respecting the will of his family, because you know an embalmed body in a mausoleum is a godless tradition. What prevents us from burying the body of Vladimir Lenin? Well, I am confident that these are not the questions for the big press conference. These questions are very sensitive. As far as abortions are concerned, of course, we have to think about respecting religious convictions. They have to be protected, of course, on the one hand. On the other hand, we have to address the demographic issues, but we also have to think about the level of welfare of Russian families with children. We have to think about their future, and we also have to think about the right of women to make these decisions. This is a very sensitive matter we cannot address during the press conference.
Nor can we address the issue of pornographic websites. You know, there are some people who are not happy with the fact that YouTube is being slowed down. I think porn websites are visited all across the world. It's as easy as ordering, you know, a beefsteak on the internet. I think it's an issue not just for us, but also for everyone. What can our response be? You know, there can be bans and prohibitions, but you always have to come up with an alternative. We have to come up with something which is more interesting than a porn site so that you go for an alternative, because you know you've been to a porn site and now you have to go for something more interesting, more passionate, something that causes greater interest. But in Russia in particular, we shouldn't make any step that would drive a wedge in our society. This is what I think. But Ilya is correct. Of course, I like him and he told me that, and I listen to what he has to say. Let's move to the other sector. Now there's Kolesnikov. Yes, Andrei.
Good afternoon. Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper. Good afternoon, Mr. President. It's been almost three years since the beginning of the war. We've all changed profoundly. The war has changed each and every one of us. But what has changed inside you? Have you come to understand something about yourself? And another question, if you don't mind—maybe no one is going to ask that question, no one is asking it: Some time ago, Joe Biden, US President, pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who had been convicted for perjury in the course of buying weapons. Everyone has expressed their opinion on this subject, whereas you chose to keep mum. So, what do you think about that? Can you comment on it? You know, silence is good, that's what they say. Sometimes it's better not to say anything.
Thank you for the question. Incidentally, as for the pardon Joe Biden gave to his son, even though he had promised not to do that, you know, this is a very delicate subject. We've got examples in our country's history. We know this famous painting, Ivan the Terrible and His Son. We know about this painting. Maybe that's a legend or maybe it's not, as is probably what happened to Peter the Great's son, Alexei. What happened to him? Maybe it's a legend, maybe it's not. Or what happened to Stalin? This was not a legend, when Stalin refused to swap his son Yakov for the German Field Marshal Paulus. He said he would not swap a soldier for a field marshal. And back then, even surrendering into captivity was considered treason. And you know, the nation was on the verge of not a defeat, but a total annihilation, I would say, of the entire nation. So it was a matter of life and death, of survival of the nation. And the measures and policies taken to win were rigid, tough, and sometimes cruel. And given that sentiment that was supported by Stalin, he wasn't able to save his son. He said what he said, and he did what he did. And his son was executed in a concentration camp, and Field Marshal Paulus was used during the Nuremberg trial, and no one expected to see him when he entered the courtroom. With respect to Biden, you know, he's a politician. So whether you have more of a politician or a human always is an important question. It turned out that Biden had more of a human being. So I wouldn't condemn him for that.
And there was also part number one: whether you have changed over the past three years. You know, we all keep changing every day, every hour. All the visitors of this room, all the streamers, we are in a flux, and those two-something years have been a tribulation for everybody, for the entire country, and for myself. And we keep joking, despite that it has been a trial. And you know, I almost stopped laughing, and I now joke much less. And there is also one more circumstance: I started improving the skills that I have in the search of key points and issues, and my concentration capability to resolve them. In the opposite sector, I can see RBC news outlet. Will you pass the mic?
As a follow-up on the question, you said that you now laugh and smile less. Could we return to February 2022, would that have changed your mind?
Well, that is a hypothetical question. Had we had a chance to go back, looking with hindsight, knowing what is happening now, I would have thought, probably back in 2022, I would have thought that the decision made in early 2022 ought to have been taken before, earlier. This is number one. And number two, well, we ought to have started getting ready for those developments and the special military operation before. And those Crimean developments were kind of off-the-cuff, offhand, impromptu. And in 2022 also, we started because we could not tolerate that anymore and wait for the situation to deteriorate further. And the Kyiv authorities stated directly in so many words that they would not implement and fulfill the Minsk set of measures, and they claimed to obtain the WMD. And we figured out that we had been deceived with respect to the Minsk arrangements, and the massacre had lasted for eight years. And they just dropped it aside, and we saw that the military stationing of those territories began, and the annihilation of all things related to Russia began, and we could not carry on like that anymore. They compelled and forced us. Had we known in advance what would happen, we would have prepared in a systemic, real, serious way. This is what I would have thought. Dear friends, we've been working for more than four hours. We've exceeded the four-hour duration. Let's allow these colleagues. URA daughter, will you please stand up, lady? Pass the mic.
Thank you, Mr. President. Ksenia Lazareva, URA.RU news agency. You have mentioned some of the European leaders. So I would ask the following: in 2025, Russia will mark the 80th anniversary since the victory in the Great Patriotic War, and you start inviting international leaders. Well, if we recall, this year France celebrated the Normandy landing day, and they didn't invite us, and the Auschwitz liberation anniversary also was celebrated, you were not invited. But have you submitted invitations to the former anti-Hitler coalition representatives to attend this future forthcoming anniversary? Is it important for you to see the US, France, and Great Britain represented?
With regards to inviting us to events, we are not seeking anything like that. We are fine at home, and we should strengthen ourselves, and this is the branching policy of ours. And second, we will never forget the sacrifice suffered by our nation and brought to the altar of the victory. We will never forget that. And other countries naturally today are trying to pass that into oblivion. This is part of their anti-Russian campaigning, but this is up to them. We will be glad to see everybody wishing to attend this glorious red-letter anniversary. Well, I do sign some invitations, but it's principally the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry. My position is that we'll be open to anyone wishing to attend. We'll be glad to see everybody, including the anti-Hitler coalition members who back then contributed considerably to the victory over Nazi Germany—the United States and Great Britain with their Northern convoys. And there were very many feats and heroes there. And some of the veterans have survived to date, and the British sailors were heroes. And when they disembarked in France, in the north of France, the Americans also acted in heroic ways. But their casualties and their participation, their contribution is not comparable to ours. The Soviet Union lost 27 million, the United States 500,000 people only, the United Kingdom less than 400,000 people. In the First World War, they lost 1.5 million conversely. So the contribution had different weights, but their participation was important. And when I became president, we repaid everything, you know, the Lend-Lease debt also. The Americans recovered that from us in full, and we have repaid that despite so many years. But we appreciate the contribution of the allies, and we'll be glad to share the joy of victory with them. We have lots of questions still. Let's ask someone in the room. Please don't make that much noise, otherwise I will conclude. Yamal, Yamal, I can see Yamal wishing to take the floor.
Mr. President, good day. Yamal-Media. The Western countries have imposed more than 20, 40—well, I stopped counting—40,000 restrictions against us. But our progressive development in the Arctic is something that they have a grudge against, and they actually say that their goal is to do away with LNG projects in the Arctic. What do they fear so much? Why are they so much afraid? Will they be able to hinder our pace of development in the Arctic?
Well, they fear competition. Actually, this is why they use politics for unfair competition. Novatek is a well-known company that is not a global leader. Other companies and countries produce more LNG, but ours keeps growing, and they want to impede that growth. This is kind of unfair ways to restrain competitors, and this is bad for them. If they fight competition like this with non-economic means, they will lose their competitiveness one day. It may not happen tomorrow, but that will happen for sure if they continue in this vein. Have they been impeding us? Yes, they have. They have been putting handicaps on us. Will they be able to kill it off completely? No. They will do damage to us, but you know, we will find a way out supplying energy, given the fact that the demand for energy will keep growing in the global economy as it develops. This is the data of the global economic institutions and their opinion. So this product will enjoy demand in the global markets, and we will keep advancing our projects and increasing our share in the LNG market.
And with respect to pipeline gas supplies, Ukraine has declined to extend the transit contract. It was Ukraine, not us. You know, Ukraine declined to extend the gas transit contract despite the fact that they received 700 to 800 million per annum for gas transit. Now the question is what is to be done about that? But this is not our problem. Ukraine has cut off our gas supplies to European customers and consumers. They've been eating from the hands of the West because they are not self-sufficient. They can live and wage this war only with Western help. But at the same time, the Ukrainians create problems for the Westerners, cutting off gas supplies. This contract will cease to exist. Okay, we can live with that and Gazprom can live with that. And not long ago, our special services reported to me that sabotage actors were detained in Slovakia and maps were found on them with energy facilities and installations spotted on their maps. So I received information just yesterday, so I would ask via special channels to find out why so and what was happening, because they wanted to commit terrorist attacks in Europe. Because they've been fed, they live off the West, and now they start perpetrating terrorist attacks in Europe. But our option is to cooperate, and we will attain our goals. So space and BBC, I also see BBC. You will be able to attack us shortly. You keep attacking us, and we just defend ourselves.
