III КВАРТАЛ 2022Г. - 55 баллов
220.23995804913 monthAccess: 1
|Да|
 |
0 %Array
(
[ID] => 107778
[~ID] => 107778
[IBLOCK_ID] => 25
[~IBLOCK_ID] => 25
[IBLOCK_SECTION_ID] => 1445
[~IBLOCK_SECTION_ID] => 1445
[NAME] => "If it is transit, we'll make it competitive".
[~NAME] => "If it is transit, we'll make it competitive".
[ACTIVE_FROM_X] =>
[~ACTIVE_FROM_X] =>
[ACTIVE_FROM] =>
[~ACTIVE_FROM] =>
[TIMESTAMP_X] => 24.10.2016 17:13:43
[~TIMESTAMP_X] => 24.10.2016 17:13:43
[DETAIL_PAGE_URL] => /publications/rzd-partner-int/5/2828/
[~DETAIL_PAGE_URL] => /publications/rzd-partner-int/5/2828/
[LIST_PAGE_URL] => /info/index.php?ID=25
[~LIST_PAGE_URL] => /info/index.php?ID=25
[DETAIL_TEXT] => "Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in the future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but, on the opposite, we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes", assures Igor Levitin, The RF Minister of Transport.
Foreign InvestorStill Lingers
- Mr.Levitin, how satisfied are you with the flow of different types of investment obtained by the transport sector last year: private and state, foreign and domestic etc.?
- Unfortunately, I have to confess that direct foreign investment and big world players didn't reach Russia. That was caused exclusively by the fact that we have no respective normative-legislative regulation of the transport sector, as judged by Western market players. Let's say, the Law on land, approved more than ten years ago, points out that there is land controlled by the transport sector, but there is no document issued by the Government that would make clear what it has to do with. The first question the foreign investor asks when he comes to Russia concerns namely "land" problem: whose land it is, what the terms of the lease are etc. These issues haven't been adjusted yet. This problem badly influences Ust-Luga, Sheremetyevo and Tolmachevo (in Novosibirsk), as well as all big transport objects. We are going to sort out this problem soon.
At the same time, I believe that the Russian financial market is warming towards the transport sector now. Big players entering the market and their wish to be involved into transport business proves this fact. However, I'd like to emphasize that one of our current problems is the lack of big, reliable and investment attractive transport companies in all modes of transport, besides railways. In the nearest future we need to consolidate companies: first of all, it has to do with aviation and next it should touch upon river and motor transport. This step is important for modern market formation, whose participants are competitive, attractive for investors and, moreover, able to perform as customers for domestic transport mechanical engineering. Why is the railway mechanical engineering sector rapidly growing now? The answer is simple: there is a big powerful customer. At present, a big aviation company is being established. Who is going to perform as its customer? If it starts to produce airplanes for Western companies and creates demand for its produce that would be great, since Russia has only three-four companies interested in it.
- Do you think the state should support domestic ports in the process of railway tariffs unification currently unfolding?
- Yes, of course. First of all, favorable conditions for receiving large-tonnage vessels should be created. Unfortunately, we can't boast of deep-waters non-frozen ports. However, it is not Russia to blame for: the geographical location of the country is a fact not to be accused. It was not accidental that the USSR constructed and developed its deep-waters ports in the Baltic region anf Ukraine. It was a very logical thing to do: significant depths and milder climate caused that. At present the matter of principal importance is dredging works. Icebreakers make another point to focus on. Today this problem is acquiring more and more weight. We risk to be left with only two large icebreakers by 2014-2017. They can't service the growing transportation on the shelf, where we are planning to develop our energetic base. Thus, the icebreakers issue is a priority now. Generally speaking, if we do not support domestic ports in this and other aspects, cargo will definitely float to our neighbors.
- There have been developed instruments of public-private partnership in Russia. Are there any real projects to launch?
- Russia takes it longer: to develop the idea and let it come true usually takes three years. Why did we start to speak about this in 2004? It was clear that it would be launched in 2007. Before the annouced deadline we can only support the already launched projects, such as Ust-Luga, the Sea Facade, and the creation of a joint airports net. In the West this sort of project implementation usually takes two years or two and half, but we have to issue more documentation.
- Many hopes were laid on the concession mechanisms launch in the railway sector. Don't you think that the system when major lines are out of the market practically excludes the possibility to use concession schemes for infrastructure development in the segment?
- New railways construction can easily be carried out on the basis of concession contracts, for example, the branch Berkakit-Tommot-Yakutsk, the Elga deposit branch, the second railway access to Novorossiysk etc. However, in my opinion, there is no need to apply concession agreement to the present-day functioning net in order to develop its infrastructure. These lines should be controlled by OAO RZD and developed on the basis of the company's investment programmes. At the same time, the company together with other investors can participate in new railways construction.
Many transport modes for the only market model
- In 2006 the third stage of the railway reform started. The project of arrangements developed by OAO RZD is known to have made the adjusted bodies demand its serious improvement. What is your position in respect of the major content and targets of the third stage?
