ASSESSMENT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF POLITICIANS IN POWER

• Overall, respondents are more satisfied with the activities of politicians in power than with those of politicians in the opposition. Thus, 41% of respondents are satisfied with the activities of President V. Yanukovych, 21% are not satisfied, and 32% believe it is still too early to give an assessment.
  36% are satisfied with the activities of Prime Minister M. Azarov, 24% are not satisfied, and 32% believe it is still too early to give an assessment.
• Both the Prime Minister and the President received the highest ratings in the South and Donbas, as well as in Eastern Ukraine. These are primarily supporters of the Party of Regions, the CPU, as well as Strong Ukraine of S. Tigipko and the Lytvyn Bloc.
• 42% are satisfied with the activities of Vice Prime Minister S. Tigipko, 15% are not satisfied, and 29% believe it is still too early to give an assessment. The geography of support for his activities is more or less even, except for the West, where only 27% are satisfied with his activities. The greatest support for the Vice Prime Minister’s activities comes from supporters of Strong Ukraine, the Party of Regions, the CPU, and the Lytvyn Bloc.
• As we can see, all three — V. Yanukovych, S. Tigipko, and M. Azarov — have a positive balance of support. S. Tigipko is the only politician who has a positive balance of support in all regions. It is worth noting that about one third of respondents believe it is still too early to give an assessment of these politicians. In particular, the activities of V. Yanukovych and M. Azarov have not yet been assessed in any way by about one quarter of Party of Regions supporters. Likewise, 29% of Strong Ukraine supporters have not yet given any assessment of S. Tigipko’s activities in government.
• On the one hand, this indicates a certain “hidden” credit of trust and potential for growth in positive assessments, and on the other hand, if politicians do not demonstrate appropriate performance in the positions entrusted to them within the next few months, there may be an increase in negative assessments.
• 31% are satisfied with the activities of V. Lytvyn as Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada, 38% are not satisfied, and 15% believe it is still too early to give an assessment. 10% of respondents do not see V. Lytvyn’s activities at all. The Speaker’s activities are primarily supported in the South and Donbas. In addition to supporters of the Lytvyn Bloc, his activities were positively assessed by supporters of the Party of Regions and the CPU.

ASSESSMENT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF POLITICIANS IN THE OPPOSITION

• 18% positively assessed the activities of Y. Tymoshenko, 54% negatively, and 11% believe it is too early to give an assessment.
  19% are satisfied with the activities of A. Yatseniuk in the opposition, 40% are not satisfied, and 16% believe it is still too early to give an assessment.
  Only 3% are satisfied with the activities of V. Yushchenko in the opposition, 66% are not satisfied, and only 7% believe it is too early to give an assessment of his activities.
• At the same time, 11% of respondents believe that the activities of Y. Tymoshenko in the opposition are not visible at all. For A. Yatseniuk this figure is 16%, and for V. Yushchenko — 19%.
• The greatest satisfaction with the activities of Y. Tymoshenko and A. Yatseniuk is in the Center, the North, and the West, with an advantage in favor of the leader of BYuT. At the same time, the activities of A. Yatseniuk were assessed more positively in the South-Eastern regions.
• It should be emphasized that Y. Tymoshenko has a positive balance of support only among supporters of BYuT, while 8% of them assessed her activities in the opposition negatively, 17% believe it is too early to give an assessment, and another 5% do not see any activity at all.
• A. Yatseniuk has a positive balance of support not only among supporters of Front for Change, but also among supporters of the Lytvyn Bloc and Our Ukraine. In addition, BYuT supporters rated A. Yatseniuk’s activities in the opposition better than Front for Change supporters rated Y. Tymoshenko’s activities.
• At the same time, 7% of Front for Change supporters assessed A. Yatseniuk’s activities in the opposition negatively, 22% believe it is too early to give an assessment, and another 10% do not see any activity at all.
• V. Yushchenko does not have a positive balance of support even among supporters of Our Ukraine — only 18% of them are satisfied with his actions in the opposition and 19% are not satisfied. One third of supporters of Our Ukraine, Svoboda, and Front for Change do not see any activity of V. Yushchenko in the opposition.

