|
Analytical review of the current state of Russian fisheries industry
4. Reforms and Reformers
Part 1. "Professionals”
Excursion into History
Ernst Cherny in the introduction to his book (in Russian) writes:
“Let’s list those who had set up the basics of the currently corrupt and criminalized fisheries, and those who obediently followed this direction: Alexander Akimovich Ishkov, Vladimir Mikhailovich Kamentsev, Nikolai Isaakovich Kotlyar, Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky, AlexanderVasilievich Rodin, Vladimir Amdurmanovich Izmailov, Nikolai Alexandrovich Ermakov. Yuri Petrovich Synelnik, Evgeny Fedorovich Nazdratenko.
The names differ, though the deeds are surprisingly alike. Therefore even today there is no sound concept for development and operations of this industry”.
|
|
Alexander Akimovich Ishkov
|
|
The statement made by Ernst Isaakovich is, in my opinion, still doubtful: it is hardly possible to put in one and the same row – in terms of power and great intentions – the name of the Stalin’s Peoples Commissar and the first USSR Minister of Fisheries Alexander Akimovich Ishkov, the founder of the great fishing Empire, - and the names of simple small-level thiefs who indeed came to alter former professionals and led the great Empire to collapse.
Talking on corruption in the times of A.A.Ishkov Ernst Cherny probably considers the famous “Ocean” case which determined resignation of Alexander Ishkov in 1978; he was in charge of the fisheries industry since 1939 and came after Polina Zhemchuzhina, the wife of Mr. Molotov. It means that in spite of all known political changes in the country A.A.Ishkov was in charge of the USSR fisheries industry in the times of I.V.Stalin, and also in the time of N.S.Khrustchev, and also in the times of L.I.Brezhnev.
Therefore in the 1970s and also now many experts consider the “Ocean” case as part of the politically requested affair needed to blame and dismiss A.A.Ishkov form his position, that became also due to his efforts, and this is not a really unjust statement, one of the key governmental positions in the entire Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
This is what came from the memory of Mr. V.I.Kalinichenko, the former VIP-case investigator of the USSR Prosecution Office:
- The first well-known case at the Ministry of Fisheries started somewhere in 1977, few years before I was appointed as the VIP-case investigator at the General Prosecution Office of the USSR; later in some parts of the whole case investigation was handed over to me.
- This is the infamous “Ocean” case? What was the main substance?
- If to comment very briefly, Ishkov, that time the USSR Minister of Fisheries, managed to persuade Kosygin, who was in charge of the Government, that the Fisheries Ministry should be made responsible also for the trade of fish and seafood products. And though according to the Soviet Law monopoly for trade, both internally and externally, remained with the state, Ministry of Fisheries got their approval. The “Rybpromsbyt” [State Fisheries Trading Enterprise] was set up, and the first enormous black money came in.
- Do we talk large sums of money?
- Yes, it’s a lot!
- Certainly that time, when Volga car cost 13 thousand Roubles, and Lada was only five to six thousand Roubles these were rather large sums; but the bribes ranged from 200, 300, 500 Roubles to the maximum of 2-3 thousand Roubles. Such scale was widely used in the whole system of state briberies, that penetrated already in those years deep through the entire fisheries industry.
...You know, I often raised a question to myself then: why was the USSR deputy minister Rytov sentenced to shooting and why was he executed?
- May be to punish him... And to set an example for the others...
- Yes, and to show to the others how dangerous it is to follow this same route. But still...
The “Ocean” programme was indeed initiated by Minister A.A.Ishkov and supported by Prime-Minister A.N.Kosygin, who had been formerly for some tome the direct boss of Alexander Akimovich when the Fisheries industry was part of the Ministry of Light Industries and Food led that time by A.N.Kosygin in the rank of deputy head of the USSR Council of Ministers. The main aim of that programme was to set up the system of stock and retail sales of fish and seafood in the USSR regions and republics, developing a chain of specialized “Ocean” stores that was meant in every Soviet city and town to trade to Soviet people the fish that was harvested by Soviet fishermen in the World Ocean. And what is most important, that the resignation of A.A.Ishkov did not prevent the set up of that specialized chain of “Ocean” stores from Moscow to the most remote places; this stimulated not only the harvests of fish in the sea, but most importantly – the consumption of fish in the country. Which means that those who followed A.A.Ishkov did not deviate the way he suggested: the programme of national food security was indeed a state task. And the results speak for itself: in 1986, eight years after resignation of A.A.Ishkov the USSR became the world leader in fisheries.
However the situation changed substantially since 1991.
Introduction
|
|
Yuri Ivanovich Kokorev
|
|
“Considering that the fisheries industry represents one organization at the federal level... the Government put forward only one objective in the market conditions - to secure food safety, and to increase average fish and seafood consumption per capita to the minimum medical standard, i.e. to 23.7 kilograms per person per year.
“Considering that the fisheries industry represents one organization at the federal level... the Government put forward only one objective in the market conditions - to secure food safety, and to increase average fish and seafood consumption per capita to the minimum medical standard, i.e. to 23.7 kilograms per person per year. - wrote Yu.I.Kokorev, the future President of All-Russian Association of Fishermen, Entrepreneurs and Exporters (VARPE), candidate of sciences in economics, professor of All-Russian Fisheries Research Institute. Simultaneously he specified further: “Unfortunately many statements and positions in these legislative and executive decisions of the state authorities were nothing more than just declarations. There were not introduced into practice, but rather forgotten, and certainly did not become something that contributed to real practice and whatever positive change in the country fisheries industry.
The measures taken by the state did not lead to expected results – as it is clear from the present reality. Initial objectives of the fisheries industry development were changed during implementation. The task to increase food security and to improve food supply to population were declared in state documents without any quantitative indicator, while the other indicator for incomes to the budget from fisheries were introduced and increased progressively starting from 1999: from 3.5 billion Roubles in 1999 to 10.5 billion Roubles in the draft budget of 2003. This happened in the conditions when the TAC limits in the national waters decreased almost 2 times".
Thus in reality the aims and objectives of the national fisheries industry and of the main fisheries Headquarters were substantially different. To be more precise, these aims and objectives stopped to be those for the state interests, but became pure commercial and targeted only to maximizing incomes in whatever possible forms and ways. That is what we are going to prove.
