2017 20:05 , 02 June 2017 Away

Valery Fedorov Director of VTsIOM Presenters Vitaly Dymarsky , Vladimir Ryzhkov

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

In Dymarsky - Good evening! The “2017” program, which is being released today in an unusual format. We are leading it together - Vladimir Ryzhkov...

V. Ryzhkov - And Vitaly Dymarsky.

To Dymarsky - ...And she comes out from St. Petersburg, from the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. And our guest is the head of a well-known sociological service called VTsIOM Valery Fedorov. Good evening!

V. Ryzhkov - They call you the “Big Three” - VTsIOM, FOM, Levada *, right? "The Big Three of Russian Sociology".

In Dymarsky - “Big Three”, yes.

V. Fedorov - There are no others, and those are far away. The Big Three remained.

V. Ryzhkov - Let’s keep us connected to the forum. You presented here international research... such as “Readiness for the Future”, “Expectation of the Future”...

V. Fedorov - “Index of readiness for the future.”

V. Ryzhkov - Tell us what we are talking about? What future?

V Dymarsky - Can I expand the question? Why else, it seems to me, is important - I don’t know, this study somewhat answers this - it seems to me that a country called Russia does not look into the future and does not know its future, and does not try to construct it. We live, at best, in the present day, and for some reason we are always looking for models of the future in the past.

V. FEDOROV: We really want to look into the future, but we are afraid to do it

V. Fedorov - I would correct it a little: we really want to look into the future, but we are afraid to do this, because the experience of the majority of living Russians has taught them that the future is not an improvement, it is not growth, not a qualitative leap for the better, but , most often these are disappointments, failures, disasters, crises and the like. That's why we want it.

Let me remind you, the mantra: We want to be confident in the future - it’s all about the future. But we are afraid, and we don’t really believe. But in any case, let me remind you that already next year in the presidential elections, 30% of those who have the right to vote are those who were born in the perestroika and post-perestroika years, who had no experience of adult life in the Soviet system.

V. Ryzhkov - This is every third resident of the country, right?

V. Fedorov - Well, soon it will be every third. So far every third voter. This is already a significant shift. Therefore, a generation is now entering life that has not had a dramatic experience, or has had it in a lighter form. Even in the 90s, it is clear, no matter how difficult it was for families, they tried in every possible way to protect and protect their children from these risks, threats, poverty, and so on. And this is good, we must take care of the younger generation. But there is also a downside: this generation does not really know how, does not really understand, how to live in Russia, how to live in conditions where development may not be orderly, but spasmodic, sometimes one step forward, two steps back or sideways. And these people, in a sense, wear rose-colored glasses, and they, of course, think about the future completely differently than the majority of the population. They just think that everything will be very good.

V. Ryzhkov - Rosy expectations.

V. Fedorov - Colleagues from the National Agency for Financial Research recently surveyed Moscow school graduates and first- and second-year university students and asked what salary they expected to receive in their first job. An amazing figure - 82 thousand rubles per month.

V. Ryzhkov - Despite the fact that the national average is 35. Clearly inflated expectations. Therefore, of course, I am interested in the future.

V Dymarsky - Then, if we are talking about the future... You yourself just said that they see this through a banal phrase that has set teeth on edge, I would say, “confidence in the future.” Is it through their own certain situation, material first of all, or do they think about the future, about the country, I would say? Because confidence in the future is in relation to oneself, to one’s family, and not about how a neighbor will live, how a neighborhood, a street, a society will live.

It seems to me that through this very few people think about the future, through modernization. It seems to me that, in general, the word “modernization”, which is the most important thing, perhaps for Russia, has been completely forgotten, not that it has been forgotten, but that it has disappeared from public opinion.

V. Fedorov - There are reasons for this.

V Dymarsky - Yes, of course.

V. Fedorov - Maybe there will be time, we’ll talk. Of course, people, first of all, think about their future, their families, their closest friends, not about the future of the social order. This does not mean that they are not patriots, it means that they are primarily responsible for their own future.

V Dymarsky - This is a completely different category - patriots.

V. Fedorov - This does not mean that they are not patriots, it means that they are primarily responsible for their own future. And when - again returning to this phrase - we want to be confident in the future, so you heard this distinction between the level of the country and the level of the individual, but I heard, you know what? If we want to be confident in the future, it means that we are not confident in it, which means that in today we see some kind of instability, more risks than opportunities.

And of course, this is very typical for a poor country that does not have experience of long-term and relatively crisis-free development. Because what is in short supply will always be in demand. They always want what is missing. If we take countries that are more or less prosperous, where there have been no revolutions for a long time, where civil conflicts, of course, exist, but they are resolved through electoral procedures, through political procedures, then there is confidence in the future - of course, this is also important and useful - but there they talk more about something else: about opportunities, about diversity, about freedom of choice, about freedom in general.