- Heated discussions are being held about the prospective competitiveness of transportation companies. No doubt, everybody wishes to be competitive. However, it won't happen until infrastructure and transportation are controlled by one company alone. It is obvious. The same situation is a tough reality for airports now. Have you noticed what a vehement reaction was caused by our decision to separate aviation companies from airports? Nevertheless, if we do not do it, then the aviation company who possesses the airport will never let their competitor function there on equal terms. The same thing is true for railways. Despite the fact that the state totally controls OAO RZD shares, the company and its business are in the hands of its management. Thus, controlling rolling stock and infrastructure, we should expect no competition. That is the reason to decide precisely what railway transport model we want "to construct" by the end of the third stage of the reform, otherwise all our steps will be taken in an experimental way instead of the planned one. The two previous stages were unfolding in the way of a "trail run" as well. At the same time, it was claimed that we should not be thinking of the final target, we'd better see where our path takes us on its own. Today we have an absolutely different position. We've realised that the target model of railway transportation market envisages a separation between the infrastructure and transportation businesses. Thus, tactic and methodology issues are to be decided on. If OAO RZD manages to convince the Board in the urgent necessity to separate a cargo company, this will be a step to the target I am speaking about. However, it is very important to make serious calculations. One thing is when expenses on infrastructure, locomotive haulage and rolling stock are in the same hands. Quite another is when rail cars belong to a different company. They will be private cars, and, consequently, their empty back run should be paid for, as well as idling on the railways of OAO RZD etc. This is a fundamentally different scheme for meeting the expenses, financial flows, infrastructure and rolling stock outlay covering etc.
The only issue yet to be considered is the locomotive component. We realize pretty well it should be singled out in the tariff, but whether the locomotive economic should remain together with the infrastructure under the company's control or separated into an affiliate is still discussed. Now we are considering a target model for OAO RZD and this year we would like to decide on it quite precisely.
- I'd like to make it clear anyway wheteher it should be namely a market model, where the mechanisms of competition and free pricing are programmed, where there is no "dictatorship" of services producer over customer, where produce quality and expenses shortage are made in order to survive, but not on command etc.? There is an opinion shared by most railway men that market doesn't suit for railway transport and in fact totally different principles are required.
- The market model for railway in its essence doesn't differ from aviation, sea or river transport. There is an infrastructure, which is not to be privatized and should be controlled by the state. This includes the airport, the sea port within the area of its berths, sea channels etc., the main line railway infrastructure. All the rest is the market. You can come, pay for the use of the infrastructure and work. Once again, I'd like to underline that for all modes of transport there is only one common model, but each sector certainly envisages its own specifics. We are getting there, although it is rather hard, since nobody wants to share his profit made on the use of the state infrastructure. It is very easy when the state has something on its balance and an enterprise director actually makes his money using the state property. Thus, we are going to sort it out. Each mode of transport will have its respective model described by respective documents which we'll adjust with the companies engaged in certain business area.
Law on Transitin Prospect
- Programme of Transport Services Export is your know-how. Have you achieved any successful results so far?
- It was approved by the RF Government. Now at this level all the projects on transport services export will be implemented. I'd like everybody to realize the fact that in prospect we are going to issue a new document to define the role of transit in Russia since we have no such document at present. Currently customs officials, border officials, vets - all work according to their own rules. If we had a Law on transit, all the respective bodies would obey it, and naturally, first of all, in the transit transportation sector. The approved sub-programme is a step towards uniting all the adjacent structures and working out a new approach to transit. We've allocated funds to invest into projects of primary importance. Now we are working on them and will share our results at the end of Q1. However, I'd like to emphasize that the key projects for us are those that develop some innovation technologies for the transport sector. They are, for example, logistic centers and high-speed Moscow-Saint-Petersburg railway, as it is a real scientific break-through. Also, it is the creation of free economic zones whose clients we are going to be. We need new airplanes, locomotives, ships, and new elements in the logistic sector. At present, we have producers who are ready to manufacture all we need and we are going to choose the one who will assist us in creating something unexpected and revolutionary for transport.
- At the session of the RF Naval Colleague you mentioned that foreign ships will call the Russian rivers in three-five years. Could you comment on this?
- Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but on the opposite we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes for river transport. It is cheap, safe and ecologically safe as well. No mode of transport can compete with river within these three options. To achieve this, we should create favorable conditions at our water ways. Now they are in poor condition, since river transport has always been financed last of all. However, despite all the advantages, river is potentially dangerous, for example, due to its floods. The locks built forty-fifty years ago are unsafe now from the technical point of view. That is why we are working out an offer to increase river transport allocations, namely for hydro constructions development. Also, the issue of a toll for river transportation has been put on the agenda. The business community reacted negatively, but we have no other way out. We don't want to tax a vessel for just floating along the river, our intention is to get money for the use of hydro technical equipment when, for example, a vessel needs to be lifted 40 meters high. Moreover, we didn't figure out any certain sums, we only asked the river business community to evaluate this possibility and share their opinions in this respect. We realize it is the state duty to finance hydro equipment construction and maintenance, but now the state financial suport makes 35-40% of the needed allocations. That is why we believe the business community has to support us to boost transportation volumes.
- When is the toll to be introduced?
- We do not want to solve the problem in a drastic way and hope to get the river businessmen's ideas about this. We've already discussed this issue at the session of the Naval Colleague, which approved respective decisions. At present, we want to coordinate all this with river men and get their support.
- Starting from the beginning of 2006 the Ministry of Transport increased tariffs for transit container transportation that almost resulted in a collapse of the TransSib container flow. Could you please explain what your aim was?
- It is no secret that the most part of the TransSib transit is import transported illegally. We've increased the transit tariff, but decreased the import one, in order to let the Russian cargo be comfortably transported to Russia. I'd like to remind you that previously all this worked vice versa: import was more expensive than transit to another country with the further run to the center of Russia by truck. As was said, it was aimed at transit attraction, but as the most part of the volume clearly has nothing to do with transit, who is deceived and why? This way we just signal that using legal schemes of transportation is cheaper now. There is nothing to be afraid of for those companies who did it legally, but for the adepts of illegal schemes this situation is really irritating, as they get no profit any longer. Thus, we've got a great number of claims to it. I think in respect of real transit flow from the countries of South-Eastern Asia towards the EU, we could set a special tariff system that would make the TransSib competitive to shipping and give profit to the Russian transport companies. What I mean is if it is transit, we'll make it competitive with the help of lower tariffs compared to the ones on shipping. My recommendation to those who worry about the transit tariff increase is to check where exactly his cargo follows to. One more thing should be mentioned. The greatest danger is that setting this tariff rate can lead to the situation when only one company would operate the TransSib. We keep the situation under control and are ready to interfere in case of necessity.
