National Pedagogical University. M. P. Drahomanov
The reform of the administrative-territorial division of Ukraine: illusion and reality
It is extremely necessary to enhance the predictive function of legal science. It should not be limited only to confine the facts, and should work for the prospect to produce optimal development model of statehood and legal system of Ukraine.
Lately more and more often it is about the need for administrative-territorial reform in Ukraine. Although it should be noted that the first statement of the need for administrative-territorial reform in Ukraine appeared still in a period of adjustment. In 1989, he was offered the project, in which it was proposed to divide Ukraine into 13 regions, which would have had more authority.
O.v. Skripnûk, too, is convinced that the administrative-territorial reform is a necessary element of the large-scale reform in Ukraine, which provides a democratic transformation of the organization-level administrative-territorial structure, defining the typology of administrative-territorial units, the wording of the requirements for creating them.
In addition, many scientists point to the shortcomings of modern TALLY. So the authors of the textbook "constitutional law of Ukraine" stating that the administrative-territorial structure of Ukraine is no longer fully meets the political and socio-economic realities that have developed in Ukraine, since mainly was created back in the 1930 's, noted that given the complexity of the socio-economic and political processes in Ukraine, the system of administrative-territorial division requires its further improvement and legislative regulation.
This same opinion and g.s. Fìlìmošina. In particular, she notes: "the need for the adoption of the law on territorial structure also contributed to" urgently needed action to abolish the outdated regulations of the Soviet period. Should lose the validity of the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR "on the issues of administrative-territorial division of the Ukrainian SSR from March 12, 1981, and the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR" on the practice of the application of the law on the naming and renaming of administrative-territorial units and settlements of the Republic from 29 July 1980 r. ..
The authors of the textbook "the General principles of local self-government in Ukraine" also argue that today, in the face of an independent State, separation and decentralisation, democratisation of society and building a market economy, the existing system of administrative-territorial structure does not meet the new criteria and needs significant changes.
Professor m. Carlin also notes that the existing in Ukraine its administrative and regional Division no longer corresponds to today's realities, especially the economic and sustainable development.
O. v. Skrypnyk also draws attention to the fact that the Soviet-era system of administrative-territorial division was volûntaristskimi, without regard to the historical, national, cultural, linguistic and other traditions. M. Pittsyk, y. i. Hanuschak, d. Šimanke, h. Cimermann also pay attention to the fact that since the 60-ies of the administrative-territorial structure, more was given the highly-partisan interests, based on, for example, as the number of party members. In this they see as one of the reasons the current distorted, and time and beztolkovoï system of the administrative-territorial system.
But y. Malinovsky argues that the Soviet Government of the administrative-territorial structure in Ukraine has undergone a huge number of false transformation (in particular was taken over 1300 regulatory-legal acts concerning the creation and liquidation of administrative-territorial units). So it is no surprise that managing the Affairs of the Executive apparatus of the Khmelnytsky Oblast v. Brickij said that the current system of administrative-territorial system is so archaic and inconsistent, which provide most of the capacity of communities to perform the given law the authority is simply impossible. Actually, the same thoughts and a. b. Hetman: the Territorial basis for the local government, which is the administrative-territorial structure, should be changed to empower municipal authorities.
As o.g. Kuchabskiy draws attention to that within the range of the western regions partly reflected the prewar political boundaries of Austro-Hungary (Lviv and Ternopil oblast), Poland (Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Rivne and Ternopil oblast), Romania (Chernivtsi oblast), etc.
I.j. Magnovskij believes that reform of the TALLY needed given the disproportion in the location of the population, the disproportion in the economic potential of territorial units, etnonacìonalnij warehouse areas and regions. O. m. Orgìêc, too, believes that the large territory of Ukraine during the reform of the administrative-territorial division on par with socio-economic and geographical factor will play a significant role etnonacìonalnij. In a. Pseudoplatanus also stresses that a system of administrative-territorial structure does not match the type of lodging etnospìlnot and does not provide the satisfaction of ethno-cultural needs of all members of the field of ethnic society.
