Who is poor in Serbia? How is misery actually measured? When it is said that 24,6 percent (1,76 million) of Serbian citizens are at risk of poverty according to the SILC (Income and Living Conditions Survey, Statistics on Income and Living Conditions SILC), conducted by the Republic Institute of Statistics, this does not mean that this number of citizens is absolutely poor in the sense that they cannot meet their basic needs. "This means that the share of residents whose income is below the poverty threshold is 24,6 percent." They are said to be at risk of poverty. We don't really know if they are poor, we just know that their income is low and low by some of our standards compared to 60 percent of the median (the median is described in statistics as the number that separates the top half of the sample from the bottom half, cf. out). They can have a large property or a large consumption for their own needs, say they grow their own food and consume it completely, and pay nothing for it. Therefore, it does not necessarily mean that the standard of living of those people is low. According to Eurostat's dictionary, this risk of poverty is not an indicator of a low standard of living, but of the fact that so many people have a low income," explains Dr. Gordana Matković, professor at the Faculty of Economics, Finance and Administration (FEFA) in Belgrade, in an interview for "Vreme". program director of the Center for Social Policy.
This concretely means that every fourth citizen of Serbia is at risk of poverty, therefore, not at the poverty line or poor, as the data of such surveys are usually interpreted in the media.
However, compared to the 28 EU countries, Serbia has the highest poverty risk rate. That value is significantly above the average poverty risk rate of the EU-28 (16,9 percent), as well as the average poverty risk rate in the new EU-12 members without Croatia (17,3 percent), but also above the countries with the highest poverty risk rate - Greece and Romania (23 percent) and Spain (22 percent).
Professor Matković further explains: "If someone who leads politics in a country wants a high level of social cohesion and a low level of inequality, then he is interested in seeing who is living with a low income."
"WEATHER": In recent days, there has been mention of a new state strategy for the fight against poverty. It will be called exactly Program of reforms in the field of employment and social policy. How late was she really?, and how expedient such a strategy is?
GORDANA MATKOVIĆ: The idea of a strategy is to determine how you will move in the medium term. What are the main pillars of the policy that you lead in each area, and depending on that, you implement some measures in proportion to the budgetary possibilities. These are strategies that many developed countries in many areas do not for nothing. Our problem, I'm not saying that it doesn't exist in other countries, is that we can make strategies like a wish list, and as if we can reach Sweden and Denmark in five years. There is no way to draw a line where we found ourselves and why we found ourselves there. There are many problems due to which the treatment of these strategies in the public is such that it is not accepted with confidence. However, aside from the fact that there is a need to create some sort of framework strategic document, this is now also a request from the European Commission. In this area, they don't say "you have to do it this way", but "create a strategy in social policy and the field of employment". This means social protection in a broader sense, education, and social and child protection, health and pensions, the entire social sector.
Declaratively, politicians and many economists support all the government's reform moves, but unofficially, they can often express the fear that a set of these measures is too aggressive a therapy "from which most patients cannot survive". How the government can implement reforms, while at the same time protecting the most vulnerable?
There are some programs that we have that we did not invent, nor are they unique. These are the programs available if protection goes through the social sector. These are two programs adopted in our country - cash social assistance and child allowance. The financial social assistance program was created in the classic way in which such programs were created in the so-called states of the Bismarck type. There is insurance, pension, health, unemployment insurance. the assumption is that you have relatively high employment and then when people fail through all those networks, that financial social assistance is intended for them. Of course, there are very strict criteria, whether that person has property, what is the household income, etc. In this way, the entire system is designed to protect only the most vulnerable among the vulnerable. There is no social protection system that can provide for the population when employment is low. Such programs are designed to work counter-cyclically. When you have a crisis, the number of users of those programs increases, it is logical that in a crisis more people fall below the poverty lines defined in the parliament.
You spoke similarly about the Labor Law. That it is not possible to increase the number of jobs by changing the labor legislation...
When I say it is not possible, I mean it is not possible in some modern times and state arrangements. I do not mean authoritarian systems and a return to some past times...
