"Free parliament in Russia of the future will be able to block our reforms"

Economist Milov responds to criticism "Medusa" addressed to the program of Navalny

On December 13, the founder of the Corruption Fund, politician Alexei Navalny, published a pre -election program. Medusa studied the document, found several controversial or not completely explained statements in it - and formulated questions. A participant in the Expert Council for the preparation of the election program Alexei Navalny, the former deputy Minister of Energy of Russia Vladimir Milov examined the publication of Medusa and sent his objections to the editor. We publish his article entirely.

Questions "Medusa" to the election program of Alexei Navalny

Medusa published questions for the election program of Alexei Navalny. Discussion is a great thing, we are ready for it and will be happy to explain our position. It seemed to us that most of the published questions are related to two reasons: 1) the authors misunderstood some details of the program (now we will explain them in detail); 2) questions are asked not to the program as such, but to the consequences of its implementation - and this leads to a polemic based on fairly controversial statements.

Let's analyze in detail the comments of Medusa.

Why did the program remain in absolute values?

“In which rubles does Navalny consider? 2016, when these figures were first published? In the rubles of 2017, which, taking into account inflation, are already less? Or 2018, when will the elections be? Or in general 2020-2022, when will the changes be introduced? In this part, specifics did not appear in the program. On the contrary, there was much more reasons to believe that inflation when performing the program (see the next points) will increase significantly, and all these numbers simply will not mean anything. ”

Navalny right at the very beginning of his video says in which rubles he believes: these are the parameters of the 2016 consolidated budget, the last full calendar year, for which there is a fully reduced consolidated budget. In no case should you consider here for the future: there will be confusion, since there will be a lot of assumptions and variables. The task of that part of the program (and video), which is dedicated to budget maneuver, was precisely in showing in the static parameters of the last available consolidated budget, from what expenses we, in principle, want to get rid of (excess officials, siloviki, drinking spotlights, kickbacks, state sales), which to increase (medicine, education), and where to collect those who are undergoing today income (income from the use of state property, taxes on Gazprom). The meaning of this analysis is precisely in the staticity of the picture, so that readers understand that we want to change in the budget system in current parameters.

There is no need to mix the promising dynamics here. The purpose of the analysis was not this. In the future, a lot will change: for example, in connection with the sharp increase in salaries we expected, the tax base for personal income tax (while maintaining the current rate of 13%) - due to the fact that Russians will receive much higher salaries, personal income tax will become the main budget -forming tax, as in many developed countries (today it is inferior to other taxes because the population is poor). But all these details would only confuse readers when clarifying the budget maneuver, the purpose of which is to explain which articles of the current budget we consider superfluous and which are under -financed.

“There has been more reasons to believe that inflation will increase significantly during the implementation of the program” - on the basis of what data is this conclusion? Such statements often have to hear, but it seems that their authors analyze some spherical inflation in a vacuum. Meanwhile, we will do two fundamental things that will help to contain inflation under control:

• restarting business activity, as a result of which the money supply will work for growth, and not to increase prices;
• The demonopolization of the economy, which will finally control the current rampant growth of monopoly prices.

We believe that these two vectors - which do not work today - will “give” inflation processes much more than the growth of salaries - they will be untwisted.

What to do with state monopolies?

“In different parts of the program, this is said differently. Navalny in one place suggests that there will be no state monopolies in his Russia, in another - that there will be no state corporations; But then he writes that funds from state property management will go to a certain analogue of the Kudrin Stabfond - the Future generation fund. In addition, in another place it is assumed that Gazprom and Rosneft (the first state -owned company is a monopolist in the main pipeline market, the second is the leader in oil production in Russia) will pay significant funds to extrabudgetary social funds.

Will Gazprom remain a monopoly right to build gas pipelines? Will the privatization of this company happen? What will happen to Rosneft? And with Russian Railways? What to do with Rosatom? The only major reform of the state monopoly in the 21st century was carried out by Anatoly Chubais in the RAO UES of Russia, but it is unlikely that Alexei Navalny will take an example from his permanent opponent. ”

No, we are not talking about it differently in different parts of the program. Gosmonopoli and state corporations in many areas are often the same thing, and both of these models are in a similar way, the elimination of both of them does not contradict each other.

