Features of realization of the “small privatizing” are in the republics of South Siberia

The main feature of privatization in the republics of Southern Siberia is unequal indicators for privatization. The Federal Privatization Programme set 1992 targets for privatization of State and municipal enterprises for the republics of the Russian Federation. Each region had its own privatization program. The smallest number of enterprises was privatized in Tuva. The main difficulties of organization in privatization in Tuva were the lack of effective demand and the weak organization of the process of reforming state property. On 28 December 1991, the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Tuva determined the objects of federal, regional and municipal ownership. The Parliament of Tuva did not have time to discuss and criticize the privatization project. Therefore, disputes about the ownership of enterprises in Tuva will begin much later, in 1997-1998, when the responsible persons for the development and implementation of sectoral privatization programs were appointed by enterprises (problem of «red directors»). For example, A. A. Rudolf, the Director General, was appointed a head of the private territorial production association of bakery and pasta enterprises. The first phase of privatization in the Republic of Tuva saw the most active privatization of public catering and transport services. To a lesser extent - the construction industry and light industry. The small percentage of privatized enterprises in retail trade - a distinctive feature of Tuvan privatization, is explained by the fact that most of the rural shops that were part of the network of consumer cooperatives were not subject to privatization. In the republic of Gorniy Altay the "small privatization" was the basic type of privatization process. The main form is the purchase of leased enterprises. The small volumes of the property allowed to conduct reformation in the compressed periods. On this stage the objects of folk education, culture, health protection, connection, energy were not privatized. An interesting fact is that in addition to the social and industrial infrastructure, at the first stage, enterprises selling wine and vodka products and trading bases should not have been privatized. Khakassia had the largest privatization volumes. There were such enterprises as Sayano-Shushenskaya hydro-electric station, Sayansk aluminum plant. Therefore, the value of «small privatization» was secondary. In the article the author emphasizes the fact that in Khakassia the management of Abakan sought to keep small business in its ownership, reducing the volume of «small privatization». At the end of the article the author gives an example of small privatization - the company «Slastena» in Abakan. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References