The heating charges must be increased. It is a regrettable, but absolutely logical and normal step. The fact that the electricity charges had been increased during the last years, while the heating charges remained practically unchanged is out of the ordinary. Everything costs money and to maintain the charges under the real cost of the services in the created situation would mean, for instance in the case of Termocom, nothing else than to continue collecting debts that must be paid to the suppliers, which would have all the legal rights to stop providing services for it. The practice has shown that as a rule the tariffs on public utilities in the last several years have been fixed according to political principles related mainly to the elections that take place every two years and not according to their real cost. [An inevitable evil that is kept under control] It is in the interests of the persons that earn enough money as well as of the supplier that the charges be increased in line with their real cost. If more real consumers with real payments are supplied with heat in a centralised way, there will be more chances that each consumer will pay less or at least not extra. The crisis situations like the present one do nothing but stimulate the solvent persons to look for alternative solutions so that Termocom could lose a large part of the clients that fully pay for the services. It is in no one’s interest that Termocom remain only with the clients that through lack of money will not be able to install an autonomous heating system or to pay for the services. The loss of solvent clients would be a real catastrophe for such an enterprise and the delay in identifying a solution is first of all to the detriment of Termocom. From another viewpoint, not only the Chisinau authorities, but the consumers also must be interested in obtaining information about the way in which the charges are formed so as they see when the tariffs are raised artificially. This information should be made public directly by Termocom and not only at request, but also on its own initiative and compulsorily. We must also look into the future. Such situations like the present one constitute a serious hindrance to investment in the public services sector. No one would like to invest if the tariffs are lower than the level necessary to recoup the investments or, more seriously, they are fixed arbitrarily, especially according to political criteria. [The Government will propose solutions, because it is obliged to] This summer, the Ministry of Industry and Infrastructure worked out a bill that proposes transferring the duties of setting tariffs from the local public authorities to the National Agency for Energy Regulation (ANRE), which is independent from the Government. The need for such amendments to the legislation stems also from the Government’s obligation towards the International Monetary Fund stipulated in the Memorandum on Economic and Financial Policies for 2007. The Government committed itself to make sure that the heating and water charges are adjusted gradually by the start of this December so that the payments from all the categories of consumers cover the costs. Also, the Government pledged to allocate additional budgetary resources if the cost of energy continues to rise so as to compensate the public institutions for the rise-related costs and to protect the vulnerable groups of people, maintaining simultaneously the agreed budget deficit. In such a way, if the given bill is adopted by the Parliament, the charges on the heating, water and sewer services provided in a centralized way in the municipality of Chisinau will be approved by ANRE. The bill yet does not stipulate one thing that the Government should take into account: why ANRE should fix only the municipal charges. A similar bill was presented to the Parliament last year, but it was rejected for the reason that it infringed the principle of local autonomy stipulated in the Constitution. I think that such an argument is not full justified because if ANRE approves the charges, this will not affect in fact the principle of local autonomy, which must not be regarded only through the angle of the right to property. Anyway, the fresh bill will be soon submitted to the Government and then to the Parliament for adoption. [Consumption subsidisation is a necessity, but it does not apply to everyone] Given the poverty rate in Moldova, the subsidisation of consumption is an absolute necessity. But it would be incorrect to use the principle ”who and how can”. It would be more appropriate to put the questions ”who and how much has” and “where and how much does it cost”. The subsidies must be paid first of all to residents that indeed need them as they earn not enough, for example their incomes are below the minimum consumption basket. We can mention here that the City Council’s decision of January 25 can be considered partially illegal because according to the present legislation, the City Council has the right to allocate nominal compensations for a certain amount of energy resources consumed only to socially-vulnerable categories and not to all the household consumers. So, the law says that the allocation of compensations is related to two essential conditions that must be fulfilled simultaneously: the agreed consumption norm and the income of the resident. One thing is sure: in 2008 the City Hall could not provide the given compensations, one of the main reasons being the 300 million lei decrease in the municipal budget revenues following the introduction of the zero income tax by the Parliament. Speaking about compensations, I want to mention again the Memorandum signed by the Government and the IMF through which the Government [committed itself to allocate additional budgetary resources to protect the vulnerable groups of people] if the cost of energy continues to rise (thing that happened). In reality, the Government delays the allocation of compensations or will allocate no compensations. At the same time, the compensations promised by the Government must be regarded not as a simple obligation stipulated in the agreement with the IMF, but also as essential things that the population of this state need. Also, the Government’s obligation must be correlated with the commitments made by the party that the Government represents (the Communist Party (PCRM) to its voters. It is well known that the PCRM’s electorate is composed mostly of older people and the lack of compensations would aggravate their economic situation even more. In such conditions, it would be wise for the Government to break the silence and announce its intentions and steps that it will take to overcome the crisis situation regarding heat supply in Chisinau. [Igor Gutan, analyst]