In order to answer the question paper, we need to understand what happened with

Romania’s decentralization process around the 2017 period.

The process of decentralization in Romania has been a process with a stop-

and-go cycle, not a gradual policy improvement process. Decentralization often
advanced more due to international pressures than driven by the convictions of
local politicians or voluntary decisions of the central government. As a
consequence, decentralization was implemented reactively, with little planning or
analysis, and no previous training or financial empowerment given to local level.

In 2017, the Romanian Government adopted the strategy for

decentralization. Prime Minister at that time period, Sorin Grindeanu, said local
authorities would be distributed additional tasks and objectives. The domains
included in the decentralization process are: agriculture, culture, tourism, the
environment, healthcare, education and extra-curricular activities, youth and
sports.

The general objective assumed in the strategy is the transfer of new

competences, except for those of inspection and control, to the local authorities -
town halls, local and county councils. At present a great part of these competences
are being exerted by the ministries’ decentralized directorates.

It was political relevant? In my opinion, I think it was influenced because

the circumstances of that time period were fueled with constant changes on the
political scene, corruption, protests, alternation in government, alliances and
ruptures of alliances between the main political parties in Romania. The political
differences between the elected president of Romania and the majority of the
situation resulting from the parliamentary elections have often led to delays in the
appointment of cabinet members or major differences between the government.
These differences have led to the postponement of measures, delays in the annual
adoption of the budget law or the slowdown in the process of reforming public
institutions.