The first reform of fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries at the National Ministry of Agriculture (1991 to 1993)
Chairman: Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky
|
|
Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky
|
|
The first task that the Government of Egor Gaidar had, - was to demolish the fisheries industry headquarters, i.e. the Ministry of Fisheries which was the second internationally important agency after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It had to be demoted to the ordinary level of “just one of the agencies” in the low-ranking Ministry of Agriculture, the place where only the reprimanded VIP communist party officials were appointed at that time. Likely the reformers understood potential danger from the Ministry of Fisheries – both for the reforms as they were, but also for them personally. And in 1991 the Ministry of Fisheries was reorganized into the Russian State Committee on Fisheries at the Ministry of Agriculture and Food of Russian Federation; its functions were reduced to minimum, and instead of the management for the entire fisheries industry it had only the role to control operations of the national fishing fleet. The Committee was led by Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky, the former head of human resources, later the head of the "SevRyba" (Northern Fish) all-USSR State Fisheries Enterprise.
“Korelsky himself was likely appointed on the basis of the principle that he invented himself: the level of incompetence should be visible just with naked eye. No doubt that he was selecting and appointing subordinates and staff following just the same principle, and similar judgments and criteria. All further operations of the fisheries management agency prove viability of Korelsky’s approaches. There were many different leaders of the fisheries industry after Korelsky, but with every of them the system managed to sustain its unique “sustainability” of maximum monopoly in decision-making by state authorities combined with enormous levels of corruption”. ().
And there is no chance to disagree with that.
The second task which was assigned already for Korelsky himself was to carry out as rapid privatization of the industry assets as possible; this was needed to break the links between the fisheries industry itself and its main headquarters. This was nicely called “de-monopolization” and “capitalization”. But since then the Headquarters started to beg for subsistence funding from the Government, and later, using the reasoning that funds are needed for fisheries industry development, learned by itself how to generate money through the trade of resources, both legally and illegally. It turns out that illegal trade prevailed. And the money was indeed good.
“Reforms of the national fisheries that were in progress since 1990-1992 led to the fact that because of too fast and unthought-of shift towards market relationships the Russian fleet started to harvest in the 200-mile EEZ the resources that were mostly demanded not only in Russia but also at the global market. At the same time due to a number of reasons such as increased costs of fuel and other vessel maintenance and supplies, lack of funds, including live cash for turnover etc., many fishing areas in the open parts of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans were abandoned. ...Simultaneously the state sharply reduced, and later completely stopped any wise financial support to the industry, especially as concerns renovation of its main capital property such as fishing fleet vessels and coastal fish processing facilities. Introduction of liberalism in the foreign trade of fish and seafood combined with the wrong elements of Chubais-Gaidar privatization caused the increase in exports of fish and fish products, losses of some part of the fishing fleets, or transfer of the vessels under non-Russian flags to avoid unjust taxation. As a result not only the total national harvests declined from 7.9-8.1 million tons in 1988-1989 down to 3.4-4.3 mullion tons in 1994-1995, but also the average consumption of fish by population fell from 18 to 10 kilograms per year". (V.K.Zilanov, Academician of the Academy for Environment, Health and Safety (MANEB), ).
Second reform of the fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries (1993 to 1996);
Chairman: Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky
|
|
Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky |
|
If we follow the line of analysis made by Ernst Cherny who compared the personalities of Soviet and Russian leaders of the national fisheries, we realize that V.F.Korelsky stayed in power longer than his successors. Later when the State Committee on Fisheries will be reorganized into Federal Agency on Fisheries within the Ministry of Agriculture he will be in charge of the Fisheries Policy Department in the Russian Ministry of Agriculture and will represent the federal executive authority that will determine the new regulations and standards base of entire national fisheries industry.
“In my previous publications I provided reliable facts which prove that in 1990-1992 Russian fisheries industry entered the stage of acute crisis. Fisheries statistics for the latest period, i.e. 1993-1995 and the first half of 1996 indicate, that the crisis slowly transformed into stagnation. Unstable trends in harvests and worsening economic performance of the fishing fleet that was involved in marine fishing were determined not only by the macroeconomic processes taking place within the country and by the lack of adequate rules and regulations, but also were affected by the existing taxation system, by the state of biological resources, and also by the level of science-based management in those resources that are the fundamental ones for entire Russian marine fisheries policy. The latter is probably the most important, as even the average decline in populations of the main objects of fisheries such as Alaska Pollock, Crabs of the Sea of Okhotsk and Cod and Haddock of the Barents Sea might lead to the most acute new crisis in the Russian marine fisheries; after such crisis recovery would be especially hard”. (V.K.Zilanov, )
Collapse in the industry continued, together with increased corruption, - both forming a background that developed to certain extent with participation of Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky. This is described in detail by Ernst Cherny in his book. At the same time Russian Committee on Fisheries develops and approves at the highest possible level in the Government the Programme to move fisheries industry from the crisis: Federal Targeted Programme “The Fish”. As it turned out later nobody ever meant to implement this programme. This was just yet another declaration to make the public happy.
In order to stabilize the situation the Government introduced in 1995, much later than needed, "The Fish" Federal Targeted Programme where the objective was set to maintain the annual harvests at the level of 4.2 million tons till the year 2000 with minimal federal support, and to bring most of these harvests for internal consumption. To be able to meet this objectives in the conditions when there is no developed market and when the country is still closed from the outside world serious and balanced steps would be needed to further integrate national fisheries into the global business network, and, more importantly, to draw investments for the renovation of the commercial fishing fleet which was 60% worn off at that time.
At the same in my opinion "The Fish" Federal Targeted Programme had a substantial strategic mistake that forced the whole marine fisheries of Russia to the edge of unsustainability, making it vulnerable to prolonged crisis’s and to the threat of loosing the formerly exploited fishing areas in different parts of the World Ocean. The fact was that the basic area for marine fisheries development according to “The Fish” programme was the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of Russia with its resources: 71% to 76% of the total catch was planned to be harvested there. At the same time it was planned to catch only 8% of the annual total amounts in the open areas of the World Ocean, and 15% to 16% of the harvests were to come from 200-miles zones of the other states where Russia was fishing according to bilateral agreements. Such disproportion might cause, even with the slightest fluctuations of resource base within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of Russia, to the total collapse of all national fisheries and to most severe socio-economic consequences not only for fishermen themselves but also for the majority of population in the coastal areas. Adjustments of “The Fish” Programme aiming at increase of the harvests from the open World Ocean areas should be made already now, so that we do not loose the practical experience of the former years and prevent negative consequences were discussed above". (V.K.Zilanov, )
In the “Note on results of the assessment made for the activities of state executive authorities for the effective management in fishing and fish processing industry”, that was carried out according to the decision of Controls and Revisions Department under Russian President Mr. V.V.Putin in 1997 it was stated that
"since 1992 to 1996 Russia moved from the 2nd to the 7th place globally as concerns fish and seafood harvests. According to the data from State Customs Committee since 1995 Russian trade balance in fish and fish products became negative. In the first quarter of 1997th total costs of fish bought abroad by Russia exceeded four times the total value of export".