Thank you. I represent Chinese television, but you look very much like the Chinese people of ours. I feel that, but I'm a Russian citizen despite the fact that I'm considered a foreign journalist. Let me start with a question from the state television of China, CGTN. Thanks to them, I'm employed. And the question is: the program is titled Outcomes of the Year, and in the course of that year, you kept saying that the Chinese peaceful and peace-building initiatives are—I don't remember the exact quote—that they're more workable and feasible than all other things by other intermediaries. If we cast everything aside, the West has exhausted the limit of trust, and Russia was deceived and duped by European leaders. But if we speak in specific, concrete terms, and if Mr. Trump and his aide Mr. Kellogg keep saying that one can put an end to this war even before the inauguration on the 20th of January, but actually we're not now saying about acceding to NATO or not, just cease the fire in an instant. Is that possible? Is Russia ready to make these important steps if the European partners and American partners would manage to persuade Kyiv? Because the entire world is tired of the Ukrainian crisis, and people in this country also want peace, and this would be a simple step. No one risks anything. Just in an instant, stop where things are. If someone fails to implement that or would not keep their word, this can resume. No one would lose anything, just put it at a halt.
And my second question, so it is a hybrid format: I live in Korolev in the suburbs of Moscow, so I'd like you to hear the biggest scientific town in Russia. Now at the Khrunichev Center, the National Space Center is being built, and the residents of the town of Korolev, a quarter million people, just are bewildered and they do not know whether we maintain this space capital status, because actually we need to have a special economic zone on the territory of the house-building plant, because we should reinstate Korolev as the historical space exploration capital of our country. And we need a third entrance to our city, because we have huge congestion—four hours we spend in those traffic jams—so we need a flyover and bridges. And we have some issues about democracy. I apologize, I'm just winding down and saying everything. So you're wearing two hats: that of a citizen and that of an international journalist. Third entry into Korolev, it is an active problem. You probably know that we need it. We cannot spend so much time in traffic jams, and I believe that the whole population of Korolev is applauding me right now. If you are able to resolve it, we will be just happy. I'm sorry for having taken so much time.
Well, your employer wouldn't thank you for the second part of your question. It's not what he sent you here for, but you got my message correctly: you should think about your home. Well, actually, we raised the issue of the entry into Korolev. I remember it. I know it from our previous debates on the development of Korolev as a space capital of Russia. In Moscow, we are already constructing an important center. It is important for the development of the space industry, but the town of Korolev is a recognized center of space industry. I'm not going to go into detail, but Korolev as a scientific town undoubtedly deserves its due attention. I'll necessarily raise this issue with my colleagues, with those who deal with aviation and with space. There are different plans. The idea of establishing special economic zones does have its justification and its reasons. I'm not going to pronounce the final judgment, but it is something we have to think about, and indeed we should think of using the potential of the city. You are absolutely right in this regard.
Now turning to the peace initiatives of the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Brazil, and the Republic of South Africa: Why do we find it important? It's because it is a sincere attempt to find a solution. From our point of view, this attempt is a balanced one, and it is not imposing anything on any of the parties, neither on Russia nor on Ukraine. And it has been done by neutral countries that don't interfere into the conflict like Western states do, that de facto fight against us with the hands of Ukrainians. So what they are proposing is something that we should think several times about, because they are a party to the conflict too. Well, about your proposal regarding the ceasefire: Well, you know what's happening on the ground is attrition of the military equipment, munitions, and most importantly, the troops on the part of Ukrainian armed forces. We see the attrition. That's what's happening really on the battlefield. Our army is advancing. The adversary cannot get a foothold and cannot entrench on the positions that it has left. They leave the areas, and even if they take over some areas, they cannot entrench in these regions. If we declare a ceasefire for a week, it will give our adversary the opportunity to entrench themselves, to receive munitions, which is very important, and something that is equally important from the point of view of training the troops.
Right now, they are simply recruiting people on the streets. They simply catch them like stray dogs. But stray dogs are at least put into special centers, and here they simply catch people in the streets and send them to the front line. That's what we see on the front line on the battlefield. They are not trained properly. It's not how soldiers were trained during the Soviet times. Even those who received trainings in the Western countries cannot be compared to those who had been trained in Soviet times, because they are prepared and trained by those who have never been on the battlefield. So how can they train others? So a long ceasefire, a relatively long ceasefire period, will give an adversary the time for training and retraining of personnel. In the battalions, they have 35% of the necessary troop numbers, so they'll receive time to re-equip their divisions. What we need is not a ceasefire. Instead, we need a lasting peace with guarantees for the Russian Federation. It is a complicated question how we can ensure these guarantees, but we could think about it.
As for short-term ceasefires, it was a proposal by the Prime Minister of Hungary, Mr. Orbán. That's what he said. I hope Viktor will not be angry with me if I reveal at least one part of our conversation. He said, 'What would it cost to you if you declare a ceasefire for at least a day or two? It could be a Christmas ceasefire. The adversary will not be able to accomplish anything within these two or three days.' And I said, 'Yes, probably you are right. But would you first talk to the Ukrainian side?' At least three times did we agree to similar actions when it came to navigation in the Black Sea, when it came to energy infrastructure, and so on and so forth. Erdoğan made proposals. Ask your president. He was a mediator, and as a mediator he made a proposal. I said I need time to think about it. Next day I called him and I said, 'Okay, we agree.' But the next day, the head of the Ukrainian regime said, 'No ceasefire, no talks.' I call Erdoğan later on, and he says, 'Well, those are our partners.' And now I asked Orbán. He suggested a Christmas ceasefire, and he also proposed a prisoner exchange. I didn't say no. I said, 'Well, we'll have to think about it in principle, but go and ask them.' He went and asked them. Next day, the head of the regime said there would be no ceasefire and no prisoners exchange. That's the answer to your question. We've been on air for more than four and a half hours. We are going to an end. Now, what to the BBC? They promised to attack us. Well, they do so without any promises. That's what they receive money for.
Exactly 25 years ago, Boris Yeltsin retired, resigned office, and he handed over the power to you, and he told you, 'Stay on guard.' 25 years later, would you say you have succeeded in it? Because from our part, we see significant losses during the so-called special military operation that you have declared. We see Ukraine soldiers in the Kursk region. You criticize the NATO expansion, but there is now a greater NATO presence at the Russian borderline, I mean Sweden and Finland. You have demographic and economic problems. What do you think, have you succeeded?
Yes, I believe I have. I believe we have moved away from the brink of an abyss, because what happened to Russia before that and after that was leading us to a complete and total loss of our sovereignty. And without sovereignty, Russia cannot exist as an independent state. I would like to draw attention to what you said about Yeltsin. It looked good. One patted him on his shoulder, one preferred not to notice when he drank a bit more than he should, and he was warmly received in all Western circles. But when he raised his voice to protect Yugoslavia, when he said that it contradicted international law and the UN Charter, as soon as he said that it was unacceptable in modern Europe to attack Belgrade, the capital of a European state, without any sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, immediately was he persecuted and immediately one started criticizing him. Don't you remember it? And I've done my utmost to make sure Russia is a sovereign and independent power that is capable of taking decisions in its interest, and not in the interest of those states that tapped on the shoulder in order to use it for their own purposes.
That's where I could stop my answer. I understand that you provided many arguments to substantiate your point of view. You mentioned inflation. Yes, we have inflation. We are going to fight against it, but we have good economic growth. We rank number four worldwide in terms of purchasing power parity. Please share it with your audience. We rank number one in Europe. We have left the UK behind, but we are ready to work with the UK if the UK wants to work with us. But if it's not the case, we can do without it. We can do without our former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition.
Mr. President, there are many questions from the Russian citizens, so I suggest that we move on to the blitz format. Do you have a personal dream?
Of course I do, but it is a personal dream. May I please keep it to myself?
A question from social networks. Alexandra Okulova asks, 'Are you a happy person?'
Do you think it is a question for a blitz? Shall I say yes or no? Well, how can I put it, yes or no? It's a well-known fact that I was born in a regular working-class family. As for my forefathers, they used to cross the Dnieper River, and I have a document that says that one of my forefathers was awarded the St. George's Cross for that. Later, all of my relatives on my mother's side and on my father's side fought in the Great Patriotic War. Every second of them died. My father was invalided out of the Great Patriotic War. I used to serve in the Foreign Intelligence Service. So my work has always been connected to serving the motherland. The fact that the Russian citizens, the people, have entrusted me with leading the Russian state is a tremendous honor and tremendous responsibility. In essence, I could say I'm happy with that, and thank you.
However, I should be more God-fearing maybe, saying what else should you expect, what more can you wish? However, the happiness will not be complete until all of our guys return from the front line, until they meet their mothers and wives, until their children hug them, until our young people, girls and boys, create the necessary number of families necessary for Russia and have children. I really want our scientists and cultural figures and so on, I hope they can fulfill themselves, and then I can say that I'm happy.
There was a question from St. Petersburg: why are you being called different names by the foreigners and you don't respond?
It depends on the level of class. As I said before, they call names due to their impotence. Why should we show our impotence when we have enough arguments to clearly present our position?
An SMS from Stavropol region: do you have a task that you hate?
No. If people have trusted me enough to perform the function of the president of the country, there are certain responsibilities. So I approach it in the way that I must perform them in full, giving it my all. But I know if I start hating something or not loving something that's part of my duties, then I will not achieve the necessary result. Therefore, I have created a mentality for myself that I need to do everything with pleasure.
Novgorod region: whose portrait do you have in your office?
I don't have a portrait. I have an icon in one of my working offices. In another one, I have a bust sculpture of Lomonosov.
Would you give political refuge to Zelensky, because he will need it very soon?
