Presidential orders are leveled in bills

The court usually makes decisions based on the results of the examination appointed by it (it is paid by the party that lost the dispute). Therefore, it would be logical for the parties to resolve the bulk of such disputes by contacting an expert together. Of course, if there are experts nearby, whose qualifications and integrity are not in doubt, who do not need to be registered for a year and the price of their services is reasonable. But with this, we, alas, have big problems, and it seems that they cannot be solved without state assistance. Help here is needed not financial, but rather administrative. It is necessary to establish requirements for experts, rules for assessing compliance with these requirements, it is necessary to control the integrity of organizations that have undertaken such work.

We expected something like this when we saw the president’s instruction to the government following the results of that meeting “to prepare proposals for the formation of a system of pre-trial settlement of disputes on consumer rights protection and the development of an institution for independent examination of the quality of goods and services with the participation of public associations, associations (unions) of consumers in this work “.

But, apparently, for the government it would be too easy. It delegated the case to the Ministry of Justice, but what is the strength of the Ministry of Justice? In laws, of course. He suggested that he should be instructed to prepare a bill. Not even two years have passed since we saw this project, which is very voluminous. I will not go into details, I will only say that neither other departments nor we, social activists, approved this project, and the government returned it to the Ministry of Justice.

But since the presidential order remained under control, the department quickly prepared a new bill, the government urgently submitted it to the Duma, and the Duma urgently adopted it in the first reading at one of the last meetings before its re-elections. I know how it happens when the thoughts of the deputies are no longer in the meeting room, but in their constituencies. The new project had nothing to do with the previous one, which is good. But even with the president’s order, only a reference to it in the explanatory note as the basis for the development of the project was common. The project completely ignored the second part of the instruction regarding independent expertise, and the first – by 95 percent, since it narrowed its subject to Internet commerce, and limited the subjects of its application to the circle of consumers who have an “enhanced qualified electronic signature or an enhanced unqualified electronic signature” on the State Services portal , whose verification key certificate has been created and is used in the infrastructure.”

Internet commerce, of course, is growing very quickly, but 90 percent of the turnover of goods and services does not take place on the Internet, which means that the bulk of consumer claims and related disputes are now presented and resolved, as they say, offline, and such a law does not apply to them. will help. As for online purchases, if consumers have complaints, they usually send their requirements to the seller or site directly, in the same way that they entered into an agreement with them, that is, on the Internet, and do not need State Services as a “postman”.

Now the bill is being prepared for the second reading, and things are moving towards the fact that another law will soon appear that will allow (and even oblige) to spend budget money on creating a resource that no one needs and create the appearance of fulfilling the president’s order, while nothing will change in life and offended consumers will still hang on the thresholds of the courts.

This story is not unique, I will give another very similar example. Five years ago, also in April, at a meeting with the president, doctors complained that there were many diseases in the country caused by iodine deficiency, and the task of preventing them was being poorly addressed. Consequences – mental retardation, especially in childhood and adolescence, the birth of children with cretinism, infertility, goiter. A trouble for people, their families, huge expenses and even more lost revenues for the state. Despite the fact that in developed countries they have long learned to prevent iodine deficiency by purposefully adding iodine to the diet, primarily through iodized salt and dietary supplements.

The President instructed the government to submit proposals “on the introduction of iodine-enriched food products (primarily salt) into production and their use in public catering, medical, preschool, educational, sanatorium-resort and other organizations.”

It would seem that the first thing that could not only be proposed, but also promptly implemented by the government is to include a requirement to use a certain proportion of iodized products in the state social order for catering, which is fully funded (as in military units and places of detention) or partially (as in children’s institutions) at the expense of the federal and regional budgets. But, apparently, it would be too simple and undignified, so in this case it was decided to develop a bill and entrust it to the Ministry of Health.

I will not describe how this bill, like Odysseus wandering in search of Ithaca, was looking for a way to the State Duma. Now he has almost reached it – everyone who was supposed to agree on it, agreed, and just about it will be submitted by the government, and the Duma almost always accepts such projects.

Let’s see, however, how the adoption of this project will solve the problem of preventing iodine deficiency. To do this, it provides an exhaustive list of four “activities”. Two of them – the mandatory use of iodized salt in the production of food products and the mandatory fortification of bakery products with iodine – are intended only for social organizations, military units and places of deprivation of liberty and do not apply to households where children and adults mainly eat, and to public organizations catering. I repeat that with regard to food financed by budgets, they can be established by the government without a special law.

Another “event” is the visual highlighting of iodized salt on store shelves. This is unlikely to encourage buyers who previously did not prefer it to change their choice. According to a UNICEF study, in Russia, unlike the vast majority of European countries, only 35 percent of families consumed iodized salt, and clearly not because it is hard to find on the shelf.

The last “measure” is to inform the population about the risks of iodine deficiency and measures to prevent it. It has been provided for by the federal law “On the Fundamentals of Protecting the Health of Citizens in the Russian Federation” for many years, so duplication in yet another law will not change anything here if the current norm has not yet been implemented or has been implemented inefficiently.

But in this form, this law will not only be almost useless, but also fraught with risks of excess consumption of iodine, which is also dangerous to health. They can be caused by switching to exclusively iodized salt, especially in those whose diet this product takes up excessive space.

Of course, this does not reduce the importance of iodine deficiency prevention, only it is eliminated not by good intentions, but by specific realistic measures. First, by iodizing food where the state pays for it, which should have been done a long time ago. Secondly, mass propaganda of such prevention, for which, again, not a new law is needed, but conscientious implementation of the current one. Thirdly, since iodine deficiency is most dangerous during the period of body growth, the inclusion of iodine-containing food supplements in the diet of children at preschool institutions and schools at the expense of budgets.

I believe that both laws will be adopted this year, the instructions are “closed”, and the solution of two acute problems will be postponed for years. What can these two rather typical stories teach us? That the road to hell is paved with good intentions? That the Russian bureaucracy has no “reverse”? That she solves the problems of her well-being, and not of society? Banal and depressing. No, I will draw a positive and life-affirming conclusion: no special operation, during which the final stage of these stories fell, has in any way affected the practices of the Russian bureaucracy, and I am already ready to believe that a nuclear war will not affect it either, if, of course, it has enough reliable shelters. She is invincible. And we need to learn to solve our own problems. So let’s wish each other that there is enough iodine in the bodies of our children and grandchildren and that we are less likely to encounter low-quality goods and services.