How will demonopolization of the economy take place, read in a detailed report on demonopolization , which with the founder of Open Russia, the opposition politician Mikhail] Khodorkovsky published more than a year ago, and about which I am talking about in my transfer "Where is the money?" on the [Utuub channel] "Navalny Live". Everything is explained there in detail.

About the Pension Fund or Future Generation Foundation: yes, the shares of monopolies will now be transferred there, and as large companies are demoned, the Pension Fund will remain the owner of a proportional share in new companies allocated from them. This is what happens with any restructuring.

No, we are not at all by analogy with the “Kudrin Stabfond” to create a pension fund (we described our plans here a few months ago): the Kudrinsky Stabfond is just a meaningless cube to accumulate money in the government’s account in the Central Bank, and we want to create a rich and capitalized pension fund-investor by analogy with the Norwegian Global Pension Fund, The largest investor in the world, whose funds would be the property of pensioners.

An example with Chubais is very unsuccessful. We constantly criticize the transformations carried out by Chubais, for the failure and profanation of the idea of ​​creating a competitive electricity market , where, as a result, 55% of the generating power is controlled by four state -owned companies, and together with three other large holdings of [Oleg] Deripaska, [Victor] Vekselberg and [Andrei] Melnichenko - all three quarters of capacity. We constantly refer to this example, explaining, “how not to do” ( here you can read more about it).

Who will pay a compensation tax on privatization?

One of the ideas of Alexei Navalny is to introduce a certain “compensation tax”-due to the fact that privatization in the 1990s “according to the conviction of most Russian citizens” was carried out in violation of the law. Judging by the words from the election program, we are talking about a tax for specific people, and not for companies.

The names of people in the election program are not mentioned, but the circle of businessmen who participated in privatization is understandable. Now the question is: from whom is the “compensation tax” for privatization, for example, “Yukos” - from the former main owner of the company Mikhail Khodorkovsky? Or with Rosneft, which later got Khodorkovsky’s assets? Or from the Rosneft shareholders, and among them not only the state, but ordinary Russians who bought its shares within the framework of the "People's IPO"?

And from whom to take a compensation tax for the privatization of Sibneft? This company was under the control of businessman Boris Berezovsky (died in 2013), and then moved to Roman Abramovich, who sold the company Gazprom.

In the program, we tried to say this extremely clear - owners of infrastructure, "dishonestly privatized." Collective auctions, a story with the sale [businessman Alisher] Usmanov “to himself” Gazprom metallurgical assets (when he even refused to call the price helped by Gazprom, at the same time the Gazprom’s daughter-seller and a private company-buyer). Of course, the assets that were subsequently renationalized do not fall under this.

From Navalny, of course, more detailed proposals on a specific mechanism for the introduction of compensation tax, but this is another question from the series “clarifying”, the answer to which will certainly be given later. The idea itself is not at all unrealized-Navalny relies on the experience of introducing Windfall Tax in Britain on the privatization of the 1980s, which was fully realized.

Mortgage at 2% for 30 years? Is it true?

“The promise of a mortgage under 2% is in the short version of the program and in the cover video - although it is not in a long one. Navalny assumes that even if inflation is higher, high rates for those who take a mortgage can compensate for the state.

This promise carries huge risks. In fact, Navalny promises that for decades in Russia there will be stable economies, currency and inflation. Now this is not so: the ruble is highly dependent on oil prices, economic crises occur at least once a decade. See how the annual increase in consumer prices for the past decades was - there is no two percent close.

Another risk is abuse. If you have loans in the economy under 20% per annum (say, consumer) and subsidized loans from the state at 2%, then there is a great risk using cunning schemes to take one loan to earn on another. ”

We have already explained above which factors will restrain inflation: the sharp increase in business activity, which is stimulated by us, absorbing the money supply, and demonopolization and deterrence of monopoly prices. In this formulation of the question, the inflation mechanism is very simplified. “Look how the price increases for the last two decades was” - well, in a super -opropolized economy, of course. We want to build a completely different economy.