What were the Headquarters doing then all these years? In is said in the note:
“It is a normally accepted world practice that the TAC limits are first shared between the national fishermen, and then the remaining portion of TAC that cannot be harvested by own country fishermen is handed over to the foreign resource users on the basis of respectively signed intergovernmental agreements. Such approach complies fully to the Article 62 of the UN Marine Law Convention of 1982, which says that the coastal states in their exclusive economic zones "give the right to the other states to harvest the portion of TAC that is left after national fishermen get all their shares”. However according to the temporary regulation on distribution of TAC among resource users “priority was given to the users that operate following the intergovernmental agreements of Russian Federation, decisions of the Government of Russian Federation and other relevant agreements”. The amounts to be harvested according to these regulations had to be defined by the Department itself and “excluded from the TAC totals that were subject for sharing among the regional fisheries enterprises”.
...The harvest of Sockeye Salmon in 1997 in the total amount of 6.5 thousand tons caught by Japanese drifters (with drift-net fishing that was banned already since 1991 according to the UN General Assembly Resolution) plus 3.3 thousand tons caught by the Russian fishing vessels that operated for “research programmes” led to over-fishing of the Sockeye Salmon Ozernovskoye school and brought to the edge of bankruptcy those coastal Kamchatka enterprises that were using these resources.
In 1996 the total TAC was set in the amount of 4954 thousand tons, including 472.6 thousand tons of fish and seafood that were allocated to foreign fishing companies according to intergovernmental agreements: this comprised 9.5% of the total annual TAC. At the same time only 350 thousand metric tons or 7% of the TAC were allocated for the needs of the national fisheries industry itself. Compared to 1992 (363.3 thousand tons) the TAC allocated to intergovernmental agreements increased in 1996 by 13% and reached the total of 472.6 thousand tons. In 1997 only 7.2% of the TAC, or 410 thousand tons of fish were allocated for the national fisheries industry, and 8% or 451.4 thousand tons were reserved for the intergovernmental agreements".
Moreover, substantial harvests of marine bioresources were allocated to foreign fishermen via the intermediate agencies such as “Asryba” Ltd., “SovRybFlot” Ltd etc.; they are getting 3% to 5% of the total contracts value for their intermediate assistance. These intermediate companies were chosen by the Heads of Departments themselves. Without any tender or competition.
At the same time the budgets that were meant for state support to fisheries in 1994-1996 were under-funded for the total amount of 68.9 million US dollars. During 9 months of 1997 out of 131.7 million US dollars budgeted to support state fisheries only 79.7 million US dollars were received. As a result the opportunities to develop national fisheries were largely under-used”.
What could be said in this respect? Only one conclusion: the interests of those who managed fisheries since 1991 had nothing in common with the interests of the Russian fisheries development.
Third reform of the fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries (1997)
Chairman: Alexander Vasilievich Rodin
|
|
Alexander Vasilievich Rodin
|
|
For the “achievements” in ruining the national fisheries V.F.Korelsky is moved up in the Government of Russia. And the Committee looses, following the 1997 Decree of the President, the basic and most important function of conservation of marine biological resources, on which all regulatory principles of fisheries are based. “Izvestia” Newspaper published a series of articles “Mafia and the Sea” prepared by the newspaper correspondent Boris Reznik on the misdeeds and law violations in distribution of quotas done by the Committee on Fisheries and its top leaders. Investigation starts for the facts described in the articles.
And here are the real results of work done by V.F.Korelsky and his team.
"To the President of Russian Federation B.N.Yeltsin
Dear Boris Nikolayevich,
Following your order of 27 October 2007 ¹ Pr-1750 the State Controls Department of the President of Russian Federation made and inspection of activities carried by state executive authorities for the effective management in the industry of harvesting and processing of fish and sea products, and reports the following. During five reorganizations in the central management authority of the mentioned industry, that took place in the past six years, there is no increase in the industry efficiency. Despite the measures taken by the Deputy Chairman of the Government of Russian Federation, Minister of Agriculture and Food of the Russian Federation there is no overall fisheries policy and no coordination of efforts to secure state and economic interests of Russian Federation. Top managers of the fisheries industry were not able to make its operations stable, and were neither able to set up the system of wise use and conservation of national aquatic biological resources. As a result a number of fishing areas in the open parts of the World Ocean were abandoned, the links to the markets of CIS member states are almost completely lost, material and technical supply system in the industry deteriorated, and internal technological links are largely also the industrial infrastructure disintegrated. The state of regulatory base in the industry and the enforcement of already existing legislation are not satisfactory. Contrary to obligations in the Federal Laws “On Wildlife" and "On the Continental Shelf” payments for the use of wildlife objects and live resources are not received. A number of orders issued by the President of Russia have not been implemented. From 1992 to 1996 Russia went down from the 2nd to the 7th place in the world in fish and seafood harvests, and the national ship building industry that works for the needs of fisheries went from the 6th to the 20th place in the world ranking. Technologically and physically the capacity of the fishing fleet became 60% to 75% obsolete and worn off. Fish and other sea products harvests decreased from 5.3 million tons in 1992 down to 4.56 million tons in 1996, supplies of fish and fish products to the markets reduced by 22%, and production of canned fish became almost three times lower. Fish and fish products consumption per capita decreased by 21%. The total unaccounted export exceeded, according to experts estimates, 2.5 billion US dollars. Violating the Statement of the Government of Russian Federation from 29th January 1992 ¹ 52 “On the intensification of privatization programme implementation for 1992" the State Fisheries Committee at the Ministry of Agriculture of Russian Federation did not develop any programme for privatization in fisheries industry; this privatization was carried out without necessary and adequate planning and without considerations on the fisheries industry specifics; this indicates on the fact that strategic interests of Russian Federation were underestimated, particularly those related to privatization of a number of fish ports. Federal executive authorities do not have precise information on a number of issues. Thus, according to the data of the Fisheries Department in the Russian Ministry of Agriculture there are currently four state fish ports operating as state enterprises, while according to the data of the Russian Ministry of State Property there are nine such fish ports. Harvests of fish and seafood in 1996 were equal to 4.1 million tons according to the State Statistics Committee of Russia, while according to the Department it was equal to 4.56 million tons.