In Dymarsky - About improving conditions...

V. Fedorov - But we still talk more about safety, about predictability, about controllability, about stability.

V Dymarsky - And also because everyone expects all this from the state, and not from themselves, not from society.

V. Fedorov - Yes, but this is at the level of discourse. In reality, everyone understands that the state is the state, and all responsibility lies with you, and if there is anyone you can seriously count on, it is your family and a few close friends.

V. Ryzhkov - By the way, your surveys consistently show that when people are asked “Do you rely more on yourself or on the state?”, the majority always consistently answers that “we, of course, would like help from the state, but we rely only on ourselves.

V. Fedorov - It would be very humiliating, it seems to me, in relation to our people, after a quarter of a century of reforms, modernization and other troubles, to rely primarily on the state, and not on themselves. We have very smart, experienced people.

V. FEDOROV: Let’s put it this way: we are ahead of India...

V Dymarsky - I don’t believe both of you.
V. Ryzhkov - You may not believe it, but this is a study.

V Dymarsky - Yes, this is a study, maybe, I don’t know. I don't believe the research then. Listen to the lamentations, complaints: “they don’t pay us...”, “they don’t give us...”; not “I didn’t earn”, not “I didn’t receive” - but “we are not paid...”, “we are not given...”, “we are limited...”. They always expect something from some uncle, but not from themselves.

V. Ryzhkov - Valery, we started with the fact that you made a fresh cross-country comparison of readiness for the future. The question is: is Russia in the general category, or is Russia not like anything at all? And in general, what is readiness for the future?

V. Fedorov - This is the most important question. Yesterday, Presidential Assistant Fursenko took part in our discussion. The discussion was held by VTsIOM and the Valdai Club, because we are co-organizers, co-initiators of this project. And he said that we very quickly want to solve some problem - calculate, compare - but we put very little time and effort into understanding, formulating, agreeing on what we want to get as a result. And, indeed, when we talk about the future, readiness for it, the key question is: What will the future be like? What kind of future will this be? Will this be a utopia...?

V. Ryzhkov - That’s the question. Between Russia, say, and Poland or France or China, are there fundamental differences in readiness for the future and in understanding what the future is?

V. Fedorov - I can’t say about Poland, because we are at the first stage, the result that we presented yesterday compared 20 countries. This is "twenty".

V. Ryzhkov - This is the G20, right?

V. Fedorov - Yes, the G20. 20 largest countries plus the European Union as an interstate entity. But at the next stage we expect to expand the number of countries to 50. It is unlikely to reach 200, because in addition to objective indicators, statistics produced by the UN and other international organizations, we also want to involve experts in this project. Because when we talk about the future, the statistics themselves are good, but they are completely insufficient. The principle of extrapolation, that if someone has a lot now, then there will be even more in the future, it does not work well in forecasting.

Therefore, such subtle things cannot be grasped without working with qualified experts. But even my colleagues from the Valdai Club and I are unlikely to be able to find qualified experts who can shortchange 200 countries. But 50, in our opinion, is the height we will take. For now, all we can talk about is 20 countries.

Where is Russia located?..

V. Ryzhkov - Yes, that’s interesting.

V. Fedorov - Russia is in the middle and in many respects a little lower. If, relatively speaking, on a one-hundred-point scale we take that these are most often points in the forties, sometimes - 30, sometimes - 41.

V. Ryzhkov - Well, for example, who is next to us?

V. Fedorov - There are different parameters after all.

V. Ryzhkov - Roughly approximated.

V. Fedorov - Let’s put it this way: we are ahead of India...

V Dymarsky - I don’t understand very well by what indicator.

V. Fedorov - I’ll tell you now. I’ll answer Vladimir’s question in general terms, and then let’s go into small pieces. We are ahead of India in almost all indicators...

V. Ryzhkov - And China?

V. Fedorov - China is a little ahead in some indicators, much ahead in others. In some cases we are ahead of them. There is no feeling here that we are behind forever. But, of course, the leaders today are Western countries, broadly understood.

V. Ryzhkov - That is, Europe, USA, Canada...

V. Fedorov - Japan and Australia. Now by what indicators? A very valid question. We have identified 10 key indicators. It seems like a lot, but we understand that since the future is difficult to predict and different scenarios may come true. Let’s say, the scenario of universal peace is unlikely, although theoretically it could be, but the scenario of rivalry... by the way, forecasters from the CIA recently wrote their next forecast about the future - one scenario was called “Besieged Cities.” This is precisely about the West, about the fact that the countries of North America, Western Europe and part of East Asia will continue to develop intensively, but they will have to build walls around themselves. And not because Mr. Trump wants it, but because global inequality is so serious...