It is claimed that the Labor Law should enable greater employment, greater labor mobility, which in total should result in a higher standard. On the other hand, both employed and unemployed perceive this law primarily as a path to additional uncertainty and total further impoverishment. Can you connect the line of that law, new working conditions with the poverty line?
I see changes in labor legislation essentially as removing barriers to investment and barriers that can deter employers from doing business here. We do not have fantastic conditions in any sphere, so let's say, well, our labor market is less flexible than in other countries, but investors will come to us because the position here is fantastic, all other conditions are unimaginably good. Of course, there are no absolute truths, but when you look at the system in many areas, you can see that there are some points where people who want to invest say "you're not a member of the EU, you need various permits for I don't know how many days, I can't get anyone yet to release there. Are you smart enough to come to that country?" So now the barriers are being removed, that's what this law is specifically for. Of course we can argue about what is reasonable and what is not reasonable, you can look at the experiences of other countries. We may not like it, that dissatisfaction comes from uncertainty. In socialism, no matter how much we didn't like it, there was certainty. And certainty is a terribly important factor in human life. Uncertainty is a terrible source of stress and dissatisfaction. In most other countries, temporary work can last up to two years. In Europe, the flexibility of the labor market increases in this way. Without going into what led to the increase in flexibility, the fact is that it has increased and that is why they are thinking about it in their social protection systems, for example, that it is important for them not only to have social insurance, but to have social pensions. They realized that people whose careers were constantly interrupted because they lost their jobs would end up with small pensions through insurance, they would have to protect them through the budget. Therefore, they are considering the reconstruction of their welfare states not only to reduce expenditures but to improve protection on the other hand, because because of these flexible relations in the labor market, people will have insecure careers. Those are big changes. We can say that we are not interested in greater flexibility of the labor market, but we pay a high price for that. Someone is over 50 years old, and the employer wants to fire him, he had a clause that he had to pay him for the entire length of service, regardless of the fact that he worked for him for only five years. Let's assume that the company could have gone bankrupt, and that the workers ended up at the unemployment office. Who will hire them? There is no soft-hearted employer who will hire this worker because if he has to fire him tomorrow because his job is reduced, he should pay him for the 35 years he worked in other companies...
And then that clause is an obstacle to employment?
It's a barrier to employment, not just the protection of those people. There are no more big companies like there used to be, today there are more small companies, and when two or three people need to retire at the same time, these are big problems. Previously, the economic environment was different.
According to statistical indicators, Serbia is among the countries with the highest rate of poverty risk in Europe. What are the specificities of poverty in Serbia in relation to European standards of poverty?
That rate is not that much higher than the poverty risk rate in developed countries (EU average 17 percent), but it is the highest and I would say that it is a reflection of what is seen in those data. If you say that those below 60 percent of the median income are at risk of poverty, that is essentially an indicator of inequality.
When the data is analyzed according to consumption, inequality is smaller. Among other things, because it is taken into account that some people base their standard on natural consumption. One of the reasons for such high poverty risk rates is that. It seems to me that in our country that rate is at a higher level than in other countries and because the importance of natural consumption is greater than in other more developed countries.
Is the gray economy a specific feature of Serbian poverty?? A third of couples in Serbia are a gray area. Here the man says what his salary is, or not working, formal, his passbook is on his desk, but he does not say how much he earned illegally by selling socks at the market, or that his aunt from America sends him $100 a month.
The question is what is "captured" from that income. We know from other studies that the gray economy is more widespread than in other countries, but this is not our specificity. In foreign literature, it is said that this income is "often forgotten". For the analysis of the poorer strata, it was confirmed that it is better to stick to the consumption criteria than the income criteria.
The President of Serbia, Nikolić, explained in a statement that he is against the reduction of pensions due to the fact that many multi-member families survive thanks to the incomes of the oldest. He even mentioned that it could bring more than half of Serbia to the brink of starvation. What is your position on pension cuts??