Basis of management in the fisheries industry is related to allocation of quotas for the use of resources among the fishing enterprises; this is done by the Department of Fisheries of the Russian Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Time limits and deadlines for allocation of quotas are not met. Quotas provided for research purposes and for the control and monitoring harvests substantially exceed the necessary amounts, and the funds received from the sales of these resources are often misused.
Interaction of law enforcement agencies for fish protection issues is not sufficiently effective, the plans that exist do not cover up all the practical needs but are limited to only exchange of information. Number of law violations in the field of fisheries increases. In 1996 compared to the previous year crime increased by 20%, and in the three latest years it was a trice increase already.
The Government of Russian Federation did not consider fisheries management issues in 1996-1997 at all.
Deputy Head of the Administration of the President of Russian Federation, Head of the Main Controlling Department, V.Putin,
26th December 1997, ¹ A8-1.2-3413".
Fourth reform of the fisheries industry: Department of Fisheries in the Russian Ministry of Agriculture and Food (1997-1998)
Deputy Minister: Alexander Vasilievich Rodin
Head of Department: Mikhail Vladimirovich Dementiev
As a result of all processes around “Fisheries Mafia” when the entire agency led my A.V.Rodin was disbanded upon the suggestion from V.V.Putin, fisheries industry again turned up to be at the remote and neglected corner of the Russian state bureaucracy. And the fishermen who were still professionals lost the highest trust from the head of the state and its closely alien circles. Other specialists were invited to become new leaders of the fisheries industry. However there is no certainty that the new state tasks were set for these renewed fisheries headquarters, as the state continued to give little attention to fisheries. As a result the official harvests were still in decline, and the consumption of fish and seafood per capita was reducing further...
Part two. Amateurs
Fifth reform of the fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries
Nikolai Alexandrovich Yermakov (1998-1999)
Yuri Petrovich Synelnik (1999-2001)
|
|
Nikolai Alexandrovich Yermakov
|
|
Former Major General Yermakov came from the KGB, Committee for State Security, where he specialized in the fight against organized crime and illegal trade in drugs. From July till December 1991 he was the Chairman of the Customs Committee at the USSR Council of Ministers, and then in 1992 he was the Chairman of the Committee for Protection of Economic Interests of Russia set up by the Vice-President of Russia Alexander Rutskoy and his assistant Alexander Sterligov. N.Yermakov was invited to become the Chairman of the Fisheries Committee by Prime-Minister Eugene Primakov, who was that time also at the end of his political career; later in the changes within the Government Primakov was altered with Prime-Minister Sergei Stepashin.
“The state of national fisheries industry, which was No.1 question in the agenda of the recent Government meeting, made the Prime-Minister so concerned that after raising the rhytorical question of "What should be done to avoid total stupidity?” he ended up hi speech with a thesis that “one should be sentenced to shooting for the damage to fish resources”. Though Stepashin immediately apologized for such harsh statement and corrected himself - “Well, certainly nobody should be shot”. However it was not so much a calming phrase for his colleagues in the Government. There was an impression that by making such, and later the other, extremely strong statements the Prime-Minister was addressing the audience much wider than just his Cabinet. More likely is that he was trying to warn so unusually some other forces undefined in his speeches that he would not let it happen that they interfere in the governmental decision-making. Otherwise Stepashin would not have been touching the staff issues, - by saying that the only criteria for appointment or resignation of that or the other officer is his or her professional skills. Or would not be reminding that it is easy for him to take decisions, because there is nobody standing behind his back. However the substance part of that Governmental meeting was not so much impressive. The last time the fisheries issues were discussed in the end of April, at that time still under Eugene Primakov as Prime-Minister. And since then decisions did not move ahead. The measures to move the fisheries industry from crisis that were suggested by the main reporter, the Head of State Committee on Fisheries Mr. Yermakov were almost totally discarded by the Head of the Ministry of Taxes Alexander Pochinok, by the Minister of Finance Mikhail Kasyanov, and also by the first Vice Prime-Minister Victor Khristenko. And the reason was that the list of suggested measures was meant, as unanimously concluded by the participants in that meeting, to get as much funding from the state budget as possible, without contributing to the budget in reverse. And the means to support fishermen through setting up the Fund for State-supported certainly caused the largest number of questions. Sergey Stepashin then immediately suggested that if such a fund was established, the Minister of Interior Vladimir Rushailo should immediately start investigation on its operations. As a result discussion on how the fisheries industry should be helped to recover from crisis was postponed, and the issues raised were subject for further discussions and amendments with participation of tax and customs people. And the long-term concept for fisheries industry development that was meant for 15 years ahead also was not appreciated by the government meeting participants. Sergey Stepashin “killed” it with just one phrase: “to make such a long-lasting concept is something similar to long-term plans to build the communism". ("Nezavisimaya Gazeta” newspaper, July 1999).
And Mr. Yermakov with his programme and concept to revive the fisheries industry was left out of business. Soon afterwards he was asked to resign because of his age - to become a pensioner.
“The new head of the State Committee on Fisheries, former Lubyanka General N.Yermakov, - the person who was honest, hard-working and willing to implement what was decided, - brought six more generals and five colonels into his team of fisheries management. However with their appointment the harvests still decreased further, and the state of many fisheries enterprises was close to catastrophic collapse. In these circumstances the production decreased further, especially noticeably the production of canned fish and fish meal. It is clear that some time is needed for the military people to become somewhat professional, and meanwhile no positive change could be expected in the nearest future despite whatever rapid measures are introduced”. ("Rossiiskaya Gazeta” newspaper, 27 August 1999).
State Fisheries Committee might become one more participant in the “military operations” of power-shifts; this is not the most well-known agency, but it is certainly very vulnerable for corruption and very attractive to lobbyists as it is dealing with the distribution of fishing quotas and payments for the use of marine biological resources. This agency has traditionally high influence in the northern and far-eastern areas of the country. The fact that Nikolai Yermakov, who came to the Government upon initiative of Primakov, resigned on the 10th September from the position of the Fisheries Committee Chairman because of his illness, have the observers the reason to expect new round of fights for control over this industry”. (“Russkaya Mysl" newspaper, September 1999).
At the same time the reason for resignation of N.Yermakov could be completely different: this was suggested by the Head of Vladivostok Base of Trawlers and Refrigerators Fleet N.I.Nikitenko in relation to a large-scale scandal case when the super-trawlers were transfered from “Super” company (Nikitenko) to “Dalmoreproduct” company (led by Yu.G.Didenko, second interested person after the Governor of Primorsky krai E.I.Nazdratenko).
