[Info-Prim Neo analysis of the series “Platforms of Candidates for Mayoralty of Chisinau under Civil Society Scrutiny”] The platforms of the two candidates for mayor of Chisinau who will compete in the second round of voting – Igor Dodon and Dorin Chirtoaca – have common points, but are different. Igor Dodon’s electoral program is vast and covers a wide range of problems. But a part of the points can be removed as they lack content. Dorin Chirtoaca’s program is shorter and neglects certain aspects. Chirtoaca addresses every issue separately not as part of a system, but he is pragmatic and proposes real projects. Analyzing the platforms from social viewpoint, I classified the points contained in the programs into: {populist} – that will not be successful because they are poplar with the people, but inefficient and will produce no results; {relevant, good} – that refer to system changes, are necessary and were asked for by many people; {declarative, or pointless} – that change nothing in essence, and {mistaken} – incorrect as idea. As regards healthcare, Dorin Chirtoaca’s platform includes only two points covering this sector, while Igor Dodon’s platform – about 20 measures that I grouped according to the abovementioned criteria. The populist measures create deficiencies in service provision. Only a small group of people benefit from them, to the detriment of other groups. For example: {“Restoration of public transport concessions for pensioners, disabled and students}. This is a populist measures because it states a paternalist attitude of the state, but makes the services more inefficient and generates abuses as regards the use of public units of transport. Chirtoaca proposes paying a compensation of 70 lei to every person. This proposal is more efficient. Another populist idea in Igor Dodon’s platform, which is useless in essence, is contained in the following sentences: {creating an efficient mechanism for paying compensations to persons on low incomes. Establishing a municipal fund to help the socially underprivileged persons and families pay for public utilities, by examining separately the applications for assistance coming from deprived persons}. The law on the social benefit sets a budgetary limit in a centralized way. The Government already provides compensations to persons on low incomes. {“Opening by at least one shop intended for deprived persons in every district of Chisinau. The prices of essential food products there will be much lower than in other stores. By 2013, the chain of social shops will consist of at least 50 units, including by a shop in every settlement of the municipality”.} The idea of a state shop chain is old and has never worked. The Communists tried to set up a chain of low-price drugstores, in which they invested a lot of money and created the infrastructure, but ultimately sold the chain to private companies. Igor Dodon’s platform includes also good proposals like: {“Extending the network of social canteens”}. This is a good idea. Instead of dying or begging, the people can go and eat in such canteens. Another good point is:{“Provision by the municipal authorities of real support to elderly persons and persons with disabilities, including by subsidizing the purchase of drugs and special equipment intended for invalids”}. It is a good intention, but it is not specified how the mechanism will work. {“Stimulating the companies to employ persons with disabilities, monitoring the observance of the set quota – at least 5% of the employees”}. Such a practice is used in many European countries and is welcome, but it should be developed in Chisinau. Another commitment of Igor Dodon – {Provision of a lump sum of 5,000 lei at the birth of the child from municipal funds”} is unclear as it is not said where the money will be taken from. Currently, the allowance is 2,500 lei. It is however a stimulus for giving birth to children. Among the mistaken points, I would mention: {“Optimizing the medical institutions by transforming some of them into treatment centers for underprivileged persons”}. This idea is similar to that of creating specialized shops. We should have a health system that will provide services of the same quality to all the people. The idea of creating treatment centers did not work as it is a utopian and incorrect one that runs counter to the Communists’ idea that the health system should be synthesized. Another erroneous provision in Dodon's manifesto is: {“Provide increased access to health care for all the residents of the municipality. Carry out annual medical examinations for free, at the municipality's expense, for every resident”}. And what does a free annual examination exactly mean? What kind of examination? For which illness? Today everyone has a health insurance which covers a wide range of medical services. Does this mean that Dodon's provision 14 provides for additional services, or what else exactly? It is erroneous in concept and contradicts the principles of the Moldovan public insurance system. Further error can be found in provision 19, which says: {“Reintroduce pediatricians in polyclinics and create favorable conditions for the conducting of medical examinations for children”}. In my opinion, reintroducing pediatricians is a long outdated issue as the entire world has opted for a system of preventive healthcare and family physicians, and these family physicians are pediatricians as well. This provision will only double the existing system. The declarative, merely formal provisions are those provisions whose realization is either unclear or impossible. Here are some examples: {“Provide individual assistance to persons from vulnerable families in employment}; {“Reduce begging on the municipality’s streets, including by granting material aid to the persons who need support from the authorities and by streamlining shelter services for the homeless”}. For some people, begging is a way of life and there's nothing you can do about it. Surely there are also criminal schemes that make people panhandle. The anti-begging provision, while having a grain of reason, is rather complicated and unclear. His rival, Dorin Chirtoaca, promises to offer aid to the vulnerable to help them pay their heating bills. Such a program already exists and is functioning, so nothing new here. The monthly 70 lei compensation for the public transport has been in place since last year. The commitments for the persons on modest incomes in Chirtoaca's manifesto are well-balanced and pragmatical, and strongly anchored in reality, too, but are nevertheless few. A wide range of problems are left without a formulated solution and this is upsetting. There are a number of declarative provisions, including: {“Prevent and combat corruption in the municipal educational system and eliminate informal payments imposed by the educational institutions”}; {“Rebuild sports facilities and ensure the access of the population, in particular of the youth, to them”};{ “Stimulate the conducting of sporting events at municipal level for children and youths. Introduce the Chisinau City Council Cup in at least 10 team sports”}. Populist provisions include: {“Establish partnerships with university institutions as well as with business associations to train necessary staff for the public and private sectors}. This is an attractive idea, but there's no instruction as to how it should be done. {“Guarantee access to preschool education services based on area of residence”} It isn't clear how this provision changes the current situation. A good provision in Chirtoaca's electoral agenda is: {“Support the development of schools teaching in the languages of the ethnic minorities that exist in the municipality, including by establishing an effective framework for cooperation with the diplomatic missions in Chisinau”}. While this commitment shows the importance given to the development of the minorities, it fails to address the other aspect, and namely: the minorities should, in my opinion and in the opinion of European experts, learn not only their language, but the official language as well. Curricula should include not only the teaching of the official language, but also provide for a gradual increase in the number of disciplines taught in the official language. Otherwise, there will continue to be two opposite poles in society – one that speaks exclusively Russian and one that speaks the official language. {“Increase the number of summer camps for children and improve the activity of the existing ones, providing real access of the children from disadvantaged families to them”} – this is important, but not new. Provision 14 and 15 are important, but also too general: {“14. Create a municipal business incubator for young people. Launch and implement a municipal program to assist young people with developing businesses through preferential granting and loaning schemes”};{ “15. Develop a network of clubs and creation centers for children and youths, which will enjoy the support of the Chisinau City Hall”.} Among the issues that both candidates failed to address in their manifestos is the problems faced by the young families. For example, they didn't mention creating day centers for children, which could allow the parents to leave their children in their care for a couple of days. This is a popular practice in many countries around the world. Also, attention should be given to the children's spare time, but extracurricular activities remained uncovered. Concerning healthcare, no doubt this depends greatly on the national policy, but the local authorities could also introduce public programs to promote healthy lifestyles, like anti-smoking and anti-drinking programs, or clean environment programs. Creating safer conditions for children and youths in public spaces is also very important. A citizens should find in a manifesto a solution for every single problem that concerns him or her. [Sergiu Ostaf, director of the Human Rights Resource Center (CReDO), for Info-Prim Neo]