|
However, the Cabinet has not held any preliminary consultations
in the Duma both about alternative proposals and its own variant.
Question: Sergei Viktorovich, what made Yabloko start
work again on an alternative budget?
Ivanenko: The government budget is a result of different
“compromises”. In view of the sober ideas, for example, in the
present budget, it obviously represents a result of aggregate
pressures from different ministries, lobbyists, economists of
different schools and political forces at federal and regional
levels. When, however, we draft our version of the budget (something
Yabloko has been doing annually since 1994), we proceed exclusively
from economic viability, from real economic requirements, irrespective
of the various external pressures. This is a “finetuned” budget,
if you like, targeted at implementation of the economic policy
that we believe to be necessary. For many years our proposals
were simply dismissed, and we constantly voted against the budget.
The budget for 2001 that we supported, because our proposals were
considered for the first time, represented an exception to this
rule. That time Yabloko submitted 16 basic proposals: 12 of them
were included in the finally approved text. I think that we made
the right decision, as clearly demonstrated by the for the first
six months. The budget is being implemented, and with a big reserve;
a basis has been established for the resolution of our problems,
including social problems. The budget for 2002 sets more serious
tasks. This includes an increase in the wages of budget workers
by 80% and a two-fold increase in pensions. We consider this possible
owing to the basis established by the budget for 2001.
Yabloko is continuing its work on the budget as an economic document,
representing the targeted policy of the state. Then we will compare
our draft with the version submitted by the government. However,
it is obvious that the government will end up with a watered-down
budget. If our draft coincides with the government’s version we
will support it and will not propose any alternative. If their
version conflicts with our draft, we will submit our variant.
If they coincide by 50%, we will draft comprehensive proposals
and insist on their adoption.
Question: Can you make a forecast now on the areas where
your draft and the
government version are likely to differ?
Ivanenko: I can name several key problems, which will
lead to disputes within the government. These are the problems
determining the parameters of economic development. First of all
these are revenues, the budget surplus and use of this surplus.
In particular, this concerns the stabilisation fund that President
Putin has talked about. It is highly likely the draft that the
government has been considering ignores this problem. In addition,
this also refers to the well-known 50x50 formula – in accordance
with the Budget Code these revenues should be distributed proportionally
between the federal budget and regional budgets. There will also
be a discrepancy in assessment of economic growth prospects, as
in my opinion there will be serious contradictions on all key
items.
One of the topics which is not directly connected with Yabloko,
but will be debated in detail, concerns support for the so-called
real sector – budget subsidies for agriculture and industry, different
subsidies and so-called investment programmes. In general Yabloko
opposes allocations of budget resources that will be poorly controlled
and inefficiently spent. In this sense we support the government
line implemented this year and probably held next year. But I
think that this will encounter fierce rejection in the Duma from
different lobbyists of different political factions. It will be
important to defend stance of the government in these directions
from this government and the pro-governmental Duma. In reality
we obtain the following impression from the draft budget for next:
in terms of its main components and policy it resembles the budget
for 2001.
This is virtually the same approach both to assessment of budget
revenues and assessment of their sources, the same approach to
the redistribution of additional revenues and expenditures. In
this sense it can be asserted that a certain trend in Russia has
evolved here.
Question: Which sectors and directions are the focus of
Yabloko’s draft?
Ivanenko: It is no accident that consideration of the
budget is split into different readings in the Duma. When the
problem is discussed in the first reading, attention is paid to
such issues of macro-economic policy as revenues, expenditures
and the budget surplus, rather than sectoral problems. This is
an assessment of the composition of these figures, namely estimated
GDP growth, estimates for inflation, GDP deflator, dollar/rouble
rate, oil prices, etc. We proceed from the premise that we have
to determine the conditions for everybody and only then divide
them between different sectors. I can say that Yabloko has always
considered to be its priority sectors that do not have clear lobbyists,
particularly in the Duma. They are education and social policy.
Also foreign debt servicing. It is very easy to obtain additional
expenditures for some sector, reducing this budgetary item and
creating problems for the whole of the country. Therefore, Yabloko
will maintain its policy and continue to defend the interests
that it has always defended. In addition military reform will
be the key issue for Yabloko in expenditure policy. As part of
our alternative budget we have prepared a special detailed alternative
military budget. I think this will be one of the key items for
Yabloko in the general consideration of the budget.
Question: You mentioned intra-budgetary relations as issues
of key importance for Yabloko. The group of the State Council
is finishing its work on this problem. Will you somehow use the
results of their work?
Ivanenko: Naturally, we pay great attention to all the
economic calculations and estimates if they are serious. We will
definitely study the proposals of the State Council. This is really
the key issue: last year it was also one of the main issues. I
would like also to remind you that I pioneered the proposed transfer
of income tax to the regions and that we managed to reduce the
imbalance. Now it is 55% against 45% and not 60% against 40%,
asš was the case in last year’s draft. The problem still remains
acute this year, as the norm of the Budget Code that the proportion
should be 50%. 50% has still not been implemented. Here serious
debate is likely to arise.
Question: Did you consult representatives of the presidential
Administration and ministers when preparing your alternative draft?
Ivanenko: No, we didn’t. Yabloko is able to independently
develop an alternative draft budget. Our group headed by Igor
Artemyev works on the alternative budget: we have a group in the
State Duma Budget Committee, which also works on the budget and
is influential. Therefore, relations between Yabloko and the government
in this sense are a question of partnership, rather than consultations.
If the Cabinet is prepared for equal dialogue, we are also prepared.
We know what to say and propose to the government which will be
in its interests.
Question: In your opinion, is there a possibility that
the government will submit a draft which will enable you not to
insist on an alternative?
Ivanenko: This requires preliminary consultations on the
budget. Such political practices are employed all over the world.
Such consultations are held prior to the submission of the budget
[to parliament], when something can be altered. In my opinion
the government should have launched dialogue at an earlier date.
Naturally, such a dialogue will take place in September, but I
think that the holding of such negotiations with the government
before the submission of the budget [to the Duma] could considerably
increase the chances of ensuring passage of the document through
the Duma. But this has not been done yet.
See also:
Budget
2002
| 