"...I left the VBTRF on 21 January 1998, and after that Nazdratenko started his enormous activity to take over the super-trawlers. He was directly assisted in this by the ex-Prime-Minister Stepashin, who currently represents the top esteem and honesty of Russia being the Chairman of Russian Accounting Controls Chamber.
Didenko quickly paid the bribe in the amount of USD 1.7 million to the ex-Chairman of State Fisheries Committee Yermakov and to Nazdratenko from his accounts in the banks of Singapore. This was later confirmed by the London Court of Justice.
The infamous order of the Russian State Fisheries Committee appears signed by Chairman Yermakov – from 29 June 1999 ¹ 170 – that all the super trawlers together with crews on board are taken over just in the process of navigation and handed over to “Dalmoreproduct”, the company that was at that moment at the edge of bankruptcy. (“Zolotoi Rog” newspaper, March 2005).
And here are the details which were clarified in London and summarized in the article by B.Reznik "Mafia and the Sea” (“Izvestia", 20 July 2002).
"Judge Creswell:
- Look at the document F5/1255A that confirms the payment of 6th October 1999 in the total amount of 1.65 million US dollars which you’ve asked Mr. Laskaridis to pay as advanced dividends to the United Overus Bank for the account of Sinegal Petro PTE Limited. Do you accept that the transfer was made following your order?
Didenko:
- Yes, it was made upon my request from Mr. Laskaridis. I asked Mr. Laskaridis to transfer the funds as payment for services of a group of people who helped to solve the problems of Order ¹ 170".
Let us fully understand the incredible meaning of what was said by the Russian fisheries magnate Yuri Didenko who was giving sworn testimony in the London Court. That was something usual, something routine and normal that he spoke on the bribe “to a group of people” from the Government, the State Fisheries Committee, who helped him to “solve the problems" with the issue of Order ¹ 170 that was fully contradictory to the Law. These people are known name by name. They gave orders, prepared, and signed the document that was known to be out-of-law; the document that made the country poor budget loose some hundreds of millions of US dollars income. This is corruption in its pure uncovered form!".
Well, there are other opinions on this resignation as well.
“The former Chairman of Russian State Committee on Fisheries Nikolai Yermakov resigned and became a pensioner as soon as the auditors of the Accounting Chamber finalized inspection of the fisheries industry. According to the controlling officers ex-Head of the Committee did not give much attention to numerous cases of misuse and wrong use of the budget funds and to the direct robbery in fisheries industry.
Auditors of the Accounting Chamber who just finished checking the operations of the State Committeeon Fisheries in 1996-1997 and the first half of 1998 partly found the reply to the question why Russian fisheries harvest is lost. The controllers state that the budget funds allocated for development of the industry, particularly for construction of new fish processing facilities and reconstruction of the old ones, were misused. And the State Committee on Fisheries of Russia, who was led that time by Yermakov, did not control the payments.
|
|
Yuri Petrovich Synelnik |
|
Thus in 199601997 and the first half of 1998 Kamchatka region Administration misused three transfers of federal funds in the total amount of 241 billion “old” Roubles (US$ 40 million), US$ 4 million and DM10.3 million (US$ 6 million). Among the enterprises that were meant to receive these funds following the decision of the Government were the South Kuriles Fisheries Enterprise and about a hundred smaller and larger fish processing plants and factories. (“Profile” Magazine, 1999, ¹ 50)
The forecast made by the "Russkaya Mysl" Newspaper became completely true: this time the position of the Chairman in the Russian State Committee on Fisheries was filled with criminal fraud person.
Below are some citations from the letter of the future Chairman of Russian State Committee on Fisheries addressed to Anatoly Chubais (that time the first deputy Head of the Russian Government), - with comments also made by Ernst Cherny:
... Introduction of the above discussed measures will enable within one year to get under control the incomes from sales of the Russian fish resources in the total amount of over 2 billion US dollars.
Dear Anatoly Borisovich, the hard situation in the industry determines the fact that I wrote this letter to you and request a meeting in person.
Few words about myself: I am in charge of the oldest fisheries enterprise in Kaliningrad region (the fact that the person who was not a specialist led the fisheries enterprise already for some years prove that the situation in the industry is indeed very bad. The activities of this either former KGB, or former SVR (Foreign Intelligence Service) officer in his position of the head of Kaliningrad Fisheries Fleet Base did not bring him respect, but instead led to the start of the criminal investigation). Enterprise includes: 46 vessels of fishing and supporting fleet, two fish processing plants and the fish port with all relevant infrastructure. The enterprise is the key for the employment in the settlement, and our tax payments comprise 73% of the total budget of the town ( Synelnik just forgot to add that the whole population of the town is equal to 10 thousand people ). We have 3000 employees.
Ñ óâàæåíèåì,
Sincerely Yours,
Chairman of the Council of Directors, Director General of the Baltic Fishing Fleet Base Ltd. Yu.P.Synelnik.
Chubais paid "adequate" respect to these ambitions of the 37-year old Yuri Synelnik. That is what happened later and what was revealed.
“State Department against Economic Crime (GUBEP) of the Ministry of Interior of Russia started criminal investigation in relation to the former Chairman of the Russian State Committee on Fisheries Yuri Synelnik. Referring to GUBEP press service, “Izvestia” newspaper writes that he was found guilty in forging the diploma about his higher education in law. According to this document Yuri Synelnik graduated in 1998 from the Kaliningrad State University. It was discovered that he had used this document both when he entered the position of the first deputy Chairman of the State Fisheries Committee, and at the time ge submitted documents for registration as the candidate for the position of the Kaliningrad region Head of Administration. Criminal case opened according to the article that provides for responsibility for the use of fake documents". (according to information from “Izvestia” newspaper, 26 February 2001)
"... in 1988 he graduated from the Faculty of Law, Kaliningrad State University, and in 1992 – the Foreign Trade Academy. For two years (1988-1990) worked as the military interpreter; knows English, German, French and Spanish languages. Positions himself as the deputy Colonel of Intelligence, who graduated from the KGB school. It is however not know where and when he worked for intelligence: already in 1990-1991 Synelnik became the expert of Kaliningrad Chamber of Commerce, then for two years was the deputy head of “The Wings” Association in Riga, and later became the leading engineer, in 1994 to 1999 the Chairman of the Council of Directors and Director General of “Ocean Rybflot” Pioneer Base Ltd.
