“Invisible” anniversary of the Mishustin government

Has it really been three years since a new cabinet of ministers headed by Mikhail Mishustin appeared in Russia? At first glance, the anniversary seems unobtrusive or even routine, although this is not at all the case. I closely follow the discussion of the work of government departments in the press and social networks – and it is very active and rich. And in society, as sociologists testify, an opinion about the government has developed quite clearly, which means that there is considerable interest in its work. Where, then, does this feeling of “everyday life” come from?

I dare to suggest that the fact is that the government of M. Mishustin knows how to manage difficult, even crisis situations. Of course, both informed experts and society criticize the government and sometimes grumble – but how else – but I don’t remember in three years that it was accused of inaction or frank inability to cope with the situation, almost never – of closedness and opacity (unless they demanded more detailed clarification).

According to a recent VTsIOM poll, government measures to support the population in the context of the coronavirus pandemic were recognized as effective by 68% of the population (the same as positively assessed the work of the cabinet over the three years as a whole), and in the context of Western sanctions – 65%.

Let’s make a reservation that these measures would not have been so effective if the government had not acted just as confidently in other areas – otherwise where to get the funds for this support and how to implement them. It’s good that we can’t even imagine the worst-case scenarios of the consequences of the pandemic (and Russia came out of it with less losses to the economy and employment than most of the world’s leading economies) or a fall in production in 2022, when sanctions broke countless chains that bind Russia with the Western world.

What is the secret of the government team? In the most general terms – in a systematic, integrated approach to solving problems, taking into account their complexity and versatility.

Firstly, while solving urgent tasks, including anti-crisis tasks, the Government never lost sight of the strategic national goals and projects, although, of course, circumstances forced them to be corrected. And at the same time, the priority of respecting the vital interests of people was clearly maintained – be it social assistance to those in need or measures to support employment and business activities – from national leaders to small entrepreneurs.

It is no coincidence that those 68% of respondents in the VTsIOM survey who positively assess the activities of the government, among its main merits, mention this particular social function: support measures (28%), attention to pensioners (18%), timely payments (8%), in total over half of the responses.

Of course, despite the fact that respondents who speak negatively about the government reproach it for rising prices (36%) and lower living standards (20%) – the same amount. Both have their truth, but the negative phenomena were generated by well-known crisis factors, and the government did everything possible to weaken their impact on the well-being of people.

Secondly, the government has become more than just an institution of governance – which we used to think of it. The adoption, and even more so the prompt execution of decisions, would be impossible without the delicate coordination of the actions of all government institutions, both along the “vertical” – from Moscow to the very outskirts, and horizontally – between the branches of power.

Acting on the “presidential agenda”, the cabinet of ministers sought to promptly adopt the necessary legislative decisions in the Federal Assembly (working with all factions), and controlled their implementation on the ground. Let us also recall how the center helped to implement regional strategies to combat the pandemic, how it identified and provided support to the ten most problematic (in terms of financial situation) regions, how vice-premiers of the government became curators of federal districts. Since 2020, in Russia there has been the concept of a “single system of public authority” – the interconnection of all its levels, from federal to local. We can say that it was the vertical of government departments that became its “supporting structure”.

Thirdly, the government is gradually introducing its own management style. The prime minister entered his current position with a track record of successfully introducing digital technology into the tax system. Since then, “digitalization” has become both the most important tool for effective management decisions and one of the main directions of the country’s socio-economic development (66% of respondents in the VTsIOM survey recognized it as such – a record figure).

Digital solutions are in demand in many sectors of the economy, but they are no less important for public administration and, ultimately, for citizens. Without them, it would be impossible to transfer a significant part of the employed to remote work during the period of epidemiological restrictions, without them the “social treasury” would not have been possible – a radical improvement in the system of social assistance.

Another direction of technocratic decisions that have far-reaching social consequences is consistent attempts to reduce administrative and bureaucratic pressure on business, to reduce numerous checks to a reasonable minimum.

Finally, another feature of this style is the readiness of the government for dialogue – and in all areas: with business – without this, decisions and many support measures would not have been born, with an expert community that is demanding and critical, but on the whole quite constructive, and also – with public opinion.

Evidence that the public “sees and hears” what the government is doing is the mentioned high scores in the survey, timed to coincide with its third anniversary. And, perhaps, most importantly, even after three years, society does not deny him confidence: when asked how the government will work in the future, 44% answered “better”, another 42% – “as it is now”, and only 6% predict performance degradation.

And Mishustin’s cabinet really needs such a credit of trust: the difficult times for our country have not ended, there are many difficult tasks ahead. And society will judge his work not by past merits, but because of how well it copes with the tasks of today.