I don't think he will need it. It is quite possible—well, I don't know how he will act, but quite possible, just like some people from the supreme leadership of Ukraine, they have traveled abroad and quite possibly he will do so. People whose interest he's serving right now will take care of him. But if he appeared out of somewhere, you know, like a jack-in-the-box, well, Russia does not refuse anyone.
The question from Tatiana Kostina: what is Russia for you?
This is a comprehensive question. Russia is a map, just like any country. It's a tremendous territory. It's not only territory; this is history, culture, our customs and traditions. All of it is Russia. However, the most important thing is people. You know, sometimes I find myself—well, I don't often watch TV, I don't have quite enough time, I'm not on the internet a lot—but when I look at the successes and achievements of our people... There was a world swimming championship. I saw guys walking out, huge guys, very confident, performing, world champions, and beautiful girls. I was looking at boys and girls who are achieving great success at the Olympic Games. I'm looking at my young scientists whom I met quite recently. Honestly, I look at that and I'm so happy about it. I rejoice at that as if they were my family members and rejoice as if they're my loved ones. Therefore, I'm looking at Russia as a family.
We've been working more than four and a half hours. We have answered many questions, millions of viewers. We have many questions ahead of us. Is there anything that you would like to tell to the citizens of our country?
I talked right now about that I treat Russia as my family. Therefore, this is what I wanted to say: we're talking on the eve of festive holidays, New Year and Christmas. I speak to many representatives of different religions, and they're saying that we all celebrate Christmas just like our neighbors celebrate Eid al-Adha, Pesach, and so on. You know, when I meet with representatives of different religions, I ask them, when you talk to people, just a regular conversation, what do people tell you? What do they regret? It's naturally the secret of confession. But you know what people regret? They did not spend enough time with children or did not dedicate enough attention to children. On the eve of the New Year, which is a family holiday, and especially Christmas, I would like to wish everyone to dedicate more attention to your loved ones. I wish to all of you success, well-being, and health. Thank you.
Before we start asking the questions from the people and the mass media, just a general question on my part to begin with: we think, we feel that the world has either gone crazy or is going mad. The conflict potential is soaring. The global economy is in a difficult, dire situation. How is Russia managing to keep afloat and keep growing?
You know, when everything is calm and tranquil and stable, we're bored. It's stagnation; we want some commotion. As soon as some commotion starts and we see bullets whistling and time flying rapidly, we get scared to our wits. It's horrible, let's say a great deal of horror. But you know, it's actually all about the economy. And we start with the economy despite your provocative question. The economy underlies everything. It's the main foundation prescribing and determining the living standards of our people and the stability and the defensive capability. Everything is based on the economy, and the economic situation in this country by and large is normal, is stable. We keep advancing against odds despite external threats and attempts to impact us.
Last year the economic growth was at 3.6% in annualized terms, and this year it's going to be at 3.9% or even 4%. We'll have to double check that because at the end of the year we will see some numbers and we will recap in the first quarter of 2025, and probably the level will even be 4%. And the growth of the economy was some 8% total because experts say—I've exchanged opinions in the morning—some of it is still virtual, but some 8% over two years. In the United States it was 5.6%, in the European Union it's 1%, the leading economy. In the European Union, Germany is zero growth, and it looks like they're going to have 0% next year as well. International economic and financial institutions are putting Russia as the number one economy—we're speaking about purchasing power parity—and number four economy in the world, and only China, the United States, and India are ahead of us. So we are ahead of Germany, and this year we have outrun Japan as well.
But this is not an indicator that we should get complacent about. Of course not. Everything is developing, everything is advancing. And while the European Union is slipping, there are other centers of global development, and they are making progress. And in Europe and in the United States, this situation is changing as well. So we should keep up this pace that we have gained to improve the quality of our economy. And there are other indicators that are satisfactory, to put it mildly. One of the serious indicators for all the countries in the world, for all the economies, is the unemployment rate, and it's record low in Russia: 2.3%. We have never had anything like this. That's one. And secondly, growth of individual industries: our industry growth is 4.4%, and the processing industry is 8.1%. And if we look into certain individual industries, the growth is even bigger.
Yes, of course, there is inflation that causes concern. And yesterday, when I was preparing for today's event, I spoke to the Central Bank governor, and Elvira told me that it's 9.3% or 9.2%. But wages grew by 9%, if we speak about real wages. I would like to emphasize this: if we do not take inflation into consideration, the population's income is also growing, and overall the situation is stable and reliable. We are faced with certain issues because the economy is overheating a little bit, and the government and the Central Bank are trying to bend this pace to make it slower. According to various estimates, next year we should have 2% or 2.5% to land it softly, to maintain macroeconomic indicators. That's what we are going for, striving for, and we will speak some more about this during today's conversation. But the situation is stable and reliable.
There is one clarifying question, if you allow. You cited Germany and Japan as an example. I would like to speak about Germany. You said the economic growth is at 0%, but it was previously a center of economic growth. Does it have to do with politics and sovereignty? Because recently at the Russia Calling Forum, you said that when you celebrated the Gerhard Schröder anniversary, all songs were sung in English and there were no German songs.
Yes, it was a long time ago. Mr. Schröder celebrated his anniversary, and he invited me and I attended. There was a small concert, and everyone sang songs in English. And I said even a choir of girls from Hanover presented songs in English. But there was one troupe that sang songs in German: it was the Kuban Cossack Choir. It was unexpected for me. I asked them how they learned this song, and they said, 'Out of respect to the Germans, out of respect to the host, we learned this song during our travel, and we presented it in German.' Later I was approached by many guests. I'm telling you how it was, and many people told me, 'We are ashamed. We are ashamed that only Russian Cossacks sang in German.' And I said it to my colleague who was present at that forum. I told him, 'Sovereignty is an important thing. It should be deep in your heart.'
And I believe in the postwar era, the German people no longer feel their sovereignty. They are proud of being Europeans, but above all they are French, German, Italian, Spanish, and only after that they are Europeans. But instead, they tried to polish things, and in the end, you see it impacting everything, including the economy. I mentioned the economic growth in our country, and largely it is the result of strengthening of our sovereignty that is projected on the economic situation. Many producers lost our market, while our industrialists started producing the same products. It necessitated various research, so we involved various institutions, including development institutions. And on the whole, it translated into the strengthening of our technological sovereignty. There might be different sovereignty in the fields of education, industry, military. It is important for our country, and for our country it is of particular importance because if we lose sovereignty, we lose our statehood. That's crucial. And strengthening sovereignty is also a result of economic growth.
Mr. President, now I suggest that we move on to questions from our citizens. You mentioned economic growth. Indeed, if we look at the economic figures, they look all right. Russian plants are working tight, but the payments are below inflation. We have made a rating of regions in which citizens asked most questions about price growth. It was in Kamchatka, in Sakhalin region, and in the most western region of our country, in Kaliningrad Oblast. And price growth was the relevant question in Yakutia. I will add some more figures. Our GigaChat provides us with some statistics. The most popular questions had to deal with price growth of bread, fish, and butter. They also ask about growing fuel prices, and those are just a few question categories that we have seen. According to Rosstat, the Russian statistics body, we see that fruit and vegetable prices have grown by 3.4% over the past week. In particular, cucumbers got 10% higher, and butter price grew by 43% over the past 10 months since November.
Those who are following our work via internet may know that when I spoke about economic growth, price growth, and high inflation rate, but apart from that, there is income growth and the growth of salaries. Well, we have a vast country, and some people might say, 'How can we speak about welfare growth?' But at the same time, some people would say that income was reduced. But I'm speaking about average figures. When we plan something, we have to base it on something, and we cannot base it on anything else but average figures. As the price grows, there are objective things and subjective things. Objective things are the following, and most crucially: the supply on the market should be in line with the purchasing power of the citizens, and it should be also in line with the volumes of produced products. But production growth was higher in our country than income growth.
Let me give you an example. Food production is growing constantly in our country. If we have some questions in agriculture, we may go into detail, but I'll tell you already now: plus 3% annually. In terms of meat production, we completely cover our demand. It is a good figure. But why is it so? Meat consumption per year is at about 80 kilos per person, while it is 42 kilos as an average in the world. It would seem that it is enough, but at the same time, meat consumption has doubled over recent times—doubled. As for milk, annually milk production is growing, but milk consumption is growing too. It is not enough in order to produce butter. And I know that the growth of butter prices amounts to 33–34% in some regions, and it might be even higher in other regions. Consumption has grown faster than production. There is a second objective reason, yes, and we have to change the situation in the industry.
There is another objective reason, that is growth of prices of certain products in the world, and there are sanctions and restrictions. They are not playing a decisive role, but they have their impact because they make logistics more expensive, and through objective reasons too. Like some experts believe that the Central Bank could be more effective and efficient, and it could have started using certain instruments not related to the growth of interest rate a bit earlier. Yes, the Central Bank started doing so in summer, but according to some experts, it should have been and could have been done a bit earlier. There are lots of reasons. I'm not going to list all of them and bore our audience with all these considerations related to various ways of regulations by the Central Bank.
As for the government, it is working efficiently. I'm quite satisfied with its performance, and it is doing a lot when it looks into the future. We always should look into the future, even in the hardest, in the most severe times of the Great Patriotic War. We know such examples; people were looking into the future, and it was the right thing to do, as it turned out later. That's what our government is doing: it sets out national development goals, national projects, and so on. That's great, but it would be not bad to work with the industries, to think about the development of certain industries and such products for which there is a broad demand. Probably there will be questions related to specific industries, and timely decisions have to be taken. It is an unpleasant thing to say, and it is bad—price rises are something bad—but I hope that on the whole, while preserving macroeconomic figures, we'll be able to tackle this as well.