Results of his activities are sad for that Pioneer Base: formerly prosperous enterprise turned to be at the edge of bankruptcy. Out of 122 modern vessels that the base possessed in early 1990s only 39 were left by 1998. The other ones were sold at the unclear conditions to a number of exotic countries, such as for example the Marshall Islands. Where did the money go (and there are millions of dollars involved) only one person was likely to know, i.e. Director of the Fishing Fleet Base Mr. Synelnik himself. Situation was made even more absurd as V.Pliyev, the own deputy to Synelnik and at the same time his step-father, wrote a complaint to the law enforcement authorities blaming his step son in robbery of shares.
In the final end these criminal activities, - and according to the documents the modern nd technically advanced fishing vessels were sold for ... one dollar or one mark) became subject for investigation of the Baltic Prosecution Office in Transport. However instead of being made responsible for the deeds he committed, Synelnik was upgraded. And appointed to the position of the Chairman of Russian State Committee on Fisheries. And there he expanded his affairs further. Thus he gave an instruction to move away Russian fishing vessels from the Norwegian Sea waters and handed over quotas for harvesting there to Portuguese businessmen with criminal past Mr. Manuel Catarino. Or later he appointed as his deputy the citizen of Japan Mr. Kham who was authorized to supervise fisheries in the Sea of Okhotsk and the Sea of Japan - and as a result the total figures for fish and seafood smuggled to the Country of the Raising Sun raised up to record totals of US$ 700 million with the official sales equal only to US$ 200.000.000.
...The last decision, that was kind of “last drop" on the patience of fishermen was the introduction of “Olympic system” of Herring fishing in the exclusive economic zone of Norway.
This decision by Synelnik, that allowed catching whatever fish and seafood without any limitations and in whatever amounts led to the total losses of the Northern basin fleet equal to dozens of millions of US dollars (“Kaliningradskiye Noviye Kolesa” Newspaper, Novebmer 2005).
"... let us consider the new system of quota sharing for the harvests of fish and seafood that was developed and introduced this year by the officials of the State Fisheries Committee led by Synelnik. All the harvest as a result turned to be in the nets of foreign fishing companies. For example the long-time partner of Synelnik, Portuguese businessman Manuel Catarino, bought in one go all the Cod fishing quotas that Russia can harvest annually according to bilateral agreement with Norway. Catarino earned 1 million 600 thousand US dollars with this deal only. But that was just a start. Some time later these Portuguese citizen was appointed to manage the finances of Murmansk State Enterprise "Sevrybpromrazvedka” [Northern Fisheries Commercial Expedition], where the former class-mate of Synelnik, Rykhlov, was simultaneously appointed as Director. Norwegian fishing company "Dravik Trading” that was under the court investigation in Norway was selected as the partner of “Sevrybpromrazvedka" ( Novaya Gazeta newspaper, October 2000)
“Redistribution of quotas and fishing vessels towards the structures that were loyal to new leaders of the State Committee on Fisheries was in progress.
For example already rather gray story with redistribution of “blue trawlers" and their transfer from “Super” to “Dalmoreproduct” suddenly continued. According to the order from Moscow 14 super-trawlers that belonged to “Dalmoreproduct-trawlers” (daughter company of the holding) suddenly lost their fishing permits. There is a chance that this most interesting piece of property will be again confiscated. Now – from “Dalmoreproduct”. It is said also that the reason for the Order ¹ 6 to appear was increased irritation in the Government with the continuous uncontrolled sales of fish and sea products to foreign buyers and active trading of fishing quotas" (“Tikhookeansky Bestnik” newspaper, February 2000).
In the final end Yu. Synelnik who was trying to avoid liability himself "traded” his deputy M.V.Dementiev, who was subject to investigation and sentenced for the “Crab Criminal Case”. And Synelnik himself, likely as the foreign intelligence officer, was left out of this whole case.
In May this year Meschansky Municipality Court of Moscow found the first deputy Chairman of Russian State Committee on Fisheries Mikhail Dementiev guilty and sentenced him to five years in jail. Surprisingly he alone was sentenced, while the senior assistant to the General Prosecutor of Russia Mrs. Tamara Pakhomenko issued the statement on the start of criminal investigations for the case which had a second person involved, - namely the Chairman of the Russian State Committee of Fisheries Mr. Yuri Synelnik. If we judge on the basis of this statement the second person is in fact No.1 criminal. It was Synelnik who gave the permit to harvest 150 tons of crab to a criminal “Fall” company – at the expense of the innocent Magadan region quotas and even prior to the Government Statement that was confirming annual TAC limits.
|
|
Mikhail Vladimirovich Dementiev
|
|
It was also Synelnik who issued the quota for harvest of (!) 3000 tons of crab to the "Sovrybflotvostok" Ltd. company that did not have any (!) vessel to harvest crabs. And the Orel transport expedition company does not have not only the vessels, - but even does not have access tp water bodies where it could harvest 10 thousand tons of Pollock and 300 tons of ÒÅÐÏÓÃ according to the quotas that they got from "generous" Synelnik. Quotas were not used, and the state only in this episode lost in total 841 thousand US dollars.
Ok, all clear with Synelnik, so what about Dementiev? He gave an order to reduce twice the crab harvest quotas of “Koryakakvaprom” Company and to have this half to “Pollux” Company. There is nothing else on Dementiev in the initial statement according to which criminal case was launched. However he is in jail, while Synelnik is enjoying freedom. Seems there is some intrigue in it".
In the office of Prosecutor General, in the Main Department Against Economic Crime in the Ministry of Interior, and in the State Investigations Committee of the Ministry of Interior I was told that in the middle of investigation process when Synelnik was addressed rather hard with the obvious facts on his misdeeds while in charge of the Fisheries Agency he suddenly declared that he is not a real minister but that this position was used as a cover for him as the acting officer of foreign intelligence service. Prosecutors, investigators and other officers got shocked. It was for the first time in their practice that the intelligence officer was put in the top state position without leaving his former KGB employer and without taking off the KGB epaulets! Besides, federal laws “On foreign intelligence service” and “On the State Security” put a complete ban on such merge of roles.
Until the moment Synelnik declared his link to the intelligence the group of criminal investigators worked out about 70 volumes of criminal case file; these materials confirmed that the Head of State Fisheries Committee was involved in serious law violations and serious crime.
