensuring the principle “money follows the consumer.”

When deciding to change the current legislation, world experience was also taken into account. “Market-oriented, competitive methods of providing public services at the expense of budgetary funds by both state and non-state organizations have long been widely used in the world,” says the explanatory note to the bill. It is also noted that social entrepreneurship requires predictability and long-term relationships with the state.

What are the actual prices for paid services provided by state and municipal institutions? Find out from the material "Paid services of state and municipal institutions" in "Encyclopedia of solutions. Public sector: accounting, reporting, financial control" Internet version of the GARANT system. Get 3 days free!

It is planned to adopt a large-scale bill “On the state (municipal) social order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere,” as well as a document that will amend the current legislation in connection with the adoption of the first. If they are adopted, the relevant laws will come into force on January 1, 2019, with the exception of certain provisions.

______________________________

With the text of bill No. 519530-7 "On the state (municipal) social order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere
The text of bill No. 519539-7 "On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the adoption of the Federal Law "On the state (municipal) social order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere" and materials for it can be found on the official State Duma website.

The new law will allow businesses to be involved in the traditionally state sphere of social services.

Currently in Russia there is no systemic regulation of the participation of non-governmental organizations in the provision of public services. Regional authorities are trying to resolve this issue independently and are developing their own regulatory framework, which is not supported at the federal level. This, naturally, creates imbalances; the conditions for attracting non-governmental organizations to provide public services vary greatly in different regions. In addition, only those regions that are willing to bear the risks associated with monitoring the targeted use of budget funds involve non-state structures in the sphere of public services.

To solve the problem, the Ministry of Finance developed a bill on social procurement, which was approved by the government, submitted to the State Duma and is scheduled for consideration in the autumn session. Of course, the bill also has critics that it will not actually improve the quality of public services. But is it?

Competition criteria

It is worth emphasizing that before being submitted to the State Duma, the bill was widely discussed for several years by federal and regional authorities with the involvement of expert and professional communities and public organizations, which made it possible to take into account the opinions of all participants in this process in the final version.

Initially, the bill proposed holding auctions using a price criterion to select service providers, which caused criticism from experts. The bill submitted to the State Duma no longer contains provisions on holding auctions, and this is fully consistent with modern international approaches to the competitive involvement of non-governmental organizations in the provision of public services. Currently, the bill provides exclusively for a competition to select a service provider. It is stated that the winner is the one who proposed Better conditions execution of the agreement on their provision.

The provision of most government services in the social sphere is now carried out by regional authorities and local governments. It is important that the draft law does not impose on them the method of providing public services, giving them the right to independently decide when forming a government order whether or not to use competitive tools. Since the bill provides the authorities concerned with the right, and does not establish obligations, it can be considered as a framework act that will allow the regions to successfully implement their own powers.

While working on the bill, experts discussed in detail the issue of procedures for selecting government service providers at the level of federal law, and studied existing practice. As a result, they decided to enshrine in the bill only basic provisions that ensure uniformity of approaches when organizing competitions. These provisions included the conditions for admission to the selection of service providers, requirements for competition participants; general requirements for the procedure for holding a competition, conditions for combining public services at a competition; conditions for canceling the competition and the content of the announcement of its holding; regulation of changes and withdrawal of proposals of competition participants, requirements for the content of proposals of competition participants; general requirements for the consideration and evaluation of proposals from competition participants.

It is on the basis of these standards that the structures responsible for the provision of services must develop and approve procedures for conducting the competition. This ensures there is no discrimination for all involved. At the same time, the government is authorized to determine a number of conditions for the competition procedure, which makes it possible to prevent the emergence of risks of violation of the rights of competition participants.

Thus, the bill eliminates arbitrariness in decision-making and builds a clear and transparent system of legal regulation that ensures competition in the selection of service providers and the protection of their rights. It would be possible to go the other way and use the law on the federal contract system to determine procedures in the field of selection of public service providers. But this would mean stopping the restructuring of the public sector in Russia, since this law regulates the selection of a supplier (performer, contractor) for procurement, the subject of which is consumed by the authorities and institutions themselves, and therefore is not suitable for the selection of service providers in cases where such a service is not provided to a government agency, but to a citizen.

Guarantees for private owners

Another important point that must be noted is that the bill includes rules governing the conditions for terminating agreements on the provision of public services, which creates additional guarantees for performers. According to the Russian Civil Code, any contract can be terminated; the code does not provide guarantees for the parties from making such decisions. And the draft law on social order creates them, which will also be important for business.

Critics of the bill point to inequalities between government agencies and non-government organizations. State institutions receive budget funds not only for the provision of services, but also for the maintenance of the property assigned to them. The same approach will be extended to non-governmental organizations through the application of uniform standards. Already now, financing the implementation of state tasks is carried out taking into account the costs of maintaining real estate, especially valuable movable property and the cost of paying taxes on this property. We can agree that such standards are not entirely sufficient to ensure the development of an organization that provides public services. But they can definitely be called the first step in the right direction, followed by others. As competition develops and the practice of involving private business in the traditionally public sphere, it will be possible to adjust the approach to the maintenance of property that is used in the provision of public services.