V. Ryzhkov - That you will have to fence yourself off from the poor world.

V. Fedorov - That is. They simply work today like a vacuum cleaner, and this gives them additional opportunities in many ways, but it is already starting to work in the opposite direction. Refugees during the 2015 crisis in Europe - a million or several million people - are by no means a resource for Western Europe. This has already been recognized by everyone, including the initiator of this pact, Angela Merkel. No, it's a burden. And that's only a million or two million people. And if we extrapolate the current alarming trends for 10-15 years, then this is a zone of low pressure where residents of failed countries, developing countries - and, as we know, developing countries do not develop (a well-known paradox) - will strive to get through by any means, because this a longer life, a happier life, more prosperous, and more chances for your children. Therefore - “Besieged Cities”.

So, back to the question. Different scenarios. And for different scenarios, of course, different qualities are needed; Russia needs to prepare for a different future. And you cannot, for example, be prepared for all scenarios at the same time, alas and ah. Therefore, we took 10 different areas. Well, the spheres are pretty clear. This is education. Of course, whatever the future, we need modern education, we need lifelong education, we need education not only for children, for young people, but also for adults. And we need education at an international level, that is, the internationalization of education is very important. Today, no country, even the most international, can be a clear leader in the field of education without broad international cooperation.

Another area is, of course, science. Production, business, and economics are becoming more and more knowledge-intensive. Once they were labor-intensive, then capital-intensive, today they must be knowledge-intensive if we want our economy to provide us with a standard of living not of 20 thousand rubles, but of 50, 100 per month, and so on.

The next area, of course, is the security sector, of course, the armed forces. Without them, in today's increasingly troubled world, it is not only impossible to win, but also impossible to survive.

The next level is resources and technology. These are different factors, but they are increasingly merging. Look, resources. Paradoxical results: out of the 20 countries that we assessed, which country took last place on this indicator, what country do you think?

V. Ryzhkov - Japan.

V. Fedorov - First. Japan took one of the first places. Great Britain took first place, and Japan was one of the first. And the last place...

To Dymarsky - Russia...

V. Fedorov - Fortunately, no. It's definitely not like that. Saudi Arabia took last place. Can you imagine the paradox? Why?

V. Ryzhkov - Another understanding of resources.

V. FEDOROV: If we want to be confident in the future, it means we are not confident in it

V. Fedorov - Of course, yes. Saudi Arabia has the maximum amount of easily extractable, cheap energy reserves. But what are the resources in the future? This is the inaccessibility of key natural resources, which, in addition to energy resources, already include water and arable land, and so on... By the way, Saudi Arabia does not have all this, except energy resources. But availability is, at best, only one third. And what else? And, by the way, these are technologies that allow you to extract maximum efficiency from any resources. That is, conditionally, if you produce oil, then you do not sell crude oil, as Nigeria does...

In Dymarsky - A reworked.

V. Fedorov - And not even refined oil, not gasoline and kerosene...

V. Ryzhkov - And the finished products

V. Fedorov - Of course, but petrochemical products, for example. If you produce oil, you can sell crude oil, you can sell gasoline, and you can sell polyethylene. Everything is made from the same product, but the added value is fundamentally different. And Saudi Arabia has big problems with this.

And in the end, the third element, according to our experts, to the resources of the future is total waste recycling.

V Dymarsky - This is rather an environmental problem, right? Or economic?

V. Fedorov - This is an economic problem.

V. Ryzhkov - And here, of course, our horse apparently wasn’t lying around.

V. Fedorov - We have great opportunities here.

V. Ryzhkov - Let’s say it carefully: great opportunities.

V. Fedorov - But there are other factors.

V. Ryzhkov - I remind you that our guest is Valery Fedorov, General Director of VTsIOM, who conducted a study on the readiness of 20 countries for the future. I want to record that Russia is a normal, ordinary country, which is in the middle of the list. Somewhere we look better, somewhere we look worse...

V Dymarsky - In the middle of the list - what? Ready?..

V. Ryzhkov - Preparedness for the challenges of the future.

V. Fedorov - Thanks to Vitaly for asking very tough and precise questions. Is it possible to prepare for the future? Honestly, no.

V Dymarsky - But, most importantly, to what future - what Valery said.