The share of expenditure on pensions in relation to what we produce is the highest in Europe, i.e. among the highest in Europe. I don't have a good idea of how many people live in mixed households and depend on the pension, that's a hypothesis that would have to be tested. But what we do know is that the elderly are actually the ones who spend more on health care, and we are not specific in relation to others here either. Those co-payments are not small and the expenditures for healthcare are not small. On the other hand, what we also know is that pensioners, especially the elderly, do not work in the gray economy. If we reduce wages, it affects the generation capable of working, while doctors and professors, for example, have a mechanism that can be activated for some survival, for additional earnings, work in the private sector. Not all, but a part of them. But when it comes to the elderly, there are no such mechanisms, they do not work in the gray economy or in any other way. When talking about the reduction of pensions, these parameters should also be taken into account.
According to one poverty measurement scale, that is, threats, one of the points is the impossibility of regular payment of utility bills, repayment of loans and other loans. It seems that there are more and more of them in Serbia. On the one hand, the state is determined to charge for all its services, and citizens have less and less money. Will a new class of the poor be created between that hammer and anvil??
It is a question about material deprivation (deprivation is a state of completely or insufficiently fulfilled people's needs, ed.) and it is alarming if it increases, but it is the first subjective question. Surveys ask the question, do you pay your bills regularly? That whole construction has an element of subjectivity: can you afford to pay the bills, the man will say he can't, and at the same time he pays them regularly. It's still a subjective question whether you're going to set aside for bills that month or for sneakers. We are talking about twenty percent of low-income people who pay what they have to at that moment.
We juggle...
That's a good expression. Everything else that is not a priority at that moment is postponed until the next month. And then you get an advertisement, you take a hundred thousand, and you only get back a hundred and ten!
It is often heard how the government adopts economic policy measures, and there is still no valid social card in Serbia. Shouldn't it have gone in reverse order??
If someone would explain to me what a social card is and show me a social card in another country, I would be ready to talk about it. What does a social card mean? So you have the complete situation of seven million people recorded every day, today one died, tomorrow another got a job, the day after tomorrow a third had a child? And so it is in motion every second, and you are now issuing new social cards. It doesn't exist anywhere. In the Scandinavian countries there are income registers and population registers and that is something else. Even if we assume that it is possible that there are population registers, income registers, that there is no shadow economy, that you know everything about every household every second, let's assume, then what? There is a law on social protection. These are data on the risk of poverty, but what we have agreed as a society, what we have defined as poverty, is the law on social protection, according to which the poor are those who have only that much from their assets and those who have this misery per member households, as much for a four-member household, as much for a three-member household, etc. And we know exactly who these people are. These people exist in the information system, they are paid financial aid under their first and last names every month, there are control mechanisms, centers for social work that go to the field determine whether that person is in the gray economy or not. When constructing a system for monetary social assistance, overall, with child allowances and everything else, it is necessary to ensure that this monetary assistance is not a demotivation for work, that it is not higher than income based on work. In the same way, financial social assistance to an individual who is unable to work and lives alone cannot be equal to or greater than the agricultural pension. Because that farmer has been paying something all his life. There is a logic to receiving and ranking them. The highest incomes are from work, then pensions because contributions are paid and only then cash social assistance. What is a social card, how is it obtained and when we create it, which I think is impossible and ineffective, but even when we create it, what do we do with it? Do we provide more funds for the poor, do we change this existing financial social assistance program and allocate more for these purposes?
You were a minister in Djindjic's government and an adviser to President Tadic. If you had to evaluate the work of this government in social policy, what is your impression, in which period was the greatest sensitivity towards the most socially vulnerable expressed?
A difficult question. I'm not objective about it. In 2001, I think everyone was socially disadvantaged. I would like to see the budget we had. You didn't know which category to turn to. Benefits for care and assistance to another person, the most vulnerable people with disabilities, have been delayed for 32 months. Those backlogs have accumulated so much. Well, for child allowances for two years, then for cash social assistance. The delays were between two and three years. Not to mention the people who were employed at that time and did not receive salaries. The first thing I asked for was to create poverty profiles. Therefore, one cannot speak of greater sensitivity, but of much greater needs in view of the situation, it was a necessity, not a special sensitivity. And this government will now have to take into account the social situation because the crisis has been going on for too long now. And if they start restructuring public companies and reducing salaries and pensions, they will have to follow the indicators. And they will have to be ready to issue more funds for cash social assistance. It is expected that this number of users will grow.