Mr. President, we have a mixed format. Today is a direct line and press conference, and I suggest that we now give the floor, and we see that the audience is willing to ask questions.
Yes, indeed. Mr. Peskov, well, if we do what you propose, it will mean disrespect to the others. What's your name, please?
Alina Khasanova, 15th Region, North Ossetia. In today's realities, the human rights potential is a very important issue. In the North Caucasus, there are many educational institutions preparing military experts, particularly the North Caucasus Military Institute. It is a legendary institution. Seven alumni are Heroes of the Soviet Union; some of them are Heroes of Russia. They continue to perform military tasks of our country. Anatoly Kulikov is one of the alumni, and one of the most recent alumni is Sergei Khaidenov. He became a Hero of Russia during the special military operation. Is it possible to revive this military institution that is so relevant and so important not only in the North Caucasus, but in the whole of Russia?
Thank you, Alina, for this question. This is a very good question. Please don't be cross with Alina. Why? Because North Ossetia has always been at the forefront for Russia in this regard in the Caucasus. And throughout the times, it's proven to be useful in performing this high duty. And we know how the citizens of the republic treat their motherland and their homeland. They have always defended the motherland. They have always performed this function nobly and with great success. You spoke about the decrease of the number of military vocational institutions. It's not about just closing it down in Ossetia. It's a thing that the network for military colleges in general, as the military specialists and the Defense Ministry thought, was out of proportion. There was no need for such a number of specialists for such an army as the Russian army as it used to be. Now we are increasing the army in numbers, as well as a number of other institutions, up to 1.5 million people. I cannot say that we will do that tomorrow, but we will work on it. That I can promise. Thank you.
Working with the audience. Let's go back to the center. TASS, please, you have the floor. The mic, please, to the center.
Thank you. Mikhail Petrov, TASS Editor-in-Chief. Before asking the question, Mr. President, I would like to thank you. This year, TASS is celebrating 120 years. We're the oldest information agency of the country. This year in August, you signed a decree to award the Order of Honorable Labor to our institution, and I would like to thank you for this. This is a high evaluation of our work. Thank you. As for the question, I think it concerns everyone today. I guess during the Great Patriotic War, TASS was relaying information from the front. I think it happened the same way as our guys are now working in the special military operation zone; they're also worried about that. What is your take on the course of the special military operation that's been going on for three years now? Is the victory any closer now?
Naturally, I've expected such questions. There are many of them as for the incoming questions that were coming in the past days. And moreover, I would like to thank you for this, and it gives us a chance to show what we are doing there, what's happening, and what our guys are doing at the line of engagement. You know, the servicemen whom I talk to regularly, they're giving some souvenirs to me. They're giving me their shoulder patches and so on, sometimes weapons as a souvenir. And quite recently, the servicemen of the 155th Marine Brigade gave me a copy of the military flag, a banner. And I would like to ask, can we ask someone to help? Could you please come up here? Yes, please. And someone on this side as well. So I have a request for you. Please stand over there, and you over here, and please unfold the banner the other way around. The Marines of the Pacific Fleet. I took it with me for a reason. Number one, I wanted to thank the guys for this gift. Second, let's think that this 155th Marine Brigade represents all military banners of our guys fighting right now for Russia, for the motherland, throughout the line of engagement. I have to say that the situation is changing drastically. You know it very well. I just wanted to confirm that we see movement all along the front line every day, and as I have already said, it's not about moving 100 or 200 or 300 meters ahead.
Our military men are regaining the territory by square kilometers every day. That's what I wanted to highlight. Why is it happening? First and foremost, throughout the last year—and this is a classic scenario of military warfare—first, the enemy is going at you, he's being defeated, he incurs losses in personnel and equipment, and then we start moving forward. That's what's happening. Warfare is complicated. Therefore, it's hard to think ahead and to foretell the future. But we are moving forward. And as I said, we're getting closer to solving our primary tasks that we have outlined at the beginning of this special military operation.
As for our men and women in uniform, and I will continue repeating that because I have every reason to say that, they're acting as heroes. The capacity of our armed forces is increasing. Right now we see the banner of the 155th Brigade. It's fighting in the Kursk region. It's pushing the enemy away from our territory. They're not alone: the 810th Pacific Fleet Brigade, the 76th and 106th Divisions of paratroopers, the shooting regiment of the North Caucasus, the motorized brigade. Everyone is working there as heroes right now. They're fighting, and let's wish all of them—everyone who is fighting in the Kursk region, all along the line of engagement—we wish them good luck, victory, and for them to return home safely.
Mr. President, I just came back from the Kursk region. Those units and brigades that you've mentioned right now are doing their sacred duty, freeing our territory. We've worked with them for several weeks at the front line. We shot a video: the 155th Brigade liberated several settlements, and we showed in our video that when the adversary has been pushed out of the settlement, he starts to shell that very settlement with artillery fire. We traveled to Borki, Snagost, and Lyubimovka, the liberated settlements. You can see that on the map. First, the houses have been intact, and now they're being destroyed, and people from the border regions have nowhere to return to. They have no homes. They're trying to rebuild their homes. But now, I suggest we call Tatiana Zibrova. She's forced to live in a temporary settlement. Do you hear us? Tatiana, your question to the President, please.
Mr. President, good afternoon. I'm from the Kursk region, from Bolshesoldatsky District. I have a question from all citizens of the Kursk region. When will our region be liberated, when will the Ukrainian army be pushed far enough so they wouldn't even dare show their face to us, even look towards us? When can we go back to our houses or somewhere so we can live in our own homes? One more question: will small villages that have been destroyed be rebuilt, will the infrastructure be rebuilt there? And now the question from Bolshesoldatsky municipality: will our citizens be put on the list for housing certificates, because they are not issued to us right now because the Ukrainian army did not go there, so we're not listed as qualifying for the housing certificate?
Madam Zibrova, no question here. I don't even want to name the specific date when the adversary will be pushed out. Right now, at this very minute, the fight is ongoing. The fighting is quite serious. It makes no military sense to enter the Kursk region—by, I mean, the Ukrainian armed forces—or to keep on staying there, sending their best storm brigades and units as cannon fodder. Still, this is happening. It is for sure that we'll get rid of them.
But as for the specific date, I cannot name you the specific date. There are certain plans, so I know the date. It is reported to me regularly. But to say that by this very date—it would not be correct, because our servicemen can hear us right now. If I just name the date, in a day or two they will try to deliver on that without regard for their own lives. A day or two would not have a great significance, but it is for sure that the adversary will be pushed out of there. And number two, we'll evaluate the detriment. And number three, everything will be rebuilt. There is no shadow of a doubt about it. We will rebuild everything: the road network, communal infrastructure, socially oriented facilities, schools, kindergartens, social clubs, and naturally housing.
We'll provide certificates to rebuild housing. Those who want to move there, we'll help them out. Right now we have allocated already, I think, about 108 billion rubles. The first tranche has already been delivered. The administration will be working throughout all of the holidays. They'll be meeting with people and solving the questions, also regarding the housing certificates. There is nothing good about what's happening to you. People are suffering. They have losses and tremendous inconveniences, especially with children and so on. But we'll do everything. Please do not doubt, Madam Zibrova. We'll rebuild everything, and everyone who requires housing to be rebuilt will be covered. Everyone will receive everything that they're bound to receive. And I truly expect that the new head of the region who has been appointed to the Kursk region—he's an experienced person who knows how to work with people directly. That's why I appointed him there. He's been working for quite a while, knows how to work with voters, he's good at it, and I'm sure that it will happen. He will work individually, case by case.
Mr. President, our servicemen who right now are liberating the Kursk region do not have the status of a participant in the special military operation. Why? Because they're participants of the counterterrorism operation. It has an impact on the payments that they receive. We received several appeals, mainly by the wives of the servicemen: 'My husband is serving in an assault brigade in Kursk region, and he's taking fire. He received 42,000 rubles in November, though he is at the front line.' Some servicemen do not receive payments for three months already since they're in the counterterrorism zone, not in the special military operation zone. Yet another appeal: 'Kursk region servicemen receive 25,000 per month, not 210,000 rubles as promised by the Defense Ministry contract.' Can it be amended?
Yes, it can and it must be. This is my shortcoming. This is unexpected for me. I know what is said here. Our servicemen who used to fight at different parts of the front line, they are participants of the military action. And if they have been moved to the Kursk region, they're bound to receive them. I think I'll check it. Possibly there used to be a category that was not at the line of engagement, and then they landed in the Kursk region; possibly they were not certified as the category of participants in the special military operation. Honestly, I didn't even think about it.
So, my apologies. All of that is going to be corrected. It's a pity that the Defense Ministry overlooked that, because it's their responsibility. But we're going to sort this out, and everyone is going to get everything they're entitled to. And the military who are performing their duty at the line of engagement will get everything, and we will recalculate everything retroactively. There should be no doubt about that. Yes, I know personally military personnel who are waiting for that. I want them to hear me: rest assured, and your families rest assured, that everything is going to be recalculated. Everything that you're entitled to, everything you'll get.