Interview by ANDREY GURYEV
[~DETAIL_TEXT] => "Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in the future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but, on the opposite, we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes", assures Igor Levitin, The RF Minister of Transport.
Foreign InvestorStill Lingers
- Mr.Levitin, how satisfied are you with the flow of different types of investment obtained by the transport sector last year: private and state, foreign and domestic etc.?
- Unfortunately, I have to confess that direct foreign investment and big world players didn't reach Russia. That was caused exclusively by the fact that we have no respective normative-legislative regulation of the transport sector, as judged by Western market players. Let's say, the Law on land, approved more than ten years ago, points out that there is land controlled by the transport sector, but there is no document issued by the Government that would make clear what it has to do with. The first question the foreign investor asks when he comes to Russia concerns namely "land" problem: whose land it is, what the terms of the lease are etc. These issues haven't been adjusted yet. This problem badly influences Ust-Luga, Sheremetyevo and Tolmachevo (in Novosibirsk), as well as all big transport objects. We are going to sort out this problem soon.
At the same time, I believe that the Russian financial market is warming towards the transport sector now. Big players entering the market and their wish to be involved into transport business proves this fact. However, I'd like to emphasize that one of our current problems is the lack of big, reliable and investment attractive transport companies in all modes of transport, besides railways. In the nearest future we need to consolidate companies: first of all, it has to do with aviation and next it should touch upon river and motor transport. This step is important for modern market formation, whose participants are competitive, attractive for investors and, moreover, able to perform as customers for domestic transport mechanical engineering. Why is the railway mechanical engineering sector rapidly growing now? The answer is simple: there is a big powerful customer. At present, a big aviation company is being established. Who is going to perform as its customer? If it starts to produce airplanes for Western companies and creates demand for its produce that would be great, since Russia has only three-four companies interested in it.
- Do you think the state should support domestic ports in the process of railway tariffs unification currently unfolding?
- Yes, of course. First of all, favorable conditions for receiving large-tonnage vessels should be created. Unfortunately, we can't boast of deep-waters non-frozen ports. However, it is not Russia to blame for: the geographical location of the country is a fact not to be accused. It was not accidental that the USSR constructed and developed its deep-waters ports in the Baltic region anf Ukraine. It was a very logical thing to do: significant depths and milder climate caused that. At present the matter of principal importance is dredging works. Icebreakers make another point to focus on. Today this problem is acquiring more and more weight. We risk to be left with only two large icebreakers by 2014-2017. They can't service the growing transportation on the shelf, where we are planning to develop our energetic base. Thus, the icebreakers issue is a priority now. Generally speaking, if we do not support domestic ports in this and other aspects, cargo will definitely float to our neighbors.
- There have been developed instruments of public-private partnership in Russia. Are there any real projects to launch?
- Russia takes it longer: to develop the idea and let it come true usually takes three years. Why did we start to speak about this in 2004? It was clear that it would be launched in 2007. Before the annouced deadline we can only support the already launched projects, such as Ust-Luga, the Sea Facade, and the creation of a joint airports net. In the West this sort of project implementation usually takes two years or two and half, but we have to issue more documentation.
- Many hopes were laid on the concession mechanisms launch in the railway sector. Don't you think that the system when major lines are out of the market practically excludes the possibility to use concession schemes for infrastructure development in the segment?
- New railways construction can easily be carried out on the basis of concession contracts, for example, the branch Berkakit-Tommot-Yakutsk, the Elga deposit branch, the second railway access to Novorossiysk etc. However, in my opinion, there is no need to apply concession agreement to the present-day functioning net in order to develop its infrastructure. These lines should be controlled by OAO RZD and developed on the basis of the company's investment programmes. At the same time, the company together with other investors can participate in new railways construction.
Many transport modes for the only market model
- In 2006 the third stage of the railway reform started. The project of arrangements developed by OAO RZD is known to have made the adjusted bodies demand its serious improvement. What is your position in respect of the major content and targets of the third stage?
- Heated discussions are being held about the prospective competitiveness of transportation companies. No doubt, everybody wishes to be competitive. However, it won't happen until infrastructure and transportation are controlled by one company alone. It is obvious. The same situation is a tough reality for airports now. Have you noticed what a vehement reaction was caused by our decision to separate aviation companies from airports? Nevertheless, if we do not do it, then the aviation company who possesses the airport will never let their competitor function there on equal terms. The same thing is true for railways. Despite the fact that the state totally controls OAO RZD shares, the company and its business are in the hands of its management. Thus, controlling rolling stock and infrastructure, we should expect no competition. That is the reason to decide precisely what railway transport model we want "to construct" by the end of the third stage of the reform, otherwise all our steps will be taken in an experimental way instead of the planned one. The two previous stages were unfolding in the way of a "trail run" as well. At the same time, it was claimed that we should not be thinking of the final target, we'd better see where our path takes us on its own. Today we have an absolutely different position. We've realised that the target model of railway transportation market envisages a separation between the infrastructure and transportation businesses. Thus, tactic and methodology issues are to be decided on. If OAO RZD manages to convince the Board in the urgent necessity to separate a cargo company, this will be a step to the target I am speaking about. However, it is very important to make serious calculations. One thing is when expenses on infrastructure, locomotive haulage and rolling stock are in the same hands. Quite another is when rail cars belong to a different company. They will be private cars, and, consequently, their empty back run should be paid for, as well as idling on the railways of OAO RZD etc. This is a fundamentally different scheme for meeting the expenses, financial flows, infrastructure and rolling stock outlay covering etc.