PRIORITY TASKS FOR THE AUTHORITIES

• The ranking of priority tasks for the authorities is headed by the fight against unemployment (51%), increasing wages (49%) and pensions (40%), and reducing the level of corruption (38%).
• In addition, about one third see among the key tasks of the authorities: stabilization of prices, ensuring the stability of the hryvnia, improving the level of healthcare, and support for agriculture. About one quarter mention support for industry and affordable housing for citizens.
• One in six demands that the authorities ensure control over the state apparatus, support small and medium-sized businesses, prevent the split of the country, and improve relations with Russia.
• One in ten calls for raising the level of education in the country and reforming housing and communal services.
• Only about 7% of respondents see among the priority tasks of the authorities granting the Russian language the status of a second state language, 5% — transitioning the army to a professional basis, and 4% — continuing the country’s course toward European integration.
• It is worth emphasizing certain demographic features of respondents’ answers. Thus, the fight against unemployment and the growth of wages are key priorities for the authorities in all regions. The fight against corruption is especially relevant for the West and the North. Price stabilization is more relevant for Donbas, and stabilization of the hryvnia for the West. Improving healthcare is most demanded in the North, South, and Donbas. Affordable housing is demanded in the West, North, and East.
• Support for industrial development is a special priority for Donbas. Reform of housing and communal services is a priority for Donbas, the East, and the North. The Russian language as a state language is among the special priorities for the authorities only for residents of the South (as is improving relations with Russia), while for the West the priority is preventing the split of the country.
• Youth among the key priorities for the authorities highlight: fighting unemployment and corruption, wage growth, support for small and medium-sized businesses, affordable housing, and raising the level of education. Older respondents, especially those of retirement age, see among the priorities of the authorities: growth of pensions, improvement of healthcare, and better relations with Russia.
• It is interesting that pensioners emphasize the need to stabilize prices for basic goods and services, while youth emphasize stabilization of the hryvnia.
• Respondents with higher levels of education emphasize the need to reduce corruption, support small and medium-sized businesses, ensure affordable housing, and reform tax legislation. Growth of pensions is among the priorities for the least educated citizens.

PRIORITY TASKS FOR THE OPPOSITION

• The main priority tasks for the opposition are seen by most as ensuring control over the authorities’ fulfillment of their promises (46%), preventing deterioration of citizens’ living standards (43%), ensuring control over the authorities’ use of budget funds (40%), and exposing cases of corruption in the new government (38%).
• Also, about one quarter of respondents see among the opposition’s priority tasks preventing the split of the country, almost one in five — defending freedom of speech, and almost one in ten — protecting business from pressure by the authorities, protecting the Ukrainian language as the sole state language, and counteracting the usurpation of power.
• Up to 10% of respondents also named among such tasks uniting the opposition for more effective resistance to the authorities, preserving their own political teams, and ensuring broader rights for the opposition.
• Only 6% of respondents named among the main tasks of the opposition the defense of the country’s European integration course and resistance to a possible rollback of democracy.
• Different forms of protest by the opposition (rallies, early elections, impeachment) were supported by only 3% of respondents.
• It is also worth emphasizing certain demographic features of respondents’ answers. Control over the authorities’ fulfillment of their promises is seen as one of the main tasks of the opposition by residents of the West, North, South, and Donbas. Residents of the East see preventing deterioration of living standards as the main task of the opposition.
• Residents of the North and East also emphasize among opposition priorities control over the use of budget funds and exposing corruption. Protection of the Ukrainian language as the sole state language is seen as a key priority of the opposition in the West. In addition, preventing the split of the country and defending freedom of speech are highlighted there.
• Securing broader rights for the opposition is most often recommended in the North, while defending the European integration course and resisting the rollback of democracy are most emphasized in the West. Almost one in ten residents of the Center advises the opposition to unite for more effective resistance to the authorities.
• The largest share of those undecided about the opposition’s tasks was found in Donbas (23%), and the smallest in the West (6%).
• Analysis of respondents’ answers gives grounds to state that people, based on their own problems and feelings, set essentially identical tasks for both the authorities and the opposition. If among the key tasks for the authorities respondents highlighted the fight against unemployment and increasing wages and pensions, then for the opposition — ensuring control over the authorities’ fulfillment of promises and preventing deterioration of citizens’ living standards. If people demand from the authorities to reduce the level of corruption, then from the opposition — to ensure control over the use of budget funds and to expose cases of corruption in the new government. If respondents advise the authorities to support small and medium-sized businesses, then the opposition — to protect business from pressure by the authorities, and so on.
• Thus, most respondents see the role of the authorities and the opposition in the country as interconnected institutions that increase each other’s effectiveness and, if they perform their functions, ensure the main current priorities of citizens: JOBS and WELL-BEING.