Sergey Aleksashenko: "Gaidarovsky Forum. Day of the Second"

"A large plenary meeting," Sustainable economic growth: model for Russia "I was very disappointed. The emotionally boring academic performance of Alexei Kudrin with the presentation of the problems and challenges facing Russia was substantially interesting exactly until the question was in the head: why did Russia find themselves in this position? What mistakes were made and what needs to be made so that they would not repeat them?", The economist writes in his own? " blog .

The speaker bypassed this topic along such a wide trajectory that it was just amazing! How can you offer recipes if you have not made a diagnosis, but are you only talking about the symptoms of the disease?

However, it didn’t come to the recipes particularly-I understand that curls and his team need to present his results only in May, so 3-4 times it will be possible to make intermediate results-the conversation was about problems and, sometimes, about forks. Although the hall, answering questions asked by the moderator, stubbornly voted for the option “We need changes in public administration”, the speaker brought this plot exclusively to the topic of “creating the Center for Changes” and to the fact that “we need qualified personnel”.

Not a single word about the abandonment of a monopoly of power, about political reforms, and the need for real political competition was said. And draw the conclusion yourself: can a leader who holds in power for 17.5 years and want to sit in his chair for another seven years, change his principles and values, the logic of decision -making, his behavior? "

"The theme about the Chinese project" One Belt, One Road "(" New Silk Road ") gained more people who wanted to participate than the audience could accommodate - as one of the panelists said" we seemed to be allocated the smallest audience in the entire giant complex of the Academy. "Campesses could be divided into three camps: Chinese who are calm, like a britme, like a brutalist, like a bridegroom. They talked about their project, not paying attention to all other topics; a representative of Russia, who tried to prove that the project of the Eurasian Union should be considered as equal to Chinese, and that we should talk about the conjugation of two integration projects (the best example of such a conjugation was a story about which China is building from Shanghai to European. Russian representatives said that we want to build a Moscow-Kazan railway-how can you “cross a hedgehog and a terrible”, if, especially, 600 kilometers between them? And representatives of the Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, who clearly and clearly said that the Evdrazes in the current form became no one needed by a bureaucratic superstructure that does not play any significant role in making decisions and does not contribute to real integration, and that it is simply impossible to develop this project without orientation to China and its economy.

In general, nothing is better than the “swan, cancer and pike” fables can tell about the course of the discussion.

The third discussion, about briefly- and the long -term principles of monetary policy, attracted me professionally, although there were no high -profile names among the speakers. The discussion was a success in the sense that there were different points of view that were argued and at times strongly opposed each other, and failed because the large number of speakers almost did not leave time for questions and answers. "

“Summing up my participation in the forum, I cannot hide the disappointment: I didn’t hear a serious conversation on the topic of the Forum -“ Choice of Priorities ” - I didn’t hear from representatives of the government of the story about what they were going to do in the coming year (not counting that waging an active struggle to preserve their seats).

And, the most sad, from those experts who are commonly called independent, I did not hear a single thesis that expressed disagreement with the policy that the Kremlin pursues "and personally Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin," or casting doubt on those decisions "personally," Alexei Leonidovich "personally. And without such a discussion, the Gaidar forum turned into an ordinary party -assault. "