Deja vu: Russia's economy will save ... privatization
Last week in the Cabinet of Ministers of the Russian Federation outlined the plans and terms of the new privatization wave. The next privatization session should begin this year and last until the end of 2016. During this period of time, the state intends to sell into private hands blocks of shares (packages of different volumes) of such companies as VTB, Russian Railways, Sovcomflot, NMTP (Novorossiysk Commercial Sea Port), Rostelecom, Transneft and some others. The maximum sales volumes should concern “Russian Railways” (up to 25% of shares) and Sovcomflot (25% + one share).
For starters, what the representatives of the Russian government motivate the need to continue privatization. According to government experts, the new privatization wave will have to attract large investors into the Russian economy, thanks to which the efficiency of the above-mentioned enterprises will increase at almost astronomical rates. It’s a strange thing: for previous privatization sessions, large investors didn’t bother much, and here, you know, private investment flows will trample on ... Why should we?
State managers, in fact, once again declare that private management is a priori better than state management. That is, a representative of private capital should manage production, transport and other enterprises supposedly better than a government official does ... What is in this plan, however, low self-esteem of our government. Here's how to perform the final reports, so here the government does not cease to praise itself, but as soon as it concerns the management efficiency of large and highly profitable state-owned enterprises, the terms “privatization”, “need a private trader”, etc. are immediately implanted. But if there are no talents and opportunities to manage the economy, so what is easier - a statement “on its own” on the table - there is another one, which with both talents and capabilities ... As they say, the Russian Land has not become scanty ... But no, about the statement on its own “No one thinks about the Cabinet of Ministers and the management of state-owned companies - they all simply merged with their leather chairs.
But let us return from the lyrics to “physics” - that is, to what preferences besides “attracting private investors” the Russian government counts. At a recent government meeting, Dmitry Medvedev announced that privatization could provide additional funds for the Russian budget. He added that in 2014, the income from the sale of certain stakes in state-owned companies should be 200 billion rubles. Already 200 billion! - it would seem just a huge amount. But if we compare this amount with the parameters of the revenue side of the budget, then this amount hardly looks impressive. According to forecasts of the economic sector of the Russian government, the revenue part of the Russian budget this year will be about 14 trillion. rubles. Simple calculations can be obtained that the income from privatization acts in 2014 year can be (and "can make" and "make" - it's still different things) about 1,4%. Not to say that within the margin of error, but something about that ...
You can certainly say that for the economy of the country any possible income is important. It is hardly advisable to argue with this, however, speaking about possible privatization revenues, the Russian government somehow bypasses at least one important nuance. This is the nuance: for what specific purposes does the government need these 200 billions of rubles (and they still need to be received for the budget), if the state actually has a dead weight in fact much more substantial in foreign currency - the Reserve Fund of about 3,1 trillion. rubles, for example? At the household level, the privatization proposals from the government look something like this: there is a bag with bills under the bed - we can sell a cow to make money - we'll throw some more bills into a bag ...
Although, no ... The analogy with the cow is not entirely true, since the state is going to sell its "cows" not even entirely, but in "live" parts. For example, Transneft, AK, is going to sell a little more than 3% of shares. I wonder how the sale of such a package will spur the development of the company and its “more efficient” management. After all, if a cow's tail is “laid down” with a live “cow”, then it is unlikely that it will start to give more milk.
There is one more interesting detail: if the privatization “session” for the above-mentioned enterprises takes place, the state will still continue to invest its funds in these companies (that is, ours - the people), as it partially implements the shares. What does this ultimately give? For the state and the people - nothing, but for those who get direct access to such budget-funded companies - a lot. Why invest yourself, if financing comes from the state treasury anyway. You can immediately after the purchase of a stake to announce your financial situation, and the government will give a "tanga" ... And where will it go, because the government retains a controlling stake for itself. But it keeps for the time being ...
This is exactly what happened during the previous privatization waves - the state got rid of its enterprises, first in parts, and then it turned out that enterprises were simply not profitable. New owners were given money from the treasury - as if to help (they say, private owners are efficient by nature), but only the new owners did not hurry to raise profitability, but they were in a hurry to transfer the received financial support to their accounts. Time passed, no one was going to exercise control over the expenditure of state funds, the enterprise crumbled and was launched “on the ferrous metal”; land was sold in other hands; other hands - in the third hands, and you will not find the ends ...
Here is a concrete example from the current plan, which can be called, to put it mildly, strange: first, they are going to sell about 5% of Russian Railways shares (the first stage of the privatization of Russian Railways), and after that to invest money from the National Welfare Fund in development the country's railway infrastructure. On the one hand, statements about the development plans of the industry can really spur investors to invest in the project, but on the other hand, isn't this a loophole for affiliated companies that can get access to the huge funds that will be allocated to infrastructure projects from the National Welfare Fund?
Such pessimistic thoughts about privatization, of course, would not have arisen if all previous privatization “sessions” had been held purely for the benefit of the state treasury and for the development of enterprises. Those enterprises that went from private to private, and at the same time reached the highest level of efficiency (for the budget, and not only for their top managers) can be counted on the fingers of one hand. One of the not so long-standing privatization bubbles is the reorganization of RAO UES, when crushing and selling the company into private hands were drawn as an indispensable positive. Positive for the entire industry, and for each individual consumer. Like, today we will cut and sell to private owners, and tomorrow you (citizens) will see how much smaller values will be in your receipts. They did not see smaller values ... And of the ideologists of such a campaign, no one claimed responsibility for outright lies, no one had passed through the person involved in the fraud case. Yes, that there “did not pass” - and things like this did not start ... “Campaigners” received new posts and new opportunities to continue their vigorous privatization activities.