V. Fedorov - But what can be done. Of course, at the beginning of everything are the scripts. There are not countless of them. There are three or four of them. And different scenarios have different probabilities. You can track the increase or decrease in the likelihood of certain scenarios. Yesterday, one of the Japanese experts who participated in our round table said: “You know, for us one of the most important risks is a catastrophic earthquake.” Clearly, this is their country risk, because they are located on a tectonic fault. For the world as a whole, this is, of course, an insignificant risk. For Japan, as we understand, it is significant. But we also understand that after every earthquake, after every tsunami, they recover very quickly. Why? Because forewarned means forearmed. Everyone there knows what to do.

V. Ryzhkov - Great experience, of course.

V. Fedorov - Vast experience, huge amounts of money are invested in this. Everyone understands. A situation similar to a tornado, a hurricane, which we had in Moscow a few days ago, is, of course, simply impossible there. Everyone there knows what to do.

I'm coming back. You can make scenarios, you need to make scenarios, and you need to record the increase in the probability of one scenario or not - well, according to some reference points.

What else can you do? We can now assess our readiness for this or that scenario, the readiness of each country. Let's say, if we understand that the future will not be a utopia, but a dystopia, it will be a world of conflicts between states or groups of states that are constantly balancing on the brink of a diplomatic and military solution, then what should we do? Of course, we must strengthen our muscles, first of all, the military ones. But again, we should not prepare for the past war, we must understand that the war of the future is not tens of thousands of tanks and not millions of infantrymen. The war of the future is largely a robotic war, and it is a cybernated war, and these are attacks on key areas of the enemy’s information structure.

Therefore, the mechanisms that we propose are the following: we discuss scenarios, we fix the zero point, where we are now; and we look - of course, this is, first of all, statesmen should do - how prepared we are for this or that future scenario. And if we are not ready, then we begin to reason and make efforts to prepare.

V Dymarsky - Can I ask a question here? There is a natural, absolutely understandable, small (if you want, large) gap between the readiness and speed of progress towards this future. How can this gap be reduced or at least not made large? Should we increase preparedness or slow down this progress towards the future so as not to leave too far behind an unprepared population? Did I explain it roughly or not?

V. Fedorov - Well, yes, you can torpedo Elon Musk...

V. Ryzhkov - Dymarsky proposes to stop progress.

V Dymarsky - No, wait, I’m not suggesting stopping progress.

V. Ryzhkov - The idea is clear.

V Dymarsky - I am based on my understanding - I do not insist - on the current state of Russia, which is not modernizing, which is not developing. Is he waiting for the population to be ready for this modernized future or is he not modernizing simply because he can’t or doesn’t want to?

V. Fedorov - I want to argue. Russia is developing. Russia is moving forward. You know that our cellular communications in Russia are one of the best in the world.

To Dymarsky - Especially on the Kremlin embankment, when it sends you to Vnukovo.

V. Fedorov - And this is not cellular communication. These are navigators.

In Dymarsky - This is the FSO.

V. FEDOROV: Confidence in the future is in relation to oneself, to one’s family

V. Fedorov - These are navigators. Let's not be confused. You know, several years ago we could not imagine that we would use these navigators in Moscow. And today 70% of the population of Moscow no longer just have phones, but smartphones. This is a revolution. We are changing very quickly and intensely.

V. Ryzhkov - By the way, on the Internet, in my opinion, we are also one of the world leaders.

In Dymarsky - In terms of speed, but not in coverage.

V. Fedorov - In terms of coverage, we have about 70-73%. This pace has slowed recently. But I think that after some time it will grow due to demographic trends. It is clear that it is still difficult for grandmothers to master the Internet beyond limited functionality, although it is also quite important - Odnoklassniki, communication, Skype have already mastered everything. It's fast, cheap, and in many cases free. Therefore, one should not underestimate the ability of the Russian people to modernize and adapt. This is, firstly.

Secondly, I will remind you that our country takes a long time to harness, but it goes very quickly if it really gets hot. And you know, I was at another event... Our work is like this: we research a lot of things. And today we presented the rating of the investment climate in the regions of Russia.

To Dymarsky - We’ll pause at this point now, and you’ll tell us later...

NEWS

To Dymarsky - Good evening again! We continue the 2017 program. Let me remind you that today it comes out from the St. Petersburg International Forum. With me today is Vladimir Ryzhkov. My name is Vitaly Dymarsky. And our guest is Valery Fedorov, general director of VTsIOM, a well-known sociological service.

Valery, you paused on the investment rating of regions, if I’m not mistaken.

V. Fedorov - Yes. This is the fourth year we have been doing it. Operator: Agency for Strategic Initiatives. The project is personally supervised by Presidential Assistant for Economic Affairs Andrei Belousov. We conduct surveys. What is the essence of the rating? We survey the opinions of businessmen, and quite a large number - from 200 to 300 in each region, including the smallest ones. It is difficult to find several hundred businessmen there, sometimes in some small autonomous district.