The only issue yet to be considered is the locomotive component. We realize pretty well it should be singled out in the tariff, but whether the locomotive economic should remain together with the infrastructure under the company's control or separated into an affiliate is still discussed. Now we are considering a target model for OAO RZD and this year we would like to decide on it quite precisely.
- I'd like to make it clear anyway wheteher it should be namely a market model, where the mechanisms of competition and free pricing are programmed, where there is no "dictatorship" of services producer over customer, where produce quality and expenses shortage are made in order to survive, but not on command etc.? There is an opinion shared by most railway men that market doesn't suit for railway transport and in fact totally different principles are required.
- The market model for railway in its essence doesn't differ from aviation, sea or river transport. There is an infrastructure, which is not to be privatized and should be controlled by the state. This includes the airport, the sea port within the area of its berths, sea channels etc., the main line railway infrastructure. All the rest is the market. You can come, pay for the use of the infrastructure and work. Once again, I'd like to underline that for all modes of transport there is only one common model, but each sector certainly envisages its own specifics. We are getting there, although it is rather hard, since nobody wants to share his profit made on the use of the state infrastructure. It is very easy when the state has something on its balance and an enterprise director actually makes his money using the state property. Thus, we are going to sort it out. Each mode of transport will have its respective model described by respective documents which we'll adjust with the companies engaged in certain business area.
Law on Transitin Prospect
- Programme of Transport Services Export is your know-how. Have you achieved any successful results so far?
- It was approved by the RF Government. Now at this level all the projects on transport services export will be implemented. I'd like everybody to realize the fact that in prospect we are going to issue a new document to define the role of transit in Russia since we have no such document at present. Currently customs officials, border officials, vets - all work according to their own rules. If we had a Law on transit, all the respective bodies would obey it, and naturally, first of all, in the transit transportation sector. The approved sub-programme is a step towards uniting all the adjacent structures and working out a new approach to transit. We've allocated funds to invest into projects of primary importance. Now we are working on them and will share our results at the end of Q1. However, I'd like to emphasize that the key projects for us are those that develop some innovation technologies for the transport sector. They are, for example, logistic centers and high-speed Moscow-Saint-Petersburg railway, as it is a real scientific break-through. Also, it is the creation of free economic zones whose clients we are going to be. We need new airplanes, locomotives, ships, and new elements in the logistic sector. At present, we have producers who are ready to manufacture all we need and we are going to choose the one who will assist us in creating something unexpected and revolutionary for transport.
- At the session of the RF Naval Colleague you mentioned that foreign ships will call the Russian rivers in three-five years. Could you comment on this?
- Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but on the opposite we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes for river transport. It is cheap, safe and ecologically safe as well. No mode of transport can compete with river within these three options. To achieve this, we should create favorable conditions at our water ways. Now they are in poor condition, since river transport has always been financed last of all. However, despite all the advantages, river is potentially dangerous, for example, due to its floods. The locks built forty-fifty years ago are unsafe now from the technical point of view. That is why we are working out an offer to increase river transport allocations, namely for hydro constructions development. Also, the issue of a toll for river transportation has been put on the agenda. The business community reacted negatively, but we have no other way out. We don't want to tax a vessel for just floating along the river, our intention is to get money for the use of hydro technical equipment when, for example, a vessel needs to be lifted 40 meters high. Moreover, we didn't figure out any certain sums, we only asked the river business community to evaluate this possibility and share their opinions in this respect. We realize it is the state duty to finance hydro equipment construction and maintenance, but now the state financial suport makes 35-40% of the needed allocations. That is why we believe the business community has to support us to boost transportation volumes.
- When is the toll to be introduced?
- We do not want to solve the problem in a drastic way and hope to get the river businessmen's ideas about this. We've already discussed this issue at the session of the Naval Colleague, which approved respective decisions. At present, we want to coordinate all this with river men and get their support.
- Starting from the beginning of 2006 the Ministry of Transport increased tariffs for transit container transportation that almost resulted in a collapse of the TransSib container flow. Could you please explain what your aim was?
- It is no secret that the most part of the TransSib transit is import transported illegally. We've increased the transit tariff, but decreased the import one, in order to let the Russian cargo be comfortably transported to Russia. I'd like to remind you that previously all this worked vice versa: import was more expensive than transit to another country with the further run to the center of Russia by truck. As was said, it was aimed at transit attraction, but as the most part of the volume clearly has nothing to do with transit, who is deceived and why? This way we just signal that using legal schemes of transportation is cheaper now. There is nothing to be afraid of for those companies who did it legally, but for the adepts of illegal schemes this situation is really irritating, as they get no profit any longer. Thus, we've got a great number of claims to it. I think in respect of real transit flow from the countries of South-Eastern Asia towards the EU, we could set a special tariff system that would make the TransSib competitive to shipping and give profit to the Russian transport companies. What I mean is if it is transit, we'll make it competitive with the help of lower tariffs compared to the ones on shipping. My recommendation to those who worry about the transit tariff increase is to check where exactly his cargo follows to. One more thing should be mentioned. The greatest danger is that setting this tariff rate can lead to the situation when only one company would operate the TransSib. We keep the situation under control and are ready to interfere in case of necessity.
Interview by ANDREY GURYEV
[DETAIL_TEXT_TYPE] => html
[~DETAIL_TEXT_TYPE] => html
[PREVIEW_TEXT] => |
|
Array
(
[ID] => 107778
[~ID] => 107778
[IBLOCK_ID] => 25
[~IBLOCK_ID] => 25
[IBLOCK_SECTION_ID] => 1445
[~IBLOCK_SECTION_ID] => 1445
[NAME] => "If it is transit, we'll make it competitive".
[~NAME] => "If it is transit, we'll make it competitive".
