The Chisinau City Hall claims that the current approach of the central authorities and also today’s statement that only in Chisinau no financial resources have been allocated for this area because those from the Government considered that Chisinau municipality earmarked financial sources are discriminatory, The reaction comes in the context of the press conference organized at the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection, IPN reports.
“The Government and the responsible ministries have been increasingly politicized lately, and the interference in the affairs of the local public authorities has become increasingly abusive. So far, the Government and the responsible ministries have not answered why, in a discriminatory form, only the residents of Chisinau and those of ATU Gagauzia have been deprived of state budget funding for social programs aimed at remunerating personal assistants,” reads a press release of the City Hall.
According to the municipality, these are social programs and policies for which the Government is directly responsible throughout Moldova. “The residents of Chisinau are citizens of the Republic of Moldova who contribute greatly to the formation of the state budget, but were excluded from social programs. The basic goal was and remains to delegate as many responsibilities as possible to the Chisinau City Hall, without financial allocations, in order to leave the local budget without resources,” the press release also reads.
The Chisinau City Hall also noted that “these abuses were remitted to court”. Also, a complaint to the Constitutional Court will be prepared and the development partners will be informed about actions that the municipality considers discriminatory and anti-European towards the citizens.
The Ministry of Labor and Social Protection on Tuesday staged a news conference, informing that the State Social Inspectorate identified abuse of power in the modification of employment contracts with personal assistants in Chisinau. Following checks carried out by the institution, it was determined that these contracts were modified without taking into account the situation and opinion of the beneficiary regarding the taken decision, which is abuse of power and nonobservance of the beneficiary’s right.