V. Ryzhkov - This is a huge study.

V. Fedorov - Yes, these are tens of thousands of people. And what’s most interesting is that this is not a one-time study, this is the third one.

V. Ryzhkov - What allows you to see the dynamics.

V. Fedorov - Trends, yes. You know, I was simply amazed by many of the results. Although we do all this, we seem to be on our toes... The Smolensk region is clearly not the most economically developed region of Russia for various reasons. Last year they were among the outsiders in the ranking, closer to somewhere around 80th place. They jumped 39 points forward in a year.

V. Ryzhkov - Everything related - registration, permitting documentation, regulation...

V. Fedorov - Yes. Ingushetia jumped by 32 points. Once again: this is a rating not based on reports from local bosses.

V. Ryzhkov - The businessmen themselves speak.

V. Fedorov - Of course. That is, in order for businessmen to say: “Yes, something has changed” - not just decisions must be made, but they must be implemented, implemented, and real businessmen who are going to connect to gas, to energy, they must see it and feel.

Why such rapid growth? But because they finally began to do their homework, they began to do simple and understandable things that their neighbors had done a long time ago.

V. Ryzhkov - This rating is a guideline for them, is it significant for them, this rating?

V. Fedorov - Today Andrei Belousov said that a presidential decree is being prepared on a new system for evaluating governors. Well, this is an eternal topic. There, they were assessed by 12 criteria, then by 300, and so on.

V Dymarsky - But the final assessment is given to them by the Investigative Committee.

V. Fedorov - Not without that. And now a decree is being prepared. And Andrei Belousov announced that a decision had already been made to include the provisions of this rating as one of the important ones in assessing the effectiveness of the governor’s work. And it really is, it works. Since everyone knows that VTsIOM conducts these surveys, then, of course, walkers come to us: “Well, tell me, what place are we in... Is it possible to do something?”

V. Ryzhkov - Walkers or carts with sour cream, chickens, eggs?

V. Fedorov - Coffee. The last time they brought coffee.

V. Ryzhkov - Famous Kuban coffee.

In Dymarsky - With sugar heads you should...

V. Ryzhkov - Piglets.

V. Fedorov - I won’t name the region, but the region is very good. But I have nothing to say to them, because we have specially built such a system: we conduct a survey - every interview that is taken is merged into their database. We do not have access to the results. We did this so that no one would be tempted to cheat and lobby, so to speak - well, the temptation will always be there - but so that a “great wall of China” would be placed in his way. And we implemented it.

But, you see, the sheer number and pressure of these people shows that the rope is in the wind. They understand that they will all be removed if their investment climate does not improve. Yes, this is an administrative lever precisely because these are state bodies, this is the administration. And they are sensitive to these levers.

V. FEDOROV: China is slightly ahead in some indicators, much ahead in others

V Dymarsky - Can I ask about the investment climate after all? As long as I have been living in the so-called new Russia, as we usually say, since 1991, I have been hearing so much about the investment climate. But during this time, money is leaving Russia rather than coming here. This is the first. But this is such a general remark.

V. Fedorov - I will add: as long as you live under capitalism, you will hear so much about the investment climate.

V Dymarsky - Probably, yes. But the investment climate, of course, is great that it is improving, according to businessmen, but does this increase investment? Because, you know, it’s like the climate: you can use the climate, you can not use it. It’s sunny now – you can go out to sunbathe, or you can sit at home and hide from the sun. After all, the investment climate, among other things, in addition to the opinions of businessmen, is also the country’s policy, it is also political risks.

V. Fedorov - Of course. I will also add: this is also the demographics of the country. And intercountry competition.

V Dymarsky - Yes, definitely.

V. Fedorov - A strong dollar means you have the same investment climate. A weak dollar means yours is different.

V Dymarsky - Yes. And this, as you know, depends not on the businessmen you interview, but on someone else - oil and so on.

V. Fedorov - Nevertheless, we must do what we can.

V Dymarsky - No, I’m not judging you. In general, I don't blame anyone. I'm just saying that you just need to be more careful with these indicators. They do not always, I will say diplomatically, directly testify to this...

V. Fedorov - Abstractly - I agree. Specifically. Look, what is the investment climate? This time a very good model was built. There are 45 parameters, and all are absolutely specific. For example, how many days does it take to connect to electricity for an average commercial company? It was, relatively speaking, 30, now it’s 13 in a year. Can you imagine? This is just a gigantic breakthrough. A year ago it seemed that this was impossible in principle. “What are you talking about!” - everyone said.

V Dymarsky - But if during this year your government started a hybrid war in a neighboring country, then these 17 days won will have no meaning.