A significant list of shortcomings of legal regulation in the sphere of administrative-territorial division were given and the authors of the Handbook of constitutional law of Ukraine a. Sovgirâ and n. Shuklina: "Imperfection in the classification of cities, the lack of clear criteria for the formation of districts, as well as the inclusion of settlements classified as villages, towns, cities, order the formation of districts in cities.
Director of the Research Institute of Geodesy and cartography in Yuriy Karpinski paid attention other shortcomings of the administrative-territorial structure at the regional level. Yes, he drew attention to the fact that the distance from the geometric centers to Zakarpattia Oblast centers, Volin, Cherkasy, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv oblast is over 65 km!
He drew attention also to the following paradox: the most compact in Ukraine are only three regions – Volyn, Kharkiv, Zaporizhia, but these areas are characterized by the largest nespìvpadìnnâm of the real and the geometric mean. It also noted that the most efficient configuration of Kirovograd, Odesa, Cherkasy oblasts and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Vitâgnutìst of complex shape and still unsatisfactory development of the transport network forms a rather inconvenient periferìjnìst (especially in remote southern areas of Odessa region).
In addition to this problem, the scientists point to another – accessibility by rail to the regional centres. So, Uzhgorod, Mykolaiv, Kherson have no direct railway connection with peripheral administrative districts.
M. Fedchishin and v. Frončenko noted that the question of the reform of the administrative-territorial structure stands sharply in view of the changes taking place in the social system, political and economic systems in the sphere of local self-government, etc.
Other scientists pay attention to what the downside of modern administrative and territorial structure is the mismatch of the status of many of the administrative-territorial units, their staffing, resource and organizational capacity.
O. g. Kuchabskiy believes that the reform of the administrative-territorial structures in modern Ukraine is the key problem. From its successful solution depends on the effectiveness of functioning and development of the Ukrainian society for a long period.
But in p. Novick argues that the problem of administrative and territorial structure with negative impact on addressing the socio-economic development, governance, the provision in accordance with the Constitution and laws of Ukraine guarantees local self-government, legislation powers of executive bodies and local authorities, ensuring the content of the respective local budgets, financial provision of bodies of executive power and bodies of local self-government full services to the population.
In another work, in p. Novick wrote: "analysis of the socio-economic development of the regions of Ukraine in recent years gives grounds to conclude that secured by the Constitution of Ukraine, a model of the administrative-territorial system demonstrated a lack of ability in the conditions of market economy effectively and efficiently affect the processes of socio-economic and cultural development of the territories, ensure the quality of the provision of public services to the population, which would be European standards."
This drew attention and academician of the NAS of Ukraine Yu.s. Šemšučenko: "the imperfection of the administrative-territorial structure affects the system of local self-government and the provision of State and public services."
And b. the Hetman also noted: "the existing administrative-territorial structure inhibits the formation of one of the main institutions of the European democracy – local self-government".
And p. Storozhuk also drew attention that without the administrative-territorial reform is nekonstruktivnim and incomplete carrying out reform in the area of local governance.
Instead, o. g. Kuchabskiy is convinced that the development of local self-government should be the beginning of administrative-territorial reform.
I.m. Skuratovič except local authorities drew attention to the regions "administrative-territorial structure is garbled and not take into account modern needs. The existing model blocks self-sufficient and efficient development of regonìv, therefore not by chance that most of them required subsidies from the Center. In addition, the interests of local communities with this system takes into account the minimum. "
About the inefficiency of the centralisation of management speak and other scientists. They argue that the centralization of management is now recognized by the international community one tangible brakes on the path of development of mankind.
Hard to disagree with a point of view. Malinowski: "objective political and economic changes to periodic revision of certain aspects of territorial poblaštuvannâ of any country."
Perhaps most eloquently about the need for reform of the administrative-territorial division, said m. Miller: "the necessity of holding in Ukraine of administrative-territorial reform, almost no one doubt that explains the chaos of the modern system of administrative-territorial division in terms of the realization of socio-economic transformations, the financial allocation of funds and the provision of high quality public services to the citizens of Ukraine".
