| Anchor: And now back to current affairs.
Curious investigators of the culture of Russian political lexicology have
noticed long ago already that the close associates of Grigory
Yavlinsky involuntarily copy his manner of speech. And here we come
to an important turn in the election campaign: "Yabloko Without Yavlinsky"
cannot survive in the sense that the Central Electoral Committee has forwarded
the materials on the campaign "Yabloko Without Yavlinsky" to
the Interior Ministry and Public Prosecutor' Office acknowledging this
campaign to be illegal and negative election propaganda. This week Grigory
Yavlinsky, who has the reputation of someone disinclined to join the executive
authorities, unexpectedly considered it possible and necessary to turn
to the president and the government with proposals on how to speed up economic
growth. Yavlinsky sends his alternative budget to the President as a supplement
to this letter.
Grigory Alexeevich, it is good that we are armed with such
a huge pile of papers, including your alternative budget, as the figures
you quote in your alternative [budget] proposal are impressive. You have
uncovered 215 billion roubles of additional revenues. Where does this
astronomical amount which appeared unneeded in Russia comes from?
Yavlinsky, leader of the YABLOKO faction: First of
all I would like to say that it is not "unneeded" at all. Simply
our calculations on the parameters at the disposal of our government demonstrate
that the government has a real opportunity to obtain an additional 215
billion roubles in revenues.
Anchor: Why have you decided that they are additional?
Yavlinsky: Because that is what the calculations show.
We know what the [oil] extraction will be and we know the tax rates. It
is not so difficult to calculate this amount.
Anchor: And what do you propose to spend this money on?
You say "economic growth should be accelerated". How?
Yavlinsky: As we know, economic growth has many factors,
but in most cases we are talking about taxes, the economic structure and
Anchor: And something which is also difficult to understand?
Yavlinsky: Ok, let us put it like this. But there is
also such a factor as "human capital".
Anchor: These 215 billion roubles are abstract, they are
abstract even for people with very high incomes, this is a huge amount.
If we speak in terms of such 'applied arithmetic', then how many roubles
per person per month will this mean? Who for and in what spheres?
Yavlinsky: This is a very good question. To reduce
the degree of abstractness we shall put it like this: this comes to about
10 per cent of the budget. For pensioners this will be 1,900 rouble single
social allowance per month, and for the able-bodied and the unemployed
this will mean 2,000 roubles per month while the person is unemployed,
and 1,850 roubles for those receiving a social pension, a pension for
the handicapped or the loss of a bread-winner. Here we are speaking about
the first stage of the implementation of the programme to elininate extreme
poverty in Russia, i.e. to reach the level of payments that ensure the
Anchor: At the World Economic Forum in Moscow this week
you said that privatisation results should be confirmed by law. I am quoting
you. Do you mean here that, in your opinion, there were no violations,
and if there were they should be forgotten?
Yavlinsky: In my view violations did take place. And
in my view privatisation was conducted in the most inefficient possible
manner and was based on serious criminal relations and developments. However,
we cannot live with this forever, as every time this will hit us a boomerang.
And there are two methods for resolving the problem. On way is traditional:
to gather together and reach an agreement. Businessmen will reach an agreement
with the authorities, they will say: don't touch us and we shall not touch
you, we shall not touch politics and you don't touch our privatisation
deals, let us make such a deal. But I propose quite another thing. Privatisation
deals which do not contain crimes such as murder, violence and other grave
crimes, can be recognised. But simultaneously decisions limiting the influence
of business on corruption, the authorities, political parties and the
State Duma, restrictions on the influence of the oligarchic structures
on public politics in Russia should be adopted. Such a balance should