Mr. President, you said that the armed forces of Ukraine are basically sending their brigades as cannon fodder to the Kursk region, and we can see that. We see so many bodies of their military they have abandoned, and there's a lot of NATO military equipment left there: Leopards, Abrams, and Bradleys. So basically, Kursk region serves as a concentration—like a graveyard, the biggest in the world for NATO military equipment.
That very well may be the case, because the amount of military equipment in Kursk region is almost the same as the military equipment of the armed forces of Ukraine that had been destroyed over all of the last year in the territory of Ukraine.
So I would also like to ask you whether they will get rewards for the military equipment that they have managed to destroy. Are there any problems with that?
Well, yes, the situation is grave. Yes, I know that the Defense Ministry is listening to this press conference. Everything is going to be done, and no one should have any doubt as to that.
Maybe we'll move to the room, to the audience?
Since we're talking about the military sphere, let's go to Zvezda TV channel.
Konstantin Khudoleev, Zvezda TV channel. I have to ask you about the statements we've been hearing from you over the last several weeks. You spoke about the first military test of Oreshnik. It seems as if it is a perfect weapon, even though in the West it's still dubbed as a modification of an old Soviet missile, saying that the air defense system can bring it down even at the moment of launch. Can you comment on that? And what about the sense behind the name of this Oreshnik? Because there are different theories as to why it received this name.
First, whether that is an old weapon or new weaponry: it's a cutting-edge type of weapon. Of course, anything that is being done anywhere is based upon previous achievements, and then we make a step forward. The same thing applies to Oreshnik. Yes, there were certain developments in the past, some of them dating back to recent Russian history, and based on that groundwork, our researchers and scientists have been thinking what else they can do. They talked to the client, namely the Defense Ministry, and it was even brought up to my level, and I weighed in on the final decision on whether this new missile has to be produced and in what volume. This is a new weapon, a short-range and intermediate-range missile.
You said that several experts in the West believe that it can be easily intercepted and destroyed, especially at the moment of launch. What can I say to these experts? The thing is, there are different types of air defense systems, because you should know that there are Patriot air defense systems, and there are also THAAD systems. I don't know whether they have those in Ukraine. Maybe if Americans want, they can supply those systems. Let them. It's similar to our S-400, whereas Patriot is more or less like S-300, and this new high-altitude air defense system is more or less like S-400. Let them do that, and we'll ask our guys in Ukraine to find some good solutions. Well, when I say our guys, I say that without irony, because there are those we can talk to in Ukraine, because there are many people in Ukraine who are dreaming of ridding their country of this neo-Nazi regime.
But the thing is, THAAD is basically an anti-missile system. And for many years before, we had been asking the Americans not to deploy those systems; otherwise, we would have to find systems that would allow us to penetrate those systems. You know, we had to come up with the Avangard system, which is kind of a cruise missile that follows the landscape without going too high. So basically, all of that is only leading to new expenses, especially for American taxpayers, without giving anything in return.
That said, this system has been developed and deployed. There are two positions: in Romania and in Poland. And there are 24 anti-missiles deployed there. I think they're called Standard 3. In Romania, it's the 1B modification with a 300 km range, and it can intercept missiles at 80 to 250 km of altitude. In Poland, there is a newer modification. It can intercept as far as 1,000 kilometers and at the altitude of up to 500 kilometers. Whereas Oreshnik is an intermediate-range missile, and it's 1,000 up to 5,500 km. That's the range of Oreshnik. Now, just imagine: our system is deployed 2,000 kilometers away. Even if the anti-missile is deployed in Poland, it's not going to be able to intercept. They say that the missile is very vulnerable at the launching stage, but they won't be able to intercept those missiles so far. Moreover, the launching sites are protected. Moreover, it takes time for the anti-missile to get to the missile, but it takes several seconds, and then it's too late to catch or to intercept it before the separation. So there is no chance that the missile is going to be brought down by the anti-missiles.
So if the experts in the West think so, well, let them come up with a proposal to us and to the US. They can suggest kind of a technological experiment, kind of a high-tech fighting duel of the 21st century. They can designate a target, say in Kyiv. They can concentrate all of their air defense and anti-missile defense there, and we will strike it with Oreshnik, and we'll see what's going to happen. We are willing to conduct such an experiment. What about the other side? Are they ready?
Well, we understand all of their anti-missile and anti-air defense systems are on high alert. They're ready. But what I've just told you is what I have learned from our engineers, from our scientists. And of course, the American political leadership also gets their information from their experts. So let's conduct this duel and look at the outcome. It's going to be interesting, because it's going to be useful both to us and to the American side.
Honestly, no idea. No clue.
Well, let's ask some questions from the audience.
Rossiyskaya Gazeta, maybe you'll ask something about...
Mr. President, you have recently signed the amendments to the nuclear doctrine. Do you think the signal has been received and understood in the West?
I don't know. You should ask them. I know what the amendments are. The doctrine is not new, but the amendments are somewhat new. I'll tell you about the key changes. We talk about the new emerging military threats that can turn into military threats, like the emergence of anti-missile systems and several other factors, and they're all named in the doctrine. We also speak about raising the responsibility of non-nuclear states that might participate in an aggression against the Russian Federation together with those countries that are in possession of nuclear weapons. And if these countries, just like their allies, create any threat to Russia's sovereignty or to the very existence of Russia, then we believe we have the right to use our nuclear weapons against them.
And there is another component which is also related to managing our military arsenal. The fourth thing: we've made an announcement that if similar threats are created to our allies, to the member of the Union State of Russia and Belarus—to Belarus, namely—then Russia is going to view that in the same light as creating similar threats to Russia. So we're going to do everything in our power to ensure Belarus's security. This is something we're doing in coordination with and with the consent of the President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko. I think this is a very important component of Russia's updated nuclear doctrine.
Another question from the audience.
Well, we have agreed not to shout out. Let's show some respect for one another.
Yes. But before that, let's give the floor to the lady who wants to ask about the Arctic, Daria Shutalova, Respublika newspaper.
Thank you for getting Rostislav Goldstein back to us, to our region. He started working right away. He's a very good leader.
Yes, he is very sensible, very reliable, and very consistent, and I hope that he's going to succeed. Thank you for sending him to us.
My question then: in the Russian High North, in the Russian Far East, in the Republic of Komi, there are many settlements with a population of under 2,000 citizens. But unfortunately, they're not entitled to this program of building cinemas. And we know that some people want to stay in these settlements, but unfortunately, there's not many opportunities for spending leisure time. Maybe some changes, some amendments could be made to the federal program so that the settlements of the Russian High North of under 2,000 people could still be entitled to this program? And I know that as a student, you worked somewhere in the North, and you know how efficient it is. But unfortunately, these student brigades could be used again. Maybe amendments could be made to Federal Law 44 so that when construction sites are organized based on municipal budgets, at least 15 or 20% of that could be carried out by students, because it provides students with very good experience and it's also a huge help for Russian regions. It helps building social facilities. 10% or 15%.
So yes, 10% of money allocated for construction could be funneled to that. Well, I'll talk to Marat Khusnullin. If that's possible, we are trying to revive this program. I think this very movement has been revived right now, and this funding mechanism could be used. It's already in use, but I'll check it, and I'll talk to Mr. Khusnullin.
Yes. Gyms and cinemas—yes, that's great.
You know, it's quite unexpected with respect to the Arctic zone. First of all, we have the preferential rate for mortgages at 2% as well. As well as in the Far East, the mortgage interest rate is at 2%. It's beneficial, and people have been using that. And for new territories, we also have this rate at 2% for mortgage lending. Besides, in that zone, we have an entire brand-new program for small towns, with 25 citizen towns participating. Well, if it's about numerically small settlements, they may not become part of that program of 25 cities, and we will try to figure out what we can do additionally for those small settlements in the Arctic zone, because most of them have few residents. But we actually assumed that broadband internet was the main need. But when it comes to movie theaters and movie halls, the atmosphere is different. And now we have lots of Russian patriotic, high-quality films and movies. Yes, it's a separate topic to cover. Many of the film manufacturers and producers have left us, which prompts us to boost our own cinema production and, given this rise in enthusiasm in society, now all our historical tales need to be promoted. I often watch those with my junior family members, and we'll try to respond to that positively.
Okay, dear friends, when you ask two questions in a row, you deprive some of your colleagues the opportunity to ask a question. Let's go that way. Let's move that way. Well, let's see. Krasnoyarsk, probably the city of Krasnoyarsk.
Good day, Yenisey TV channel of Krasnoyarsk. Mr. President, you have called Krasnoyarsk to be the center of Russia. Now we are getting ready...
I just apologize for interrupting. It wasn't me who called it. It's the geographic center of Russia.
Krasnoyarsk. And we're getting ready to mark our 400th anniversary in 2028, and using the opportunity, would like to invite you to visit the anniversary. But my question is: now RusHydro headquarters is moving to Krasnoyarsk at your behest, and probably it would be coherent to prompt other state-run and private companies to move to the region, which would give new tax revenues and opportunities. Do you contemplate and entertain such opportunities?
Well, first of all, I believe it is a proper way to do, and possibly some of the federal authorities should migrate to different regions. That would prompt and boost the development of our government. We are trying to concentrate all the judicial power in St. Petersburg, and that kind of separates the judicial branch of power from the presidential branch of power, making the former one more independent, and some of the functions of the capital city are transferred to St. Petersburg. And other big centers of our country, like Krasnoyarsk, also need more attention, having more revenue and companies paying taxes on site, and that would encourage the region's development.