And after that, again the tale of "positive privatization." What's this? - masochism against the background of lack of knowledge (with the attack on the same rake) or a frank anti-people course? The right, as they say, underline. If the first option - it will save the usual removal from office for incompetent, but if the second - then everything is much more serious ...
For starters, what the representatives of the Russian government motivate the need to continue privatization. According to government experts, the new privatization wave will have to attract large investors into the Russian economy, thanks to which the efficiency of the above-mentioned enterprises will increase at almost astronomical rates. It’s a strange thing: for previous privatization sessions, large investors didn’t bother much, and here, you know, private investment flows will trample on ... Why should we?
State managers, in fact, once again declare that private management is a priori better than state management. That is, a representative of private capital should manage production, transport and other enterprises supposedly better than a government official does ... What is in this plan, however, low self-esteem of our government. Here's how to perform the final reports, so here the government does not cease to praise itself, but as soon as it concerns the management efficiency of large and highly profitable state-owned enterprises, the terms “privatization”, “need a private trader”, etc. are immediately implanted. But if there are no talents and opportunities to manage the economy, so what is easier - a statement “on its own” on the table - there is another one, which with both talents and capabilities ... As they say, the Russian Land has not become scanty ... But no, about the statement on its own “No one thinks about the Cabinet of Ministers and the management of state-owned companies - they all simply merged with their leather chairs.
But let us return from the lyrics to “physics” - that is, to what preferences besides “attracting private investors” the Russian government counts. At a recent government meeting, Dmitry Medvedev announced that privatization could provide additional funds for the Russian budget. He added that in 2014, the income from the sale of certain stakes in state-owned companies should be 200 billion rubles. Already 200 billion! - it would seem just a huge amount. But if we compare this amount with the parameters of the revenue side of the budget, then this amount hardly looks impressive. According to forecasts of the economic sector of the Russian government, the revenue part of the Russian budget this year will be about 14 trillion. rubles. Simple calculations can be obtained that the income from privatization acts in 2014 year can be (and "can make" and "make" - it's still different things) about 1,4%. Not to say that within the margin of error, but something about that ...
You can certainly say that for the economy of the country any possible income is important. It is hardly advisable to argue with this, however, speaking about possible privatization revenues, the Russian government somehow bypasses at least one important nuance. This is the nuance: for what specific purposes does the government need these 200 billions of rubles (and they still need to be received for the budget), if the state actually has a dead weight in fact much more substantial in foreign currency - the Reserve Fund of about 3,1 trillion. rubles, for example? At the household level, the privatization proposals from the government look something like this: there is a bag with bills under the bed - we can sell a cow to make money - we'll throw some more bills into a bag ...
Although, no ... The analogy with the cow is not entirely true, since the state is going to sell its "cows" not even entirely, but in "live" parts. For example, Transneft, AK, is going to sell a little more than 3% of shares. I wonder how the sale of such a package will spur the development of the company and its “more efficient” management. After all, if a cow's tail is “laid down” with a live “cow”, then it is unlikely that it will start to give more milk.
There is one more interesting detail: if the privatization “session” for the above-mentioned enterprises takes place, the state will still continue to invest its funds in these companies (that is, ours - the people), as it partially implements the shares. What does this ultimately give? For the state and the people - nothing, but for those who get direct access to such budget-funded companies - a lot. Why invest yourself, if financing comes from the state treasury anyway. You can immediately after the purchase of a stake to announce your financial situation, and the government will give a "tanga" ... And where will it go, because the government retains a controlling stake for itself. But it keeps for the time being ...
This is exactly what happened during the previous privatization waves - the state got rid of its enterprises, first in parts, and then it turned out that enterprises were simply not profitable. New owners were given money from the treasury - as if to help (they say, private owners are efficient by nature), but only the new owners did not hurry to raise profitability, but they were in a hurry to transfer the received financial support to their accounts. Time passed, no one was going to exercise control over the expenditure of state funds, the enterprise crumbled and was launched “on the ferrous metal”; land was sold in other hands; other hands - in the third hands, and you will not find the ends ...
Here is a concrete example from the current plan, which can be called, to put it mildly, strange: first, they are going to sell about 5% of Russian Railways shares (the first stage of the privatization of Russian Railways), and after that to invest money from the National Welfare Fund in development the country's railway infrastructure. On the one hand, statements about the development plans of the industry can really spur investors to invest in the project, but on the other hand, isn't this a loophole for affiliated companies that can get access to the huge funds that will be allocated to infrastructure projects from the National Welfare Fund?
Such pessimistic thoughts about privatization, of course, would not have arisen if all previous privatization “sessions” had been held purely for the benefit of the state treasury and for the development of enterprises. Those enterprises that went from private to private, and at the same time reached the highest level of efficiency (for the budget, and not only for their top managers) can be counted on the fingers of one hand. One of the not so long-standing privatization bubbles is the reorganization of RAO UES, when crushing and selling the company into private hands were drawn as an indispensable positive. Positive for the entire industry, and for each individual consumer. Like, today we will cut and sell to private owners, and tomorrow you (citizens) will see how much smaller values will be in your receipts. They did not see smaller values ... And of the ideologists of such a campaign, no one claimed responsibility for outright lies, no one had passed through the person involved in the fraud case. Yes, that there “did not pass” - and things like this did not start ... “Campaigners” received new posts and new opportunities to continue their vigorous privatization activities.
And after that, again the tale of "positive privatization." What's this? - masochism against the background of lack of knowledge (with the attack on the same rake) or a frank anti-people course? The right, as they say, underline. If the first option - it will save the usual removal from office for incompetent, but if the second - then everything is much more serious ...
- Alexei Volodin
- http://nnm.me/
Information