“If you have loans in the economy at 20% per annum ...” - so we will not have such expensive loans. We will make peace with the whole world and return Russia access to cheap external credit financing. We are demonopolying the banking system, banks will increase operational efficiency, and not to be fat due to excessive “forks” between interest income and expenses. Forget about loans at 20%. With Navalny, with a highly competitive banking sector and returned to the access to cheap external loans, loan rates as a whole will be low.

It is unclear what was meant by "abuse." What banks will take from the state subsidies for mortgage loans and issue this money under 20% in the form of consumer loans? We repeat that, firstly, there will be no bets of 20%, and secondly, how is it technically possible? Fraudulently, when there is no fact of mortgage collateral?

Returning to the mortgage: evaluating the real demand for these loans, we believe that the maximum cost of subsidizing mortgage rates is several hundred billion rubles a year (consider it yourself: now the average payment for a mortgage is 21 thousand rubles, the state, for example, will subsidize four to five thousand, multiply by several million families that want to take the mortgage). The state of car loans subsidizes today (by the way, we are not sure that this should be done - it is better to subsidize housing).

What to do with the fired Naval people?

“The politician assumes that for only a few years the number of officials, military personnel, employees of the Pension Fund, the Russian Guard and other civil servants will be significantly reduced. The exact number of those whose work will be under the blow is unknown, but by indirect signs it can be judged that we are not talking about hundreds of thousands, but about millions of Russians.

What will happen to these people? It is unlikely that they will be able to take the places of migrants (in Russia Navalny, a visa regime with the countries of Central Asia and Transcaucasia will be introduced), because it is difficult to imagine that the former employee of the same Russian Guard will go to work as a janitor.

To ensure the work of all dismissed, a significant growth of the private sector will be required (which, in fairness, Navalny promises in his program). But if it does not happen, the dismissed still will remain “on the balance” of the state - they will only pay them a salary, but unemployment benefits. ”

It is hardly worth worrying for useless officials and Ephesians who are sitting today on our neck. We explained many times what would happen to them ( here is my recent video on this topic ), but we will always be happy to explain again. Where will the dismissed non -unit security officials go (FSB, FSIN, FSSP, Rosgvard, etc.)? Yes in the army. The creation of a professional army is half a million high -paid jobs on an ongoing basis . All the time they teach us to love the Motherland, all these Ephesians - well, let them serve it. Moreover, this will be good. Some, by the way, express us a counter -reproach: "And where do you get half a million warhead men to serve in the contract army?" Yes, we’ll take it, among the abbreviated non -military security forces.

Thirdly, the fired civilian civil servants are actually about a million, there is no need to exaggerate their number-of course, they will receive help from the state in the form of retraining programs to adapt to market professions. For example, in the Federal Tax Service, Treasury, the Pension Fund, Rosreestr, almost 350 thousand people are working today. There just does not need so much, in the age of digitalization, all this is very quickly and elementarily automated ( here you can read more about where we see excessive numbers of both officials and security forces). At the same time, financial markets will grow rapidly, as a result of demonopolization of the economy, dozens of new attractive “blue chips” will appear, where investment and pension funds will be able to actively invest the populations. There will be a clear increase in demand for workers in this area. We re -qualify, chill and let these ducklings into the market. Everything will be fine.

And as well as with regard to janitors - if the janitors pay as much as they pay by the statement, and not so much as the communal pimps give in their hands after leaving the corruption rent, then the people will run there, because there are not small nominal salaries there. We will quickly open all this corruption communal farm and force to increase productivity there, and to pay really good salaries to those who remain. And excess labor in this area - you are right, home to Central Asia, to demand democracy and economic reforms from your governments according to the same scheme. There they will be more useful, we need prosperous, developed and democratic neighbors.

Humanization or dehumanization of justice?

“In the Navalny program there is a specific point“ Humanization of justice ”, in which, in particular, it is proposed to conduct a wide amnesty among convicts on economic crimes. At the same time, at points about the fight against corruption, it is directly said about the tightening of the law - and also in terms of economic crimes. Here is just one paragraph of the program: “An increase from 10 to 20 years of statute of limitations for corruption crimes and economic crimes against the state and individuals, if the amount of damage exceeded $ 10 million.”