- I was ready to convict Synelnik to Article 286-1 (this is the Article Dementiev was sentenced to for 5 years - B.R.) - told the officer of Investigation Committee at the Russian Ministry of Interior, Colonel of Justice Mrs. Olga Vorob’yeva. - There were many documented proofs for the episodes of acting against the lat in the whole file of Synelnik, and there is no doubt that they could have led to the court decisions.
Synelnik was threatening the investigation officer both on the phone and directly face to face, in presence of the other members of the investigation team. Saying that in few months the case will be closed anyway, and that the revenge will come to her... And that was finally the case. Early this year the whole case on Synelnik was ordered to be handed over to the Main Military Prosecution Office, - as the intelligence confirmed that Synelnik was part of them. Main Military Prosecution Office transferred all 70 files of this case to the Moscow City Military Prosecution Office, and there without any investigation followed, the case was closed... because there was no criminal substance in the case. ( Boris Reznik, “Mafia and the Sea”, “Izvestia” newspaper, 19 July 2002)
Later the card patience with “vices” will be played several times again: there was not any Top-1 leader of the fisheries industry who was accused on the basis of whatever investigations on fisheries mafia. They either were resigning, or changing the job.
That was also the case with the next Chairman, E.I.Nazdratenko: he was the main commander during the parade itself, but the shame of the criminal sentence fell on the gray head of his deputy, former leader of the Far-East fisheries state enterprise “Dalryba” Yu.I.Moskaltsov.
Sixth reform of the fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries
Chairman: Eugene Ivanovich Nazdratenko (2001-2003)
Chairman: Alexander Petrovich Moisseev (2003)
acting Chairman: Vladimir Igorevich Burkov (2003)
|
|
Eugene Ivanovich Nazdratenko
|
|
Mikhail Kasyanov in his time as Minister of Finance had the chance to realize the value of the fisheries agency (by the way it was him who participated in the “Affair of the Century” when the supertrawlers were built with the financial warranty of the national Government and the Russian fishing quotas); becoming the Prime-Minister he was eager to put his “own” person in charge. However the President V.Putin decided differently and put in charge of the Fisheries Committee, as if upgrading, the rebellion Governor of Primorsky krai, - the former miner who led the region to real problems. And at the same time, in order to "limit the capacities of those who trade quotas” in the State Fisheries Committee the whole industry was put into a position of the milking cow - in order to get regular access to "cream and milk" of the fisheries industry that was subject for discussions when Yermakov's concept was criticized. Decision was taken not to give money to the industry, but to get money through the trade of resources. Therefore the most valuable quotas – those that bring most money in terms of currency for the most precious species of fish and sea products (including all the quotas for all species of crabs and substantial part of quotas on the Sea of Okhotsk Alaska Pollock) were put into auctions. This have the state budget 9 billion Roubles of net income and led to yet another redistribution of powers in fisheries - between Russian, that time already a minority, and foreign companies. These auctions took place independently from E.Nazdratenko State Fisheries Agency - and as a result he immediately started his fight for quotas “ownership” with the government of Mikhail Kasyanov, the Godfather – together with the head of economic development Mr. G.Gref – of the fish auctions. As a result he was finally upgraded again - to the position of the 8th deputy chairman of the Security Council on environment, where he also did not stay for long.
|
|
Alexander Petrovich Moisseyev
|
|
Mikhail Kasyanov knew well enough on all the “drawbacks” (i.e. the funding sources) of the State Fisheries Agency and their staff from a high-rank informer of his, who was the first deputy chairman to E.Nazdratenko. It turned out that Nazdratenko was even not inventing anything new, - all things in the Committee followed already established path. It means they were selling of what was left for them to distribute among the regions, and were stealing badly along.
“The main control department in the Administration of the President came to a conclusion during inspections made at State Committee on Fisheries, that the Committee systematically gave lower objectives for taxes and income generation from fish harvests to the state budget. According to the data from Presidents controllers in the first half of 2002 the budget got from the fisheries industry in total 9.7 billion Roubles of payments, which was already 40% more than the annual target. However for 2003 the agency again forecasted only 7.8 billion Roubles income, which was considered underestimated by the Main Controlling Department of the Presidents Administration.
...It can’t be excluded that also the time factor played kind of role in the attitude of Kremlin to the Head of State Fisheries Committee... He remained in the position for more than two years – that is the term that was guaranteed, the rumors said at the time of Nazdratenko appointment in 2001, by the President”. ( Gazeta.py newspaper, May 2003)
|
|
Yuri Ivanovich Moskaltsov
|
|
This article has only smallest portion of all negative information on the activity of E.I.Nazdratenko in his role as the Head of Russian State Committee on Fisheries; there he managed "to do" as much as all his predecessors altogether. And the man “to shoot the bullets at”, as we already said, was his deputy, Yury Ivanovich Moskaltsov. Again for the crab criminal case.
The former correspondent of “Izvestia”, by that time already the State Duma deputee and the member of Anti-Corruption Committee of Russia Boris Reznik had to devote a completely new cycle of articles, “Mafia and the Sea -2” (2003-2003) to E.I.Nazdratenko. He concluded that cycle with the following words addressed to the Russian President V.V.Putin:
“Vladimir Vladimirovich, let us first implement everything that was planned five years ago, - after the "Izvestia" publication "Mafia and the Sea". And once again I think that the start should be at ¹1 point: that the State Fisheries Committee has to be disbanded starting from the Chairman Eugene Nazdratenko. I would feel sad if in five years I will have to write again on mafia and the sea".
However also since that publication and after another staff reshuffling in the State Fisheries Committee almost nothing changed.
But this time there was a person of Mikhail Kasyanov appointed as the Chairman of State Fisheries Committee: the former first deputy Chairman A.P.Moisseyev. He had a wonderful CV - the colonel, in 1997 deputy head of the 7th technical operations enterprise of the State accommodation and exploitation department of the Russian Ministry of Defense; in 1998 the head of logistics in the Government of Russia, in 1998 to 2000 assistant on the state property issue to the first deputy Chairmen of Russia Mr. Yuri Maslyukov and Mr. Victor Khristenko; in 2000 – deputy head of the secretariat of the first Prime-Minister of the Government of Russia Mikhail Kasyanov. Later when Kasyanov became the Prime-Minister he became his assistant. On 18th January 2001 he was appointed by the government statement as the first deputy chairman of the State Committee on Fisheries, and later was made acting Chairman of the Russian State Committee on Fisheries. And then there was a pause as Eugene Nazdratenko was appointed. From February to April 2003 he was again the acting Chairman, then since 30 April till December 2003 – the Chairman of the State Committee on Fisheries, and currently just the cultural issues coordinator in the administration of Novgorod region in the rank of deputy Governor).
|
|
Vladimir Igorevich Burkov
|
|
Memories of this person in charge of the State Committee of Fisheries are short and rather uncertain. According to one version he repeated in substence – what else could he invent himself – the presentation that was some time ago prepared for N.Yermakov. The one on the needs of radical changes in the fisheries industry and on the need to support it financially. And as a result he followed the path of Nikolai Alexandrovich: resignation. But possibly that similar to N.Yermakov there were some other reasons; it's not just by chance that his direct boss, the Prime-Minister of Russia that time had the nickname of “Misha two percents".