Sergey KHABAEV, Head of the Center for Finance of State and Municipal Institutions, NIFI

Pavel KRADINOV, senior researcher at the Center for Finance of State and Municipal Institutions, NIFI

The Government of the Russian Federation submitted to the State Duma draft Federal Law No. 519530-7 “On the state (municipal) social order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere.” The bill creates a legal basis for developing competition and improving the quality of state and municipal services by involving non-governmental organizations in their provision.

Before moving on to the consideration of specific provisions of the bill, we note that this document is of a framework nature and involves the adoption a large list by-laws at the federal, regional and municipal levels. In particular, these are:

the procedure for the formation of state (municipal) social orders for the provision of public services in the social sphere;
the procedure for holding a competition for the purpose of concluding an agreement on the provision of public services in the social sphere;
report form on the execution of social orders;
the procedure for combining several public services in the social sphere during a competition for concluding an agreement on the provision of public services in the social sphere;
the procedure for generating an electronic certificate for receiving government services in the social sphere;
the procedure for providing subsidies from the budget to the provider of public services in the social sphere;
the procedure for selecting a new service provider in the event of termination of the agreement concluded with the existing service provider (necessary to ensure the continuity of the process of providing public services).

In addition, the Government of the Russian Federation must adopt a whole package of regulatory legal acts. For example, general requirements for determining the maximum permissible possible deviations from indicators of the volume and quality of the provision of public services, requirements for the description of proposals of competition participants for concluding an agreement on the provision of public services, requirements for documents that may be required from competition participants to confirm compliance with established requirements.

Scope

The bill applies only to services provided to individuals in the field of education, healthcare, social protection, employment, physical education and sports, as well as tourism. At the same time, relations arising in connection with the provision of services in accordance with the laws “On Compulsory Medical Insurance”, 210-FZ are excluded from the scope of the bill (with the exception of services in the social sphere included in the all-Russian basic (industry) lists of services provided to individuals persons), “On the fundamentals of protecting the health of citizens in the Russian Federation” (with some exceptions).

Public hearings of the draft federal law on state procurement for the provision of public services in the social sphere were held at the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. Experts from the non-profit sector and government authorities discussed what opportunities the law will provide to non-profit organizations, what provisions of the bill need to be finalized, and how it relates to existing laws.

According to a member of the Commission of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation (OP RF) on social policy, labor relations and quality of life of citizens of the Russian Federation Elena Topoleva, the law “On the state (municipal) order for the provision of state (municipal) services in the social sphere” is aimed at denationalizing the services market and attracting non-state suppliers, including non-profit organizations, into the sphere. The measures required for this are outlined in road map on NPOs’ access to the social services market and in a set of measures to ensure NPOs’ access to budget funds for the provision of social services.

“The process is slow and difficult, many barriers arise due to the fact that this system has been developing for decades and, naturally, there is internal resistance. On the other hand, non-state suppliers themselves are not prepared to enter this market. The state recognizes NPOs as its partners in the social sphere and therefore takes artificially stimulating measures so that these organizations are able to enter this market and compete with government suppliers and businesses,” said Elena Topoleva.

The Chairman of the RF OP Commission on Social Policy, Labor Relations and Quality of Life of Citizens of the Russian Federation proposed to submit the Law on State Social Order for consideration. Vladimir Slepak in November 2015. According to Slepak, such a law will increase the efficiency of the implementation of social programs.

“It is obvious to me that NPOs can remove the costs that exist in social policy and compete in open competitions with others. The very essence of NPOs, associated with the fact that they do not make a profit, provides significant advantages compared to other market participants... The law will open the opportunity for the active participation of NPOs, and they will occupy the niche that is between state enterprises and small businesses,” noted Vladimir Slepak.

According to the Deputy Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Alexey Lavrov, the bill is criticized, on the one hand, for infringing on the interests budgetary institutions, and on the other hand, they believe that it provides few guarantees for the participation of NPOs.

Vice President of the National Association of Charitable Organizations Nodari Khananashvili believes that the complaints of municipal institutions about the deterioration of the situation are unfounded.

“Our task is to improve the quality of services for citizens. If your situation worsens, improve the quality of your work and increase your competitiveness. Our constitution says that creating competitive advantages is not acceptable, which means we must create a level playing field. Now at budgetary organizations there are no income taxes and there is a base, which NPOs do not have, so when fulfilling a social order it is necessary to ensure equal economic conditions,” says Khananashvili.

It is important for the law to take into account the problem of disproportion between order and supply, says the director of the National Fund for the Protection of Children from Cruelty. Alexander Spivak. The law defines a social service as a service included in the departmental list of government services, but the non-state sector, as a rule, specializes in providing narrow services for a specific target group, which may not be included in the list.

“It seems to me that very few NGOs are covered by this law. It fits well with social business, since government social services mean services within the scope of authority government agencies authorities. In this case, we see competition between public and private hospitals, public and private schools. But this reflects poorly on helping NGOs, because their services are almost always unique, specific and do not duplicate the powers of government bodies,” added the lawyer of the Center for Curative Pedagogy Pavel Kantor. In this situation, some organizations consider themselves excluded from the state order. For example, the Vera Hospice Fund, which provides unique services in the field of helping terminally ill people.

The scope of the law overlaps with federal laws and No. 44, and experts consider it necessary to clearly delimit the scope of their application.

Based on the results of public hearings, a resolution will be prepared that takes into account proposals from representatives of non-profit organizations, government and business. Comments and suggestions on the bill are accepted until October 14 by email [email protected].