[ACTIVE_FROM_X] =>
[~ACTIVE_FROM_X] =>
[ACTIVE_FROM] =>
[~ACTIVE_FROM] =>
[TIMESTAMP_X] => 24.10.2016 17:13:43
[~TIMESTAMP_X] => 24.10.2016 17:13:43
[DETAIL_PAGE_URL] => /publications/rzd-partner-int/5/2828/
[~DETAIL_PAGE_URL] => /publications/rzd-partner-int/5/2828/
[LIST_PAGE_URL] => /info/index.php?ID=25
[~LIST_PAGE_URL] => /info/index.php?ID=25
[DETAIL_TEXT] => "Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in the future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but, on the opposite, we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes", assures Igor Levitin, The RF Minister of Transport.
Foreign InvestorStill Lingers
- Mr.Levitin, how satisfied are you with the flow of different types of investment obtained by the transport sector last year: private and state, foreign and domestic etc.?
- Unfortunately, I have to confess that direct foreign investment and big world players didn't reach Russia. That was caused exclusively by the fact that we have no respective normative-legislative regulation of the transport sector, as judged by Western market players. Let's say, the Law on land, approved more than ten years ago, points out that there is land controlled by the transport sector, but there is no document issued by the Government that would make clear what it has to do with. The first question the foreign investor asks when he comes to Russia concerns namely "land" problem: whose land it is, what the terms of the lease are etc. These issues haven't been adjusted yet. This problem badly influences Ust-Luga, Sheremetyevo and Tolmachevo (in Novosibirsk), as well as all big transport objects. We are going to sort out this problem soon.
At the same time, I believe that the Russian financial market is warming towards the transport sector now. Big players entering the market and their wish to be involved into transport business proves this fact. However, I'd like to emphasize that one of our current problems is the lack of big, reliable and investment attractive transport companies in all modes of transport, besides railways. In the nearest future we need to consolidate companies: first of all, it has to do with aviation and next it should touch upon river and motor transport. This step is important for modern market formation, whose participants are competitive, attractive for investors and, moreover, able to perform as customers for domestic transport mechanical engineering. Why is the railway mechanical engineering sector rapidly growing now? The answer is simple: there is a big powerful customer. At present, a big aviation company is being established. Who is going to perform as its customer? If it starts to produce airplanes for Western companies and creates demand for its produce that would be great, since Russia has only three-four companies interested in it.
- Do you think the state should support domestic ports in the process of railway tariffs unification currently unfolding?
- Yes, of course. First of all, favorable conditions for receiving large-tonnage vessels should be created. Unfortunately, we can't boast of deep-waters non-frozen ports. However, it is not Russia to blame for: the geographical location of the country is a fact not to be accused. It was not accidental that the USSR constructed and developed its deep-waters ports in the Baltic region anf Ukraine. It was a very logical thing to do: significant depths and milder climate caused that. At present the matter of principal importance is dredging works. Icebreakers make another point to focus on. Today this problem is acquiring more and more weight. We risk to be left with only two large icebreakers by 2014-2017. They can't service the growing transportation on the shelf, where we are planning to develop our energetic base. Thus, the icebreakers issue is a priority now. Generally speaking, if we do not support domestic ports in this and other aspects, cargo will definitely float to our neighbors.
- There have been developed instruments of public-private partnership in Russia. Are there any real projects to launch?
- Russia takes it longer: to develop the idea and let it come true usually takes three years. Why did we start to speak about this in 2004? It was clear that it would be launched in 2007. Before the annouced deadline we can only support the already launched projects, such as Ust-Luga, the Sea Facade, and the creation of a joint airports net. In the West this sort of project implementation usually takes two years or two and half, but we have to issue more documentation.
- Many hopes were laid on the concession mechanisms launch in the railway sector. Don't you think that the system when major lines are out of the market practically excludes the possibility to use concession schemes for infrastructure development in the segment?
- New railways construction can easily be carried out on the basis of concession contracts, for example, the branch Berkakit-Tommot-Yakutsk, the Elga deposit branch, the second railway access to Novorossiysk etc. However, in my opinion, there is no need to apply concession agreement to the present-day functioning net in order to develop its infrastructure. These lines should be controlled by OAO RZD and developed on the basis of the company's investment programmes. At the same time, the company together with other investors can participate in new railways construction.
Many transport modes for the only market model
- In 2006 the third stage of the railway reform started. The project of arrangements developed by OAO RZD is known to have made the adjusted bodies demand its serious improvement. What is your position in respect of the major content and targets of the third stage?
- Heated discussions are being held about the prospective competitiveness of transportation companies. No doubt, everybody wishes to be competitive. However, it won't happen until infrastructure and transportation are controlled by one company alone. It is obvious. The same situation is a tough reality for airports now. Have you noticed what a vehement reaction was caused by our decision to separate aviation companies from airports? Nevertheless, if we do not do it, then the aviation company who possesses the airport will never let their competitor function there on equal terms. The same thing is true for railways. Despite the fact that the state totally controls OAO RZD shares, the company and its business are in the hands of its management. Thus, controlling rolling stock and infrastructure, we should expect no competition. That is the reason to decide precisely what railway transport model we want "to construct" by the end of the third stage of the reform, otherwise all our steps will be taken in an experimental way instead of the planned one. The two previous stages were unfolding in the way of a "trail run" as well. At the same time, it was claimed that we should not be thinking of the final target, we'd better see where our path takes us on its own. Today we have an absolutely different position. We've realised that the target model of railway transportation market envisages a separation between the infrastructure and transportation businesses. Thus, tactic and methodology issues are to be decided on. If OAO RZD manages to convince the Board in the urgent necessity to separate a cargo company, this will be a step to the target I am speaking about. However, it is very important to make serious calculations. One thing is when expenses on infrastructure, locomotive haulage and rolling stock are in the same hands. Quite another is when rail cars belong to a different company. They will be private cars, and, consequently, their empty back run should be paid for, as well as idling on the railways of OAO RZD etc. This is a fundamentally different scheme for meeting the expenses, financial flows, infrastructure and rolling stock outlay covering etc.