V. Fedorov - As far as I know, we have not started any hybrid wars over the past year.

V Dymarsky - Me for example. I understand, thank God. In relation to another country.

V. Ryzhkov - Let's maybe change the topic.

V. Fedorov - And before changing, the last phrase. Do you know who comes first in the investment climate ranking?

To Dymarsky - From the regions?

V. Fedorov - Yes, from the regions.

V. Ryzhkov - Tatarstan?

V. Fedorov - Yes, Tatarstan is in first place.

V. Ryzhkov - They are generally great. They were the first to introduce this e-government. And budget transparency...

V. Fedorov - Moscow, what place do you think it is in?

V. Ryzhkov - Well, I think it’s the 20th. 30th.

V. Fedorov - Moscow has made a breakthrough. This year she entered the top three for the first time in 4 years. On the third place.

To Dymarsky - I can’t help but ask about St. Petersburg.

V. Fedorov - St. Petersburg has moved up and entered the top twenty.

V. Ryzhkov - Who are our poor students? Who should the pioneers not look up to, who should they not follow as an example?

V. Fedorov - I won’t scold. Today, specifically in order to work not through fear, but to work through positive incentives, my colleagues and I published the top twenty. Tomorrow or the day after tomorrow the entire rating will appear on the site, and everyone will find it there. Most, of course, will find themselves at the bottom, not at the top. But you know who's in second place to finish this topic and move on to the next one?

V. Ryzhkov - No, who?

V. Fedorov - In second place - for me it was also a small sensation - Chuvashia. Chuvashia took second place. A small republic without special resources took second place in the investment ranking...

In Dymarsky - Wait, the main investment was... But no, it’s not in Chuvashia. Depardieu - is this not in Chuvashia?

V. Fedorov - This is in Mordovia.

V Dymarsky - I think this was the main investment.

V. Fedorov - The main point: you may have practically no resources, but if you are involved, inspired, and you understand that you need to break through, resources will appear from somewhere. First of all, from ourselves. Russia's main resource has been and will always be not oil, but people.

V. Ryzhkov - People, of course, yes.

V Dymarsky - I think, if we talk about these indicators, it seems to me that this is just important, as you say, of course, for the investment climate, but it seems to me that it is simply important for local business.

V. Fedorov - First of all.

In Dymarsky - Primarily for small and medium-sized businesses. Because I can simply draw up my documents and start sewing mittens tomorrow...

V. Fedorov - Here we have two heroes: Kalinin, the chairman of Opora Russia, who very actively fights for the interests of small businesses, and Braverman, the head of the Corporation for Small and Medium Business, who worked for less than a year, but has already retired for entire years. And today at the session we heard simply streams of gratitude from above and below.

V. Ryzhkov - That is, it is extremely important when civil society institutions set the agenda and promote...

V Dymarsky - It is extremely important that when we talk about medium-sized businesses, about all these indicators, we do not use the verb “fight”, that we will not have to fight for this, when this will be normal practice.

V. Fedorov - For this, at least a generation must change. Our generation will continue to fight.

V. Ryzhkov - I remind you that Valery Fedorov, general director of VTsIOM, is in our studio. I think we will be able to discuss another very important topic. In general, we are having such a strategic conversation today. We started with cross-country comparisons. Then we discussed the dynamics in the regions, and, in fact, the totality of regions is Russia. If we understand what is happening there, we understand what is happening in the country. Am I right?

Now let's talk about the presidential election because there is less than a year left. And VTsIOM, as I know, very carefully analyzes what is happening with public consciousness, with public opinion in our country. My first question, Valery, in relation to the presidential elections, is this: what is the greatest demand in our society now? Such a fundamental question. I know that all sociologists measure. Are you more for change or are you more for maintaining stability, the status quo? Today, by and large, according to Hamburg, a year before the presidential elections, do people in Russia want to preserve what they have more, or is there a request for some structural, serious reforms and changes?

V. Fedorov - We are afraid of reforms not because we are all such true conservatives, but because we have accumulated experience, mostly negative among the majority of the population. Therefore, most of the population perceives any talk about reforms and modernization as a signal to grab everything and bury their belongings somewhere in the garden, because now the most difficult times will come.

V. Ryzhkov - So there is no request for changes?

V. Fedorov - Not so. There is a request for changes, of course. What kind of changes should there be? There is no request for political change. There are no people en masse who would say: “Give more freedom, give more democracy! We want not these deputies, but others! We don’t want this president, but another!” These are the people you have to look for under a magnifying glass. There is no such request that we have another president instead of Vladimir Vladimirovich next year to lead our country.