Approximately same such thoughts follow some other scientists. Yes, m. Pìtnik, y. i. Hanuschak, d. Šimanke, h. Cimermann write that if 2004-2005 years on the reform of the administrative-territorial division said only experts, now virtually no one with those who are involved in public administration, has no doubt that organize administrative-territorial relations cannot be put off in a long box. They also claim that the disadvantages of modern administrative and territorial structure lately have become so apparent that the leadership of the country was forced to pay attention to it. Because they are pretty serious impediments in the way of advancement of a number of reform is fiscal, tax, health insurance, public administration, education. And t. Root believes that the administrative-territorial reform is a matter of national security.
About the fact that the absolute majority of experts conducting the administrative-territorial reform is an urgent task (85.7%) evidence and analysis of the results of expert polls about the administrative-territorial reform, held in July-August 2009 year, Center for political studies. And p. Begej generally concluded that in Ukrainian society is understanding that the current model of administrative management and territorial structure themselves exhausted and without its reform hope to improve the situation in the communities is hardly possible.
T. o. Kulik and l. g. Yurkovskaya absolutely naturally pay attention to the fact that the administrative-territorial structure was adapted to the command-administrative system of management. Analyzing the modern administrative and territorial structure of Ukraine v. 13 concluded that his Foundation was laid the principle of centralization management of territorial units, but rozporâdnickim techniques.
V. Malinovsky also drew attention to the fact that it has become quite obvious that hold democratic transformations, based on the territorial organisation of power pìdlaštovanu to the command-administrative system is impossible.
About what the shortcomings of modern administrative and territorial structure is a major obstacle in the way of advancing reforms – fiscal, tax, health insurance, public administration, education. It was in the explanatory note to the draft law of Ukraine "about the concept of the reform of the administrative-territorial division of Ukraine."
Yu Molodožon, publishing its work in 2010, said: "today, in a society like stihli the debate on the proposed approaches to reforming the territorial division of the country, but it is obvious the fact that without reforming the territorial organization of the Government, the system of territorial structure, no statements of politicians about the improvement of the living conditions of the population will not be implemented.
The fact that the issue of optimization of administrative-territorial division of Ukraine today is highly relevant agrees and o. d. Lazor.
A. b. Hetman is convinced that the improvement of the administrative-territorial system through reforms and new legislation is one of the most important existing problems.
According to i. Kresìnoï, the introduction of administrative-territorial reform allows you to solve such fundamental for the development of the whole political and administrative system tasks as: 1) streamline the administrative-territorial units, their unification and systematization; 2) increase the efficiency of use of budget funds with the simultaneous stimulation of the growth of a profitable part of the local budgets; 3. improving the quality and availability of social services to the population; 4) suspension of degradation of the rural poselenskoï network, reduction of social differences between city and village; 5) addressing infrastructural problems like transportation, removal and disposal of garbage, water, maintenance and repair of roads; 6) creation of a spatial basis for regional development; 7) improvement of spatial development planning; 8) improvement of preconditions for the revival of investment attraction; 9) improved land management, reducing vulnerability, corrupt transactions with the land; 10) improve the system of management of territories.
However, according to experts, carrying out reform of the administrative-territorial system is it is very expensive. Their estimated budget the costs of its conduct should not be less than 7 billion hryvnias. Actually, this amount is determined by the work of capitalizable territories, creation of new communication networks, construction of additional roads, schools, hospitals, part of capital construction.
And o. Lialiuk argues that the reform generally required will be approximately 10-12 billion dollars! Instead, I v.vermenich believes that this amount will not be enough given that Poland to carry out such reforms alone, the EU has provided 12 billion. euro.
Thus, you can reach the conclusion that in the current economic conditions start to the reform of the administrative-territorial system is not necessary. However, you need to work on the conceptual principles of this process. And, above all, reform at the level of communities.