The only issue yet to be considered is the locomotive component. We realize pretty well it should be singled out in the tariff, but whether the locomotive economic should remain together with the infrastructure under the company's control or separated into an affiliate is still discussed. Now we are considering a target model for OAO RZD and this year we would like to decide on it quite precisely.
- I'd like to make it clear anyway wheteher it should be namely a market model, where the mechanisms of competition and free pricing are programmed, where there is no "dictatorship" of services producer over customer, where produce quality and expenses shortage are made in order to survive, but not on command etc.? There is an opinion shared by most railway men that market doesn't suit for railway transport and in fact totally different principles are required.
- The market model for railway in its essence doesn't differ from aviation, sea or river transport. There is an infrastructure, which is not to be privatized and should be controlled by the state. This includes the airport, the sea port within the area of its berths, sea channels etc., the main line railway infrastructure. All the rest is the market. You can come, pay for the use of the infrastructure and work. Once again, I'd like to underline that for all modes of transport there is only one common model, but each sector certainly envisages its own specifics. We are getting there, although it is rather hard, since nobody wants to share his profit made on the use of the state infrastructure. It is very easy when the state has something on its balance and an enterprise director actually makes his money using the state property. Thus, we are going to sort it out. Each mode of transport will have its respective model described by respective documents which we'll adjust with the companies engaged in certain business area.
Law on Transitin Prospect
- Programme of Transport Services Export is your know-how. Have you achieved any successful results so far?
- It was approved by the RF Government. Now at this level all the projects on transport services export will be implemented. I'd like everybody to realize the fact that in prospect we are going to issue a new document to define the role of transit in Russia since we have no such document at present. Currently customs officials, border officials, vets - all work according to their own rules. If we had a Law on transit, all the respective bodies would obey it, and naturally, first of all, in the transit transportation sector. The approved sub-programme is a step towards uniting all the adjacent structures and working out a new approach to transit. We've allocated funds to invest into projects of primary importance. Now we are working on them and will share our results at the end of Q1. However, I'd like to emphasize that the key projects for us are those that develop some innovation technologies for the transport sector. They are, for example, logistic centers and high-speed Moscow-Saint-Petersburg railway, as it is a real scientific break-through. Also, it is the creation of free economic zones whose clients we are going to be. We need new airplanes, locomotives, ships, and new elements in the logistic sector. At present, we have producers who are ready to manufacture all we need and we are going to choose the one who will assist us in creating something unexpected and revolutionary for transport.
- At the session of the RF Naval Colleague you mentioned that foreign ships will call the Russian rivers in three-five years. Could you comment on this?
- Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but on the opposite we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes for river transport. It is cheap, safe and ecologically safe as well. No mode of transport can compete with river within these three options. To achieve this, we should create favorable conditions at our water ways. Now they are in poor condition, since river transport has always been financed last of all. However, despite all the advantages, river is potentially dangerous, for example, due to its floods. The locks built forty-fifty years ago are unsafe now from the technical point of view. That is why we are working out an offer to increase river transport allocations, namely for hydro constructions development. Also, the issue of a toll for river transportation has been put on the agenda. The business community reacted negatively, but we have no other way out. We don't want to tax a vessel for just floating along the river, our intention is to get money for the use of hydro technical equipment when, for example, a vessel needs to be lifted 40 meters high. Moreover, we didn't figure out any certain sums, we only asked the river business community to evaluate this possibility and share their opinions in this respect. We realize it is the state duty to finance hydro equipment construction and maintenance, but now the state financial suport makes 35-40% of the needed allocations. That is why we believe the business community has to support us to boost transportation volumes.
- When is the toll to be introduced?
- We do not want to solve the problem in a drastic way and hope to get the river businessmen's ideas about this. We've already discussed this issue at the session of the Naval Colleague, which approved respective decisions. At present, we want to coordinate all this with river men and get their support.
- Starting from the beginning of 2006 the Ministry of Transport increased tariffs for transit container transportation that almost resulted in a collapse of the TransSib container flow. Could you please explain what your aim was?
- It is no secret that the most part of the TransSib transit is import transported illegally. We've increased the transit tariff, but decreased the import one, in order to let the Russian cargo be comfortably transported to Russia. I'd like to remind you that previously all this worked vice versa: import was more expensive than transit to another country with the further run to the center of Russia by truck. As was said, it was aimed at transit attraction, but as the most part of the volume clearly has nothing to do with transit, who is deceived and why? This way we just signal that using legal schemes of transportation is cheaper now. There is nothing to be afraid of for those companies who did it legally, but for the adepts of illegal schemes this situation is really irritating, as they get no profit any longer. Thus, we've got a great number of claims to it. I think in respect of real transit flow from the countries of South-Eastern Asia towards the EU, we could set a special tariff system that would make the TransSib competitive to shipping and give profit to the Russian transport companies. What I mean is if it is transit, we'll make it competitive with the help of lower tariffs compared to the ones on shipping. My recommendation to those who worry about the transit tariff increase is to check where exactly his cargo follows to. One more thing should be mentioned. The greatest danger is that setting this tariff rate can lead to the situation when only one company would operate the TransSib. We keep the situation under control and are ready to interfere in case of necessity.
Interview by ANDREY GURYEV
[~DETAIL_TEXT] => "Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in the future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but, on the opposite, we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes", assures Igor Levitin, The RF Minister of Transport.
Foreign InvestorStill Lingers
- Mr.Levitin, how satisfied are you with the flow of different types of investment obtained by the transport sector last year: private and state, foreign and domestic etc.?