And in this regard, rallies and political protests against renovation are absolutely indicative. The silent majority still votes. It is satisfied with Putin's work, and it wants Putin to serve another term and for him to win. But, of course, there is a colossal demand for economic changes. Let me remind you that last fall we finally landed at the bottom of the economic crisis.

V. Ryzhkov - And, in my opinion, incomes are still continuing to fall now.

V. FEDOROV: In reality, everyone understands that the state is the state, and all responsibility lies with you

V. Fedorov - We have landed at the bottom - this means that the ruble has stopped falling, this means that the price of oil has stabilized. This means that the most important thing is that inflation has stopped growing, and moreover, has begun to decline. We searched for this bottom for a very long time. And it seemed that as soon as we landed on it, that’s it, paradise would come. And just a few months passed and it became clear that things were bad for us at the bottom. Moreover, you correctly said that income continues to decline.

And in just a few months our aspirations have grown. It is no longer enough for us to reach the bottom and lie there. No, we want to grow.

V. Ryzhkov - This is evident from the polls, right?

V. Fedorov - Of course. Moreover, look, back in December we asked our traditional annual survey: “Do you think that in a year you will live the same as you do now, better than now, or worse than now? - two years in a row - the 14th, 15th results were predominantly negative. People believed that they would live the same or worse.

December 2016 - a sharp reversal: people believe that they will live the same or better. This means it has been formed...

V. Ryzhkov - Request for improvement.

V. Fedorov - Of course. This is a big canopy of positive expectations.

V. Ryzhkov - What if they don’t exist?

V. Fedorov - And if they don’t exist, then tension in society will grow, of course, including political tension.

V Dymarsky - From this point of view, I would like you to comment on events that have already been commented on a hundred and fifty times, but, nevertheless, I would like a sociological approach, because they usually comment and analyze from the point of view of current politics . I mean the performances on March 26th.

V. Ryzhkov - Science seems to have already figured this out.

V Dymarsky - As many say, they were qualitatively a little different, at least in terms of age composition. I beg you, just don’t say that they were all bribed.

V. Ryzhkov - Science doesn’t say that, a few other people say that.

V. Fedorov - Science says that about 20% of the participants in these protests not only in Moscow, but throughout the country, these were people who for the first time took part not only in protest activities, but in general in any political activity ...

In Dymarsky - What brought them?

V. Fedorov - And these 20% are mainly representatives of the younger generation, already post-Soviet. What brought them? Well, various factors led to this. First, safety brought them. This is, in fact, a fundamental factor. If the forecast changes from negative to positive, it means that the risk that we can rock the boat and break everything through inept actions drops sharply and that means we can go out and protest.

The second factor: these are really young people, they have no experience. They have a lot of energy, enthusiasm, desire, and, I would say, illusions. And they want everything at once, and they respond to calls to go out. They think it's their right. They believe that they live in a free country. They believe that they can make life better.

V Dymarsky - This is, indeed, their right.

V. Fedorov - Of course, this is a fact. They will implement it. True, it’s still better not to go to unauthorized rallies, because then the police have a duty...

V Dymarsky - This is their constitutional right.

V. Fedorov - There is no constitutional right to go to prohibited rallies...

V Dymarsky - There is no constitutional right to prohibit a rally.

V. Fedorov - There is a procedure stipulated by federal law. Let's not be like Navalny and Usmanov now. Let them sort out their problems and conflicts in court.

Returning to science. These are really people who want to try. They have the right to do so.

V Dymarsky - And their main request? Not anti-corruption, I think.

V. Fedorov - They want self-realization. It's such a basic story. Well, what words does this take... the fight against corruption is such a very private discursive formula that is very well grasped by everyone, representatives of all ages, in any period of life in our country.

V Dymarsky - I absolutely agree with you.

V. Ryzhkov - But, Valery, the question is this. There are two points of view on this performance on March 26th. There is a point of view that this is a rather marginal phenomenon, a kind of peripheral activity in a society that is generally satisfied with the authorities and the situation, and so on. There is another point of view that this is a manifestation of some kind of massive shift towards change, change and protest. Here is your interpretation, as a specialist, as a scientist: is this more likely a youth protest or is it a reflection of broader social changes?

V Dymarsky - And I would add regarding the minority-majority: such radical changes in society are made not by the silent majority that you spoke about, but by an active minority.

V. Fedorov - And an active minority. It is a fact.

V Dymarsky - How to interpret this?

V. Fedorov - I have already said that there has been a shift in public sentiment. The hardest part, according to people, is behind us. And they raise the question at full force: When will economic growth begin? And most importantly: When will we taste the fruits of economic growth? You understand that economic growth at 1% or even 1.5% is the ultimate dream of our economists...