Let's see what articles people sit in prisons in our articles. Almost no one sits for corruption, despite the fact that we are among the leaders in the world in the number of prisoners. Of the half -million prisoners, only a few thousand sits for receiving a bribe. So let's not distort - comparison is completely knocked down. It is clear that the humanization will affect everyone else, but the attitude will be tightened towards corrupt officials - because corruption is the cancerous tumor that hung up the country and prevents it from developing. There is no contradiction here.

Where to get the money? This is the most important question for the whole program

“The expenditure of the budget Alexei Navalny assumes not only to redistribute, but also to significantly increase. At the same time, income will grow by no means at such a high pace - moreover, judging by some reservations, they can be completely reduced.

The basis for the alleged growth of income is a reduction in corruption in public procurement. <...> Can Navalny simultaneously remove trillion rubles from the public procurement system to finance the budget without destroying it? At least this can be doubted in this: all the measures proposed by him to combat corruption (creating an additional anti -corruption structure, increasing the transparency of state -owned companies, tightening legislation, international coordination) have a long -term effect. In addition, Navalny proposes to significantly reduce the public sector, and this automatically means a decrease in public procurement. In other words, when performing one point of the program, the execution of another is in question. ”

Honestly, the question "Where to get the money?" Just focus. So Navalny only does what it explains. In addition to his fresh video , a detailed document on budget reform, where this is explained in the details, was released a few months ago. “Navalny proposes to significantly increase the expenditure of the budget” - it is not clear why the authors came to this conclusion. We show in detail the numbers: everything is balanced, there will be no growth of total expenses, simply redistribution between the articles of the budget (see the first question of our discussion). Will everything happen to happen at once? Well, we will not at once and we will increase the costs of the necessary articles, everything in strict accordance with the principle of neutrality (we do not increase expenses for one articles until we reduce the general goals of budget maneuver).

"Can Navalny simultaneously remove trillion rubles from the state procurement system to finance the budget without destroying it?" Many years of experience of the Fund for Combating Corruption proves that in Russia there is no more effective structure, which just knows how to do this. This is the competitive advantage of Navalny over other candidates (here you should add the traditional one for the politician “so far everyone says, Navalny does”, but you understand so - Smile).

Comments of economists Sergei Zhuravlev and Andrei Movchan

Comments of economists to the Navalny program are too long to quote them here completely. Their opinion about the program can be read here .

It is very strange to read the comments of Sergei Zhuravlev “The program in the substantive part ... is very narrow, little proposed” (despite the fact that the entire previous text of the “Medusa” is devoted to the analysis of any detailed specificity that is criticized!) - or Andrei Movchan “This program should make a 90% of the country's population by enemies”. Apparently, the Movchan believes that the population is hated by the very idea of ​​raising salaries, pensions and taxes on Gazprom, and it will beat us for the very thought of climbing into a pocket to Gazprom in order to raise salaries and pensions to people. By the way, he lists among the “injured 90% of the population” only officials and security forces-someone, please introduce Andrei Movchan with the structure of the population of the Russian Federation, not only officials and security officials are found among its inhabitants.

It is impossible to seriously comment on this. I would like really substantial comments instead of this traditional muttering of economists-artagnans that everyone around does not understand anything. Time in the country is difficult, a serious discussion is needed, not a posterity.

We are always happy to have questions, but it is better to ask questions before the publication of the material about the program - this is what it is better to avoid misleading.

And the last. The task of the program is to draw the image of the future. We outlined it in detail - a competitive economy, focused on the production and export of high -tech products, without monopolies and excessive pressure of officials and security forces. A compact state friendly to people and providing them with the necessary infrastructure - medicine, education, security, roads - and not trying to dictate to them where to give their money, what to read, with whom to sleep, etc. This is the purpose of the election program.

Graduations about what will be and will not turn out in the course of reforms can be given a lot. In the end, in the beautiful Russia of the future there will be a free parliament that can easily block or modify any reforms offered by the bulk. Our task is to indicate the course. We designated it, people like it. Дискуссию по поводу деталей мы всегда приветствуем, но лучше все же замечать лес за деревьями.

Владимир Милов , специально для «Медузы»