- Unfortunately, I have to confess that direct foreign investment and big world players didn't reach Russia. That was caused exclusively by the fact that we have no respective normative-legislative regulation of the transport sector, as judged by Western market players. Let's say, the Law on land, approved more than ten years ago, points out that there is land controlled by the transport sector, but there is no document issued by the Government that would make clear what it has to do with. The first question the foreign investor asks when he comes to Russia concerns namely "land" problem: whose land it is, what the terms of the lease are etc. These issues haven't been adjusted yet. This problem badly influences Ust-Luga, Sheremetyevo and Tolmachevo (in Novosibirsk), as well as all big transport objects. We are going to sort out this problem soon.
At the same time, I believe that the Russian financial market is warming towards the transport sector now. Big players entering the market and their wish to be involved into transport business proves this fact. However, I'd like to emphasize that one of our current problems is the lack of big, reliable and investment attractive transport companies in all modes of transport, besides railways. In the nearest future we need to consolidate companies: first of all, it has to do with aviation and next it should touch upon river and motor transport. This step is important for modern market formation, whose participants are competitive, attractive for investors and, moreover, able to perform as customers for domestic transport mechanical engineering. Why is the railway mechanical engineering sector rapidly growing now? The answer is simple: there is a big powerful customer. At present, a big aviation company is being established. Who is going to perform as its customer? If it starts to produce airplanes for Western companies and creates demand for its produce that would be great, since Russia has only three-four companies interested in it.
- Do you think the state should support domestic ports in the process of railway tariffs unification currently unfolding?
- Yes, of course. First of all, favorable conditions for receiving large-tonnage vessels should be created. Unfortunately, we can't boast of deep-waters non-frozen ports. However, it is not Russia to blame for: the geographical location of the country is a fact not to be accused. It was not accidental that the USSR constructed and developed its deep-waters ports in the Baltic region anf Ukraine. It was a very logical thing to do: significant depths and milder climate caused that. At present the matter of principal importance is dredging works. Icebreakers make another point to focus on. Today this problem is acquiring more and more weight. We risk to be left with only two large icebreakers by 2014-2017. They can't service the growing transportation on the shelf, where we are planning to develop our energetic base. Thus, the icebreakers issue is a priority now. Generally speaking, if we do not support domestic ports in this and other aspects, cargo will definitely float to our neighbors.
- There have been developed instruments of public-private partnership in Russia. Are there any real projects to launch?
- Russia takes it longer: to develop the idea and let it come true usually takes three years. Why did we start to speak about this in 2004? It was clear that it would be launched in 2007. Before the annouced deadline we can only support the already launched projects, such as Ust-Luga, the Sea Facade, and the creation of a joint airports net. In the West this sort of project implementation usually takes two years or two and half, but we have to issue more documentation.
- Many hopes were laid on the concession mechanisms launch in the railway sector. Don't you think that the system when major lines are out of the market practically excludes the possibility to use concession schemes for infrastructure development in the segment?
- New railways construction can easily be carried out on the basis of concession contracts, for example, the branch Berkakit-Tommot-Yakutsk, the Elga deposit branch, the second railway access to Novorossiysk etc. However, in my opinion, there is no need to apply concession agreement to the present-day functioning net in order to develop its infrastructure. These lines should be controlled by OAO RZD and developed on the basis of the company's investment programmes. At the same time, the company together with other investors can participate in new railways construction.
Many transport modes for the only market model
- In 2006 the third stage of the railway reform started. The project of arrangements developed by OAO RZD is known to have made the adjusted bodies demand its serious improvement. What is your position in respect of the major content and targets of the third stage?
- Heated discussions are being held about the prospective competitiveness of transportation companies. No doubt, everybody wishes to be competitive. However, it won't happen until infrastructure and transportation are controlled by one company alone. It is obvious. The same situation is a tough reality for airports now. Have you noticed what a vehement reaction was caused by our decision to separate aviation companies from airports? Nevertheless, if we do not do it, then the aviation company who possesses the airport will never let their competitor function there on equal terms. The same thing is true for railways. Despite the fact that the state totally controls OAO RZD shares, the company and its business are in the hands of its management. Thus, controlling rolling stock and infrastructure, we should expect no competition. That is the reason to decide precisely what railway transport model we want "to construct" by the end of the third stage of the reform, otherwise all our steps will be taken in an experimental way instead of the planned one. The two previous stages were unfolding in the way of a "trail run" as well. At the same time, it was claimed that we should not be thinking of the final target, we'd better see where our path takes us on its own. Today we have an absolutely different position. We've realised that the target model of railway transportation market envisages a separation between the infrastructure and transportation businesses. Thus, tactic and methodology issues are to be decided on. If OAO RZD manages to convince the Board in the urgent necessity to separate a cargo company, this will be a step to the target I am speaking about. However, it is very important to make serious calculations. One thing is when expenses on infrastructure, locomotive haulage and rolling stock are in the same hands. Quite another is when rail cars belong to a different company. They will be private cars, and, consequently, their empty back run should be paid for, as well as idling on the railways of OAO RZD etc. This is a fundamentally different scheme for meeting the expenses, financial flows, infrastructure and rolling stock outlay covering etc.
The only issue yet to be considered is the locomotive component. We realize pretty well it should be singled out in the tariff, but whether the locomotive economic should remain together with the infrastructure under the company's control or separated into an affiliate is still discussed. Now we are considering a target model for OAO RZD and this year we would like to decide on it quite precisely.
- I'd like to make it clear anyway wheteher it should be namely a market model, where the mechanisms of competition and free pricing are programmed, where there is no "dictatorship" of services producer over customer, where produce quality and expenses shortage are made in order to survive, but not on command etc.? There is an opinion shared by most railway men that market doesn't suit for railway transport and in fact totally different principles are required.