“It might be possible that we have a new epoch in the history of fisheries, as during the entire meeting of the Ministerial meeting there was not any word said against the Ministry of economic development and the auctions they organized to distribute the quotas for harvests of biological resources. Though the discussions went indeed on the quotas. This time the attention of the State Fisheries Committee was to those quotas that are allocated to the foreign fishermen. It happens that foreigners do not use them well. For example during 5 months of this year the Japanese used in the Far Eastern basin only one tenth of the allocated quotas, the Koreans used 7.6%, and the Chinese did not start fishing activities at all. At the same time many participants expressed their distrust to the figures of official statistics based on the daily reports of the foreign ships that are doing the harvesting, but also based on the reports of the Federal border guards service vessels. Anyway these were the official figures, an the other were not available.
... As reviewed by the State Accounting Chamber, the Russian State Committee of Fisheries implemented the state budget objectives for only 44 percent. The Committee owed 1.5 bullion Roubles to the state budget, while it had only 657 million equivalent contracts signed with foreign fisheries enterprises. At the same time these quotas could have been used also by the national fishermen; then not only with tax income benefits, but also with local employment opportunities.
... By the way during the Government meeting it was discovered that the state of payments with the foreigners for the quotas already issued was far from being good, and it largely took place because of the legal illiteracy of the Russian governmental officials. Bankruptcy of several foreign fishermen led to a total formation of debt equal to several billion dollars. Payments often took place without any contract with foreign fishermen, - and this made the situation even worse as some of those who got the quotas were not the good buyers. It was strange to hear that time from the head of “NatsRybResource” [National Fish Resource] State Enterprise Mr. Andrei Tarasenko that (!) the state guarantees presented by a Japanese Fishing Association were not, as it turns out now, at all valid.
“Here we have to find the lawyers, some legal men, capable in the international law, those who have some practice in these areas”, - wisely said Alexander Moisseyev. And though it is not possible to argue with the wise part of this, it is still surprising that this has not yet been done. Taking into account that the State Fisheries Committee is responsible for dozens of millions of the international contracts. ("Nezavisimaya Gazeta” newspaper, June 2003)
This means that the state officials just in the same way as it started with V.Korelsky were successfully trading fish, and the state, contrary to its officers, did not get any profit from THEIR trade.
|
|
Alexander Tugushev
|
|
This case could be a good example of emergency: deputy Head of State Fisheries Committee Mr. Alexander Tugushev was arrested and later sentenced for bribery and fraud. He has called for a bribe of more three million US dollars: requested from a company for allocation of quotas. Do you still remember the bribes of 200, 300, 500 Roubles and 2-3 thousand Roubles at the time of the USSR deputy minister of fisheries Vladimir I.Rytov who was shot-executed?
Fisheries industry of Russia was rapidly approaching its collapse. And the fishing quotas auctions just as yet another instrument to claim finances ruined the industry even further. For that only reason the fishermen and fisheries officials joined the efforts: each of them had own interests to defend. There were no state interests, - except direct payments to the budget, - that time in the fisheries industry, though the concept, adopted in 2003 and supported by the Government of Russia (“Concept for the Russian Fisheries Development until 2020") declared same stable ideas on the national food safety and the security of the national fishing market, priorities for the coastal fisheries development and increased fishing harvests. Just like it was before.
Keeping memories of the famous I.A.Krylov's metaphors on swan, crayfish and pike – all taking enormous efforts to move, but in different directions, - one can understand why it happens that nobody moved from declarations to deeds.
Seventh reform of the fisheries industry: Federal Agency on Fisheries in the Russian Ministry of Agriculture
Deputy Minister of Agriculture: Vladimir Abdurmanovich Izmailov
Director of the Fisheries Policy Department: Vladimir Fedorovich Korelsky
Head of the Federal Fisheries Agency: Stanislav Valentinovich Ilyasov (2004-2007)
|
|
Vladimir Abdurmanovich Izmailov
|
|
This time the industry got a real fighter. The champion in free style wrestling. He came to take some rest after the victories in Chechen Republic, after working for some time as the Head of the Chechen Republic Government, and later the chairman of the Federal Commission for restoration of social sphere and economics of the Chechen Republic.
This man, the Doctor of Technical Sciences, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, published a serious book called (in Russian), that was published in 2004 in the “Law and Safety” magazine; that was the memory this man left in the history of Russian national fisheries.
At the same time all the indicators of fisheries industry well-being confirmed that the situation remained as bad as usual.
|
|
Stanislav Valentinovich Ilyasov
|
|
Eighth reform of the fisheries industry: Russian State Committee on Fisheries
Andrei Anatoliyevich Krainy (2007)
Wrestling champion Stanislav Ilyasov was altered by the former military correspondent of “Komsomolskaya pravda” newspaper Andrei Krainy. He knew the subject as he was formerly the head of Kaliningrad marine fisheries port; until now he gives the best interviews on fisheries in all press and media of Russia.
With this man appointed people started talking on revival of Russian Fisheries Ministry; however decisions remained unclear because of the elections of the new country President.
Ninth reform of the fisheries industry: Federal Agency on Fisheries of the Russian State Ministry of Agriculture (May 2008)
Anyway nobody was appointed to the leading position, as it was all re-played again.
Tenth reform of the fisheries industry: Federal Agency on Fisheries at the Government of Russia
Chairman: Andrei Anatoliyevich Krainy (2008)
|
|
Andrei Anatoliyevich Krainy
|
|
Regulatory base is being established with the main aim to monopolize all the rights of the fisheries executive authorities for sole management of fisheries, for the conservation of aquatic biological resources, and for the rights to trade fish and seafood harvests at the stock exchange; this is combined with de-capitalization (nationalization) of the industry through designation of a number of state-owned fisheries corporations.
Means we again got what we were fighting against!
|
prev
back
top