We are still a traditional patriarchal society. Being poor is a shame here. How to measure that invisible poverty, poverty that hides, although it is said that poverty, cough and love can never be hidden?
Poverty measurements are never perfect and accurate. That is why it is considered that more criteria should be taken, so that the so-called sections should be looked at. The only way for the interviewer to capture that subjective poverty is to not talk to adult family members in front of the children. That is, let's say, interesting, because parents don't want to talk about poverty in front of their children. In some areas, there may be more whining than usual, so it is difficult to determine the true state of affairs in that sense as well. Disguised poverty is difficult to capture, probably only in the cross-section of several measurements according to different criteria. That is why field work is very important, the work of all social services. That is unattainable for us today, and that is why it is important to include the non-governmental sector in it. That is why, in fact, NGOs appeared in the world. There are simply some things that the state-administrative system cannot cover.
For someone, it's poverty when they can't go on vacation, for someone who can't buy a child sneakers, when he cannot eat meat for a week, for someone who cannot pay bills regularly and receives a red warning from EPS a? What is the difference between the subjective feeling of poverty and what is objectively the risk of poverty?
Adapting to change is terribly important. If you were at a higher level, then at the first moment when you fall lower, you have a much stronger subjective feeling about the depth of poverty, and vice versa, when you rise, you have the feeling that you are much higher. Illness also plays a significant role, and then a further comparison with the parental family. There is this phenomenon that you live very modestly, especially according to the criteria of relative poverty, that you are endangered, but you consider it quite satisfactory, you lull yourself, according to the "I don't need better" type of reform.
Whether "formula" to calculate poverty in the Serbian way, crossing several of those measurement criteria: revenues, consumption, assets?
When you give someone help, you must have insight into all these criteria. Not enough thought is given to the fact that the budgeting system is such that it is taken from someone, even the poorest, who enters the store to buy half a kilo of bread and one pâté, in order to give it to someone who doesn't even have enough for that bread and pâté. And that's why it's very important to record as well as possible the terrain that needs help the most. You are taking, in effect, from many who are barely making ends meet to give to someone who cannot make ends meet. It is a terribly responsible and sensitive job. It is important to know what this data means.
Is your exit from DS and an indicator of some kind of personal loss of confidence that through parties and official politics, something can truly be done for the most socially vulnerable?
No, that's not why I left DS. In the 1990s, many people got involved in politics, even those who are not close to politics as a way of acting, people who deal with research matters. And that doesn't work with politics. These are people who think seven times and only then act. People from different professions can be present in politics, but not in the front ranks. I left the DS because staying in the DS meant fighting for a new DS, rolling up my sleeves with great doubt as to whether it was possible at a time of serious turmoil in the party, and just sitting in the GO and minding my own business. , I couldn't do that...
The dominant impression here is that nothing was done or, if it is, that the goal of convincing citizens that any government thinks about the ordinary has not been achieved, by definition a vulnerable person? People work under more difficult conditions, for less pay, they are more difficult to treat, they educate their children more and more painstakingly and it is more and more difficult to satisfy their elementary cultural needs. What is the real consequence of general conditions?, that is, the economic crisis that continues to shake the whole world, and what inequality in "home craftsmanship"?
For all that you state, I ask if it is so? How do we prove it? We were in the nineties, the devastating years, so we kind of patched things up a bit, and now it's the way it is again, and it's understandable that people are always looking for better, that's the result of progress. I'm not sure that in any research we would be able to prove that it is exactly so for most of the things you mentioned. But one thing is certain; progress is much slower than we expected and this contributes to the assessment that everything is even worse than it was. However, it is difficult to separate what is the consequence of the economic crisis and what is the consequence of inequality in Serbia. But the outcome for sure is that we did not hire Serbia. The fact that we have been in the last places for years according to those surveys, World Bank rankings, those barriers to starting a business, for example. That's awfully hard to change.