- The market model for railway in its essence doesn't differ from aviation, sea or river transport. There is an infrastructure, which is not to be privatized and should be controlled by the state. This includes the airport, the sea port within the area of its berths, sea channels etc., the main line railway infrastructure. All the rest is the market. You can come, pay for the use of the infrastructure and work. Once again, I'd like to underline that for all modes of transport there is only one common model, but each sector certainly envisages its own specifics. We are getting there, although it is rather hard, since nobody wants to share his profit made on the use of the state infrastructure. It is very easy when the state has something on its balance and an enterprise director actually makes his money using the state property. Thus, we are going to sort it out. Each mode of transport will have its respective model described by respective documents which we'll adjust with the companies engaged in certain business area.
Law on Transitin Prospect
- Programme of Transport Services Export is your know-how. Have you achieved any successful results so far?
- It was approved by the RF Government. Now at this level all the projects on transport services export will be implemented. I'd like everybody to realize the fact that in prospect we are going to issue a new document to define the role of transit in Russia since we have no such document at present. Currently customs officials, border officials, vets - all work according to their own rules. If we had a Law on transit, all the respective bodies would obey it, and naturally, first of all, in the transit transportation sector. The approved sub-programme is a step towards uniting all the adjacent structures and working out a new approach to transit. We've allocated funds to invest into projects of primary importance. Now we are working on them and will share our results at the end of Q1. However, I'd like to emphasize that the key projects for us are those that develop some innovation technologies for the transport sector. They are, for example, logistic centers and high-speed Moscow-Saint-Petersburg railway, as it is a real scientific break-through. Also, it is the creation of free economic zones whose clients we are going to be. We need new airplanes, locomotives, ships, and new elements in the logistic sector. At present, we have producers who are ready to manufacture all we need and we are going to choose the one who will assist us in creating something unexpected and revolutionary for transport.
- At the session of the RF Naval Colleague you mentioned that foreign ships will call the Russian rivers in three-five years. Could you comment on this?
- Russia hosts foreign airplanes, in future we'll welcome trains (the Finnish "Sibelius" has already been calling) and, consequently, river vessels. We ought not to close, but on the opposite we should encourage the boost of transportation volumes for river transport. It is cheap, safe and ecologically safe as well. No mode of transport can compete with river within these three options. To achieve this, we should create favorable conditions at our water ways. Now they are in poor condition, since river transport has always been financed last of all. However, despite all the advantages, river is potentially dangerous, for example, due to its floods. The locks built forty-fifty years ago are unsafe now from the technical point of view. That is why we are working out an offer to increase river transport allocations, namely for hydro constructions development. Also, the issue of a toll for river transportation has been put on the agenda. The business community reacted negatively, but we have no other way out. We don't want to tax a vessel for just floating along the river, our intention is to get money for the use of hydro technical equipment when, for example, a vessel needs to be lifted 40 meters high. Moreover, we didn't figure out any certain sums, we only asked the river business community to evaluate this possibility and share their opinions in this respect. We realize it is the state duty to finance hydro equipment construction and maintenance, but now the state financial suport makes 35-40% of the needed allocations. That is why we believe the business community has to support us to boost transportation volumes.
- When is the toll to be introduced?
- We do not want to solve the problem in a drastic way and hope to get the river businessmen's ideas about this. We've already discussed this issue at the session of the Naval Colleague, which approved respective decisions. At present, we want to coordinate all this with river men and get their support.
- Starting from the beginning of 2006 the Ministry of Transport increased tariffs for transit container transportation that almost resulted in a collapse of the TransSib container flow. Could you please explain what your aim was?
- It is no secret that the most part of the TransSib transit is import transported illegally. We've increased the transit tariff, but decreased the import one, in order to let the Russian cargo be comfortably transported to Russia. I'd like to remind you that previously all this worked vice versa: import was more expensive than transit to another country with the further run to the center of Russia by truck. As was said, it was aimed at transit attraction, but as the most part of the volume clearly has nothing to do with transit, who is deceived and why? This way we just signal that using legal schemes of transportation is cheaper now. There is nothing to be afraid of for those companies who did it legally, but for the adepts of illegal schemes this situation is really irritating, as they get no profit any longer. Thus, we've got a great number of claims to it. I think in respect of real transit flow from the countries of South-Eastern Asia towards the EU, we could set a special tariff system that would make the TransSib competitive to shipping and give profit to the Russian transport companies. What I mean is if it is transit, we'll make it competitive with the help of lower tariffs compared to the ones on shipping. My recommendation to those who worry about the transit tariff increase is to check where exactly his cargo follows to. One more thing should be mentioned. The greatest danger is that setting this tariff rate can lead to the situation when only one company would operate the TransSib. We keep the situation under control and are ready to interfere in case of necessity.
Interview by ANDREY GURYEV
[DETAIL_TEXT_TYPE] => html
[~DETAIL_TEXT_TYPE] => html
[PREVIEW_TEXT] => |
|
Copyright © 2002-2024 Учредитель ООО «Редакция журнала «РЖД-Партнер»
Информационное агентство «РЖД-Партнер.РУ»
Главный редактор Ретюнин А.С.
адрес электронной почты rzdp@rzd-partner.ru телефон редакции +7 (812) 418-34-92; +7 (812) 418-34-90
При цитировании информации гиперссылка на ИА РЖД-Партнер.ру обязательна.
Использование материалов ИА РЖД-Партнер.ру в коммерческих целях без письменного разрешения агентства не допускается.
Свидетельство о регистрации СМИ ИА № ФС77-22819 от 11 января 2006 г., выдано Федеральной службой по надзору за соблюдением законодательства в сфере массовых коммуникаций и охране культурного наследия.
Любое использование материалов допускается только при наличии гиперссылки на ИА РЖД-Партнер.ру
Разработка сайта - iMedia Solutions