V. Ryzhkov - He is invisible to people.

V. Fedorov - He is absolutely invisible. 3-4% is a minimum minimum, and even then with the active work of the state to redistribute income, so that they feel at least something. And people, by the way, are tired after two years of tightening their belts.

V. Ryzhkov - Even more. It's been three years since '14.

V. Fedorov - In 13 , we had growth, albeit small.

V. Ryzhkov - 14th - decline, 15th - decline, 16th decline.

V. Fedorov - In the 14th year there was euphoria, which acted as a very powerful anesthetic. But in the 15th and 16th years - yes, this is already a decrease. And the most important thing is the decline in real incomes of the population. Let me remind you that in 2009 the state poured hundreds of billions of rubles into the pension system and the social system. This did not happen during this crisis, because there is no more money.

So, returning to your question, yes, there has been a major change in public sentiment. Today people are not afraid of the worst, today people hope for the best. And they are waiting for the best to begin. Does this mean an increase in protest sentiment? Not yet. In order for protest activity to grow significantly, a combination of different factors is needed. The fact that Navalny exists, the fact that he has a network organization, the fact that he works well in the language of social networks, the fact that he is approaching this young generation that has never existed in politics - yes, this is an important component, but not enough. I won’t tell you what else is sufficient, so as not to act as a political consultant to a revolutionary.

V. Ryzhkov - Moreover, a technologist.

V. Fedorov - According to our feeling, a critical mass has not yet developed. What will happen next, let's look at June 12, first of all. Let's look at the results of the elections in September in different regions that make up Russia. And the real election campaign, of course, will begin in the fall, after that.

V Dymarsky - You spoke about critical mass. Is this formation of a critical mass a process or an explosive effect?

V. Fedorov - Well, you and I all came out of Lenin’s overcoat, we all know that a revolution is the moment when processes dramatically change their dynamics. It seems like slowly, slowly everything accumulates, then - bam! - jump, explosion...

In Dymarsky - When the top can’t, the bottom doesn’t want to.

V. Fedorov - Jump.

V. Ryzhkov - Spasmodic changes...

V. Fedorov - Of course.

V Dymarsky - And it is impossible to predict this leap.

V. Ryzhkov - Valery, here’s a question. You have been doing this competently and professionally for many years. If we extrapolate the current situation to March 2018 - the presidential elections - this could affect the outcome of the presidential elections, most importantly - the course of the presidential elections, the agenda, the atmosphere, the actions of political actors: official position, unofficial position...

V. Fedorov - What?

V. Ryzhkov - Well, these youth protests, expectations of an improvement in life that may not happen?

V Dymarsky - I think the question here is simpler. Now, if you turn to young people. What do you think: is this a demand for the current government or a demand to change the government?

V. Fedorov - For now, these are requirements for the current government, of course. Because even in the youngest groups, Putin was and remains the most popular politician, and, so to speak, his closest rival is inferior to him not by percentages or even tens of percentages, but by orders of magnitude. Therefore, this is a request, of course, to the current government and specifically to the president. Because if we talk about other authorities, both the government and regional administrations...

In Dymarsky - They do not enjoy authority.

V. Fedorov - Big gap... Now, can it influence or not? Well, of course, everything can have an impact. Another thing is that, as the Americans say - they have more experience in democratic politics - they say: in politics, even one day is a lot of time. And we still have 10 months ahead. Therefore, based on the rallies on March 26, to say that the picture has lined up, the picture will be like this, the scenarios will be like this, the trajectories will be like this and the results will be like this, then this is simply ridiculous. There will be a lot more to come.

I agree with that – the warm-up has begun. Moreover, it started a little earlier than expected. It was expected in the fall - it started in the spring. Of course, Alexei Navalny is trying to repeat his success of 2011. We also remember that in January-February 11, with the famous broadcast on “Echo,” he began his campaign about “swindlers and thieves.” Of course, our experience is our helper, but it is also our enemy.

I doubt he'll be able to play this card a second time. But we will find out what will really happen soon enough. The main thing is to understand that the future, including the near future, is not something predetermined. This is something in which you and I are directly involved. We have the right, we have the opportunities, and, of course, we must realize these opportunities in order to create the future we want.

To Dymarsky - Valery, but we have the right to check all your forecasts after some time.

V. Fedorov - Absolutely.

V. Ryzhkov - We will definitely invite you to the Echo broadcast, knowing that you are closely following the dynamics of public opinion. And thank you! We'll hear you.

V Dymarsky - It was the “2017” program. See you!

* Levada Center is an NGO recognized as a foreign agent. The movement for the protection of voters' rights "Golos" is an unregistered public association recognized as a foreign agent.

— Valery Fedorov — 2017 — Echo of Moscow, 06/02/2017