You have mentioned RusHydro. Indeed, when I blessed the future CEO, I just asked him, 'Will you be ready to move to Krasnoyarsk?' 'Yes.' 'And your wife?' 'She would agree.' But that takes time. You know, one needs to move the manpower there, and people don't want to leave Moscow—not because they're lazy, but they are ingrained in Moscow with schools and kindergartens, and you need to train staff on the ground. RusHydro will still be moving, and we will prompt more big companies and governmental bodies to move to other parts of Russia. We have the biggest landmass in the world, and major manufacturing companies should be spread evenly across the country, as well as governmental bodies. But you know, there are some limitations, like the President and the government should be next to each other to interact properly. And thank you for the invitation to visit Krasnoyarsk.
Some of the businessmen suggested moving the capital to Krasnoyarsk, or Peter the Great wanted to move the capital to the south. He had two options: either St. Petersburg or a city in the south, in Taganrog. Originally, he wanted to install the empire's capital in Taganrog. I can see Andrei Rudenko, a military correspondent of ours from Donetsk. I can't but give the floor to him.
Mr. President, I've been around in Donbas since 2014, and I head State TV Company Donetsk. My question is quite serious: across Donbas, Kherson, and the Zaporizhzhia region, a great deal of reconstruction is in progress, but still war is waged, and there is a lot of fighting, and the enemy has been destroying our settlements. Will we have enough capabilities and funds to fully restore the historical lands that we have returned?
No doubt, without a doubt, we will have the necessary capabilities and resources. We have a huge program in place to restore these territories. This program is valid until 2030, and work is underway on a number of spheres, like the road network reconstruction, housing reconstruction and construction, public utilities reconstruction, cultural and social sites. Also with respect to roads: in three years, we plan to bring all the roads there to the national Russian standards. Please have a seat. And you know that this is ongoing, and there's an undertaking that is being implemented already. We are planning to build a circular ring road around the Azov Sea, which is now an inland sea of the Russian Federation, and it will be similar to the Tavrida trunk road in Crimea, of four lanes with all the advantages of such a high-speed road. The first segment has been built from Taganrog to Mariupol, a segment of 40 kilometers, a short one, but we actually plan a road around the Azov Sea. Another road connecting Mariupol and Donetsk, which is 197 km long, also is in the pipeline, and all the road network will be restored, and all the necessary funds have been envisaged.
Some of the welfare and social facilities have been put into operation. In Donetsk, a world-class perinatal center has been commissioned. In Mariupol, a medical center was opened. In the south, in the Zaporizhzhia region, a children's clinical hospital is planned—it was the behest of the local residents, and the government also supported that, and the design is already launched. So we have a lot of work planned till 2030. Now we have already reconstructed 21,000 facilities: 11,000 facilities were reconstructed with the help of federal funds, and 10,000 installations were done with the funding of patron regions from across the Russian Federation. I'd like to thank the leadership and the residents of those patron regions. We will construct 20,000 facilities more in the near future, and all that will be accomplished.
Mr. President, with respect to Lugansk People's Republic: during the rule of Ukraine, they never had good roads. Now they have perfect roads all across that republic, and people are wholeheartedly grateful.
These are the basic, most necessary things, and we'll do more. We'll go beyond that. And as regards the new regions, I'd like to address the residents and all other Russian nationals while we have the live broadcast, that these regions have a very good potential to unlock, and potential and prospective tax revenues might be huge. Lugansk region has seen a 97% growth in tax revenues collected. In Donbas, the growth is at 69%—I mean the revenue collection. In Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, the growth is measured by hundreds of percent. Although the base figures were much lower, still they have grown by 200% in each of the regions. So the tax base is good and solid, and they are restoring at a quick pace, and they are becoming self-sufficient. We definitely need to prop them up and back them and support them, and we will keep doing so. The entire country will do so until they are fully—not de jure, but de facto—economically and socially integrated.
You are now speaking about taxes. Is it about tax collection?
Yes, it's about tax collection in these regions. I might be a bit mistaken in figures, but with respect to Donetsk, the growth has been at 79%, in Lugansk they increased the tax revenues by 90-something percent, and in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions, the growth of tax revenue collection was around 200%. The base levels were lower, but still they are growing faster.
With respect to the new regions, lots of questions are coming from them, including on pension calculations and reckoning the labor track record. Work during the Ukrainian period is not taken into account, and they don't have the documents. Now a video address from a pensioner, Shapovalov.
I am Shapovalov Leonid Nikolaevich, a pensioner from Lyman. I have a labor track record of 45 years, and now I live in Donetsk with my daughter. Krasny Lyman is in hostilities, my house got burnt, and my labor track record register also got burnt. The only document I have is the certificate 5-OK. In July this year, I submitted it to the pension fund of the Kalininsky district of the Donetsk region. I still received no answer. Please help me sort it out.
Leonid Nikolaevich, these are actually day-to-day real problems of people. You need to confirm your job track record. But not long ago, a law was passed that all the time and employment years of work—a work record—will be taken into account. So the law is on your side, even if you have no documents at hand. Witnesses may come in handy, as well as decisions by regional commissions may be made. And I'd like to ask the authorities of the region to assist in resolving such questions, such issues, without any red tape. Not long ago, I talked with Mr. Pushilin, head of the People's Republic of Donetsk, and he told me how he received a delegation from Africa, and we were happy to receive our guests and friends, and he's going to go to Africa also, which is good.
We have to support the relations, but I would like to remind you that there is also Leonid Nikolaevich, whom you need to involve as well. I hope that intergovernmental commissions, inter-regional commissions, or inter-agency commissions will be operating efficiently. Again, there is now a federal law that was adopted a short time ago. There are lots of addresses about laws, documents. It's not only about pensions, also about education and rights to property. But as I already mentioned, these issues are governed by decisions of inter-agency commissions and so-called witness records. It's not about a judicial proceeding, but it's about obtaining authentic information from neighbors and so on.
Housing is another important issue, and there are lots of calls and questions from Mariupol from those who expected to receive housing as compensation. I'll quote some of them: 'Mariupol needs assistance for housing construction.' It was an SMS with such a text: 'New houses were constructed in spring, but we cannot move in until today.' And there are lots of similar questions.
Well, Mariupol is in the focus of our attention, and it is right. So, it is a big city. Before the beginning of hostilities, it officially had about 430,000 residents. According to local authorities, even more residents lived there—over 470,000 people. About 3,000 family houses and block houses were constructed. About 1,700 houses were destroyed, but the reconstruction is on the way. New houses are constructed, too. Those that cannot be reconstructed were demolished, and this land was given to the developers, to construction companies. And there is a mortgage program of 2% which can be applied to those new houses. So there is a construction boom of a sort in these territories. In Mariupol, for example, according to our estimates, about 300,000 people have returned to their homes, and the population is growing at a high ratio.
Roads, schools, social infrastructure are in the focus of our attention. There is a medical center that was constructed recently. We deal with educational institutions and will continue to do so in the future. But as for housing, I'll reiterate: there are houses that were handed over to developers, but citizens, the residents, have the right to receive housing at least close to the neighborhood they used to live in before. If a new block house was constructed by a developer in this neighborhood, the person should receive an apartment close to the neighborhood where he or she was living. There are about 5,000 unattended apartments in the houses, and they have to be redistributed among the citizens. Of course, some people are returning, but we have to regulate it and resolve these issues. But I can say for sure: all those who are entitled to compensation, all of them will receive it. If it's not the case, please appeal to regional authorities' centers for decision-making. They were established. If I'm not mistaken, it is located on Murata Street.
Mr. President, speaking of the southern region, I would like to mention the environmental situation after the crash of two tankers after a storm in the Kerch Strait. Oil products were leaked near Anapa, and it is now moving and migrating towards Gelendzhik. The situation is deteriorating. Employees of emergency services and common residents are now trying to provide assistance, and I invite you to watch this short video.
Anapa has never seen such a devastating environmental catastrophe before. About a 45-kilometer distance is affected. Birds are affected. There are new and new waves bringing oil products again and again. It all has affected the sand and the resorts of our region. We cannot improve the situation alone.
Mr. President, those are horrible footages from our resorts. I know you have already given instructions to mitigate the situation. What else can be done?
Well, it is an environmental disaster. It is obvious. Law enforcement agencies are dealing with the situation. According to the reports that I have received, captains of the vessels violated some rules as the weather conditions deteriorated. They should have anchored their vessels, but they didn't do so. But it is up to the Ministry of Transport and law enforcement agencies to look into this situation.
Next point: I don't know what's happening right now, but yesterday the storm was ongoing, and the working conditions were complicated. But apart from that, by Saturday, we expect the sea will calm down and we'll be able to proceed with the work. I said it is a great catastrophe because about 40% of the fuel leaked is obvious. Some tankers are close to the shore, some are a bit further away, and we have to deal with them. Different services, like the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Transport, and the Ministry of Emergency Situations, are involved. These works should be coordinated. I instructed the government to organize a working group. It is headed by Mr. Savelyev, Vice Premier in charge of transport issues, and all services are involved regularly. I receive reports with updates.
We have to look into the situation. We'll have to assess the condition of the tankers, and we'll have to think of what to do with them in the near future. The work has to be conducted in several stages. First, we have to localize the leaked fuel. At the next stage, we need to remove the fuel that we see on the shore. Yesterday or the day before yesterday, Governor Kondratyev told me he established a group of about 4,000 people. And according to him, no further efforts are needed, but if needed, they will be ready to deploy an additional team from the Ministry of Emergencies. The fuel, the heavy oil fuel, has certain properties under specific temperatures. It is solid material, and it should be removed from the shores as such. But parts of this material have sunk already, and when the temperatures rise, this fuel can surface up. So already now we have to be prepared for the temperature rise in the water, and already now we have to think about what we'll do in the future. We'll have to think of bringing the tankers up to the surface. We have to organize this work. It will take time and effort, and we'll have to devise a project for removing these tankers with the fuel. The government is involved, and I hope that we'll lose no time.
Let's take some questions from the audience.
Mr. President, if you don't mind, I see a US journalist. You have the floor, please. NBC, just in the middle of this sector.
Mr. President, you have failed to reach the objectives of your special military operation. Large numbers of Russians have died, including a general assassinated here in Moscow this week, and the leader of Syria whom you supported has been overthrown. Mr. President, when you face President-elect Trump, you will be the weaker leader. How do you propose to compromise? What are you going to offer?
I see. Please take your seat.
Well, frankly speaking, I haven't seen President Assad yet after he came to Moscow. But I plan to do so, and I will have a conversation with him. We are adults; we understand. Twelve years ago, a person went missing in Syria twelve years ago. We understand what situation was in place twelve years ago. Active hostilities were ongoing from both sides. Does President Assad himself know what happened to that US citizen, to the journalist who performed his journalist duties in the combat area? Nonetheless, I do promise that I will ask this question to him. We can ask the same question to those people who are controlling the situation on the ground in Syria today.
You asked what we can offer or I can offer to President-elect Trump when we meet. I do not know when we are going to meet because he does not speak about that. I haven't spoken to him for more than four years now. I am prepared for that conversation at any time. I will be prepared to hold a meeting as well if he so desires. You said that this conversation will take place where I'll be in a weakened state. Dear colleague—well, I'm saying dear and distinguished colleague because despite all persecutions of Russian media, you are allowed to work here freely. Isn't that good already to you and to the people who pay your salary in the United States? They would really like for Russia to be in a weakened state. I'm of a different opinion. I think that Russia became much stronger over the past two or three years. Why? Because we are becoming a truly sovereign country. We are largely independent of any country. We are prepared to stand our own in terms of economy. As for the economic growth rate, I have already spoken.
We're strengthening our defense capacity. Our combat readiness of the armed forces today—and I'm speaking very confidently here—is ranked the highest in the world. The same applies to our defense industry. We're increasing the production of everything that's necessary for the army and the fleet, both for today and for tomorrow. We're doing that very confidently, actively. The same cannot be said about our adversaries. We already spoke about the success of our armed forces. This happens largely due to the increase in production of the defense industry, the output of the defense industry of Russia. As I have said, we're doing that confidently and in a streamlined fashion. I spoke about the movement forward of our army at the line of engagement. How is this achieved? It is achieved by the presence of equipment that I have already mentioned.
Yes, indeed, almost all NATO countries are fighting against us. We spoke about our inflation rate, but what's happening over there? One shell of 155 mm used to cost a year ago about €2,000; now it costs €8,000. The price has increased fourfold. If the hostilities continue at the same tempo, not only 2% of the budget for defense, which was always done at the insistence of President-elect Trump, will be enough for NATO countries—even 3% won't be enough. The training, combat readiness, and morale of the Russian army is at such a point right now that is unparalleled by any army in the world. Therefore, I believe that to a great extent, Russia today is in such a state that we have been trying to achieve. It has become stronger. It has become a truly sovereign country, and we'll make decisions without taking anyone's opinion into account; we will follow only our national interests.
You mentioned Syria. Well, you and those who pay your salary would like to present everything that's happening in Syria as a shortcoming or a defeat of Russia. I'd like to assure you that is not so. And I'll tell you why. We came to Syria 10 years ago in order to prevent the creation of a terrorist enclave the likes of which we have seen in other countries, for example in Afghanistan. In general, we have achieved our goal. Even those groups that used to fight with the Assad regime, with governmental forces, they have evolved as well. It is for a reason that today many European countries and the United States would like to establish relations with them. If they are a terrorist organization, how come you're trying to do that? Then that means that they have changed. That means that to a certain extent our goal has been achieved.
We did not have ground troops in Syria. They simply were not there. We have two military bases there: an air base and a naval base. The ground operation consisted of the troops of Syria itself and, it's an open secret, of certain pro-Iranian paramilitary forces. We have withdrawn the troops of special operations forces from there. But what was happening at the time when the groups of armed opposition came close to Aleppo? Aleppo was defended by about 30,000 people. 350 fighters entered the city. The governmental troops, as well as so-called pro-Iranian units, left the city without fighting. They blew up their positions and just left. The same happened, with some exceptions—there were some hostilities there, but the same happened all around Syria. Previously, our Iranian friends used to ask us to provide transportation for their units in Syria. Now, they've asked to withdraw their units. We have transported out 4,000 Iranian fighters to Tehran from the Hmeimim base. A part of the so-called pro-Iranian units left without fighting to Lebanon, part of them to Iraq.
Today, the situation is quite complicated. If we're talking about Syria, we expect and hope that peace and calm will come there. We have established relations with all groups that control the situation on the ground and with all countries in the region, and the majority of them are telling us that they have an interest for our military bases in Syria to remain in place. We need to think about it, because we need to decide for ourselves: what will our relations be with those forces that are controlling the situation right now and who are going to control it in the future? Our interests should coincide. If we are to stay there, we must be doing something in the interest of the side who is ruling there. What would be such an interest? What could we do for them? This is a question that requires accurate and painstaking work. But even now, we can do something using these bases as well, and we have proposed that to our partners already—those partners who are on the territory of Syria and in the neighboring countries. We have proposed that we can use the air base of Hmeimim to deliver humanitarian aid to Syria. This was accepted with understanding and with a desire to organize this joint work. The same applies to the Tartus naval base.
Whoever would like to present Russia as weakened—and as you're an American, I would like to remind you of a well-known writer who said at a certain time, 'The rumors of my death are greatly exaggerated.' And if we hold a meeting at some time with President-elect Trump, I'm sure we'll have something to discuss.
One more question about the assassination of General Kirillov. Yes, the assassination of the general: you said an attempt at assassination, and I am thankful to you for this because you have acknowledged indirectly that this is a terrorist attack. Why? Because this is a murder committed by means that are dangerous to others. Kyiv has conducted such terrorist acts and crimes against many citizens of the Russian Federation right now in Kursk when they're shooting civilians—I mean the Kursk region—and in other regions, your colleagues were killed. Terrorist attacks against journalists were conducted as well. I don't mean you personally right now, but I mean Western journalists in general: we've never heard condemnations of such terrorist attacks. So I'm thankful to you right now that at the very least you have remembered that.
Let's work with the audience as well because we have tremendous interest. I see Tatarstan and BRICS, and I'm sorry...
I would like to address our American colleague. Do you hear me?
Do you have any other questions? If you have any, go ahead and ask them.
Are we going back to Kazan or not? If you would think about them, if you can formulate them, then we'll go back to you then, and we'll talk to Tatarstan, then to Americans.
Yes, sorry that I've missed this part of your question. This is a very important part of your question. Politics is the art of compromise, and we have always said that we're prepared for negotiations and compromises. But the other side, the adversary, has refused to hold negotiations. But we're always prepared for that. And the result of such negotiations is always a compromise. We have achieved an agreement in essence in Istanbul at...
the end of 2022. And I'm saying it for the hundredth time now: the Ukrainian side has initialed the document. That means that, in general, they were in agreement with it. But they banned it, they went back on their position. Well, it's clear why they did it, because your ally, Prime Minister Johnson—a person with great hair—traveled there and he said that they need to fight to the last Ukrainian. That's what they're doing now. They're running out of Ukrainians who would like to fight. I don't think there are any left. We are prepared. But the other side must be prepared as well to negotiate and to compromise.
Thank you. Going to Kazan. So we're done with the US. Let's talk to Tatarstan now.
Thank you for this possibility to ask questions. Tatarstan forum, BRICS after Kazan summit has reached an unparalleled level. It's hard for me to remember such a gathering in Moscow—dozens of heads of state, Narendra Modi, Xi Jinping, and so on. So, your expectations about sending off to the Western world order, have they been fulfilled fully? And a follow-up question: you responded to my question last year and you said that Tatarstan is a showcase of peaceful coexistence of nations, religions, and peoples. The same can be said about BRICS because this is a combination of very different countries. Hence the question: do you see an opportunity to create the headquarters of BRICS in Kazan, maybe of the Russian part or of the organization in general?
Arthur, you said that Moscow hasn't seen such a gathering of leaders of different countries. You're quite right. Yes, but they gathered in Kazan. So, thanks to Kazan for giving us such a platform. This is number one. Now, number two: as for headquarters, we were not planning to create any. Well, there are several tools that we're creating that are working in the interest of the whole organization. Naturally, we'll use all opportunities of the capital of Tatarstan that were created there over the past decades. Kazan made a tremendous quantum leap in their development. Without an exaggeration, this is one of the best cities of Europe. And I say that with great pleasure.
We're proud of Moscow; this is one of the largest and the best megapolises of the world. Kazan is also developing very fast and very successfully. We traveled with the leadership to the outskirts of Kazan, and people used to live in dugout houses; it was just a pit. But I have to say right now that it's all so clean and wonderful and nice and beautiful, and right now the city is all but transformed. It's a wonderful city. It has built a subway system. I spoke to the previous leader about that, and the new leader has taken up the baton, working very actively. Kazan is home to talented people. There are people of different ethnic groups, of different backgrounds, who live in peace and in accord with one another, having respect for the traditions of one another, visiting one another during religious festivities. You're doing a great job. I can only congratulate you on that.
But there is another thing I'd like to draw your attention to. You said that BRICS is developing as an instrument to counter the West, which is not the case. You are mistaken. It's not an instrument to counter the West. We're not working against anyone. We are working in favor of our interests and the interests of the organization's members. We're not trying to build any kind of adversarial narrative or agenda within the organization. The organization, however, is developing very rapidly. It's expanded, its membership has become bigger, and there is a great number of countries who are showing interest in developing BRICS as an organization, because our work within BRICS is based on respect for the interests of one another. All issues are decided by consensus, which is of the utmost importance. There are no small or big countries within BRICS, no countries that are more or less developed. This is an association that brings countries together who have only one interest: that is their national development. We are using the existing tools and creating new ones to achieve better economic growth, to reconfigure our economic structure, to make sure that BRICS is at the helm of this forward movement. And we'll do everything now to make sure that it stays so in future.
Let's give our colleagues within the audience a chance to ask their questions. I see a new media outlet. It's very popular even though it's unconventional. It's called Readovka. Maxim Dolgov, Readovka edition.
Mr. President, for many countries of the world, the issue of aging and depopulation is a burning issue. Russia has not been spared this fate. Many measures have been put into practice in order to boost our birth rates. Recently, you have signed into law the establishment of a council on family policy and on demographic policy. But what happens if these measures do not prove to be sufficient?
We'll enhance them. We'll improve on them. Please sit down. This is a question of utmost import, and it's a key issue not just for Russia, but for the rest of the world, because many countries across the world are facing the same problem as we are. During Soviet times, the birth rate stood at around 2%. The birth rate is basically the number of children per one woman. Sometime in the past, several years ago, we managed to reach 1.7% or so, but unfortunately right now it stands at 1.44%, which is very little. But unfortunately, many other countries are facing the same problem. Neighboring countries like Finland, I think it's even less. In Norway, it's the same. In Spain, the birth rate is even lower than that. And many other countries are facing birth rates lower than that. Even developed countries like Japan or South Korea have very low birth rates; it's 0.7% in South Korea. So, we are in a better position somewhat. But in order to make sure our population is replenished, we have to raise it to 2.1%. And in order to make sure that our population keeps growing, we have to secure a 2.3% birth rate.
I spoke at length about what had been happening in the previous decades. We had a trough during the Second World War, in '43–'44, and then after the collapse of the Soviet Union we had a similar plunge in birth rates. I'll spend two minutes to speak about that. When a small generation reaches the age of giving birth to children, it also gives birth to a smaller generation. And unfortunately, these trends in Russia have overlapped—the trough after the Second World War and then the plunge after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. So it's kind of a sine wave, and unfortunately we had a 30% drop of women who are capable of giving birth, who are in this age. And we need more girls, more women.
What are we doing to rectify this situation? We have put forth a whole program dedicated to this issue. We are improving the instruments, enhancing them all the time. Year in, year out, there are certain tweaks and changes. We have the allowance to families with children, which is an efficient instrument. We are paying this allowance starting from pregnancy and by the time the children reach the age of majority, that is 18 years. More than 10 million children are getting this allowance, and around 320,000 pregnant women. Secondly, we have a unique instrument we have come up with, which is unique in the world, that is the maternity capital, which we are always refunding and rebuilding. We're also keeping the instrument of family mortgage at 6%. We will talk about mortgage, I think, later; we'll talk about construction. But this family mortgage is a program we are keeping active. We are also paying 450,000 rubles to every family with a third child to make sure they are capable of paying back that mortgage. We're also improving healthcare and education that is related to maternity and to childhood, and we're also going to continue doing that.
I'll take this opportunity to address all the leaders of the Russian regions: this is where you should start in the morning and finish in the evening, because it's a challenge for many countries across the world, and for Russia in particular, because the population is the backbone of a country. Territory is good, but it has to be populated with citizens. Though I think we're doing a lot, apparently it's not sufficient, and we can say that we're doing some useful things, but we will only have succeeded once we have reached the objectives that I've just enumerated.
Actually, we're getting many messages from families with many children. There is this problem: there is this single allowance, but once the mean salary is superior to the minimum level established at the region, then they are not getting that allowance. And unfortunately, even if the discrepancy is very small, they're not getting the money. We are giving the floor to Anna from Surgut. She's got five children. Anna, over to you.
Hello, Mr. President. My name is Anna Alieva. I was born in Surgut. I live in Surgut in Khanty-Mansi Autonomous District. I've got five children. One of them has a disability. Starting from July 2023, I have been applying for an allowance every month, but I'm denied that allowance because my salary is a little more than the minimum wage—once it was 400 rubles. So when I get a pension for the child who has a disability, is that considered as part of my revenue? Why is it taken into account? You know, my spouse is getting an official salary, and when they take into account all of my revenue, they are calculating that based on our revenue before tax. But the thing is we're paying taxes, so we're getting less money than what they are calculating. And another problem: the thing is we have to go on vacation somewhere just as any other family. But just the day before yesterday, we looked at the tickets: one-way ticket costs 140,000 rubles or so per one person. So what can we do about that?
Anna, you've got five children, right? My congratulations. That's great. You're a happy person, that's for sure. And many people in our audience should congratulate you and should also emulate you and your family. Secondly, the thing is, when the income is calculated, they take into account everything based on your income the previous year, because, you know, I've just cited our figures for economic growth, but the thing is, this is just conjecture, so they can only do that based on your income the previous year. We could think about that. I'll ask Tatyana Golikova as well as our Ministry of Labor and Social Security.
But this is not the most important thing. The thing is, there are other reasons that might explain the problem that you are facing when your income is a little bit more than your minimum wage, and once there is this discrepancy, then you are not going to get the allowance. This is a very formal approach. We were thinking about how to avoid this similar situation, the one your family is facing, and we have a solution: we have to recalculate the income tax, and then we have to give at least a 7% tax rebate based on the tax your family has paid. I think this will be able to compensate the money you're not getting due to the fact that you're not entitled to the allowance. We'll have a look at that; we'll see how it works. The government believes that this will be able to give you back the money you are not getting normally due to the fact that they're denying you the allowance. This is a written decision; we are going to look at how it's being implemented.
Secondly, you spoke about travel and going on vacation. We know about the problem. I've spoken to the leaders and to the heads of the industry. You know, our aviation industry is very stable. Last year it was 105 million passengers. This year it's going to be 111 million passengers that have used air transport. So we are coming up with a solution: there are going to be benefits provided to families with many children. There has to be a 50% discount or so. But the thing is, air companies are giving their own benefits, but this is not a standard tariff, and it's just a little lower than the normal tariff, and they're kind of circumventing the rule. This practice needs to be stopped. I fully agree with you: a full discount has to be provided. So I would like to ask the government to resolve it before January the 14th next year. And as for this 7% tax rebate on income tax, this is a solution we're going to look into and see how it works. Thank you.
I think there's another follow-up question about demographics somewhere in the room. Yes, please. Where are you?
Grozny, Chechen Republic. Mr. President, you are talking about demographic growth, how important it is, and you are citing the example of the Chechen Republic. Yes, not just the Chechen Republic, but also the Republic of Tuva, because these two regions are very good in terms of demographics. Probably we should provide some special program to the regions that are most efficient in addressing the demographic challenge. And secondly, you adopted the three-stage strategy for a high-speed road last year. The third stage is Moscow–Adler, and many experts believe that if Grozny and Makhachkala are included into this road, then this direction is going to be more efficient. Thank you for the question.
Well, you have mentioned the fact that Chechnya is doing well with respect to demographics. It is true, both Chechnya and Tuva are doing well in this respect, two regions in the federation. Do we need to take any additional steps or measures? Shall we thank you, and the rest should take you as a role model? Probably with respect to regions that have lower birth rates that are below 1.41 factor, they need a special program to support birth rates. There are 35 such regions, and a separate program to the tune of 75 billion rubles for the next forthcoming years is planned.
And as regards the Moscow–Adler–Makhachkala high-speed road, we have several issues to resolve. We need to resolve the Black Sea passage and the entrance to Sochi, the exit to Sochi from that road, and eliminate the traffic congestion in the vicinity of Adler during the high tourist season. People spend hours in those traffic jams. First of all, they built an alternate near Sochi, and the existing road is a bottleneck, and then the two traffic flows merge in front of Adler, and we need to resolve this bottleneck, widen that bottleneck to avoid traffic jams. So, either there or on the spot next to Adler, Chechen construction companies will be working. As regards Grozny–Makhachkala, it is probably a proper thing to do, a good thing to do, a good idea. We'll think of it later, next stage.
Grozny main roads—you had a similar question. I just don't want to offend people. Chechen State TV and Radio Company, Grozny. Yes, this was part of our question. Thank you. But you gave an assessment to the city of Kazan while talking to my Tatar colleague and mentioned the BRICS summit, and you also visited Grozny. Is it a beautiful city, a wonderful, a marvelous city?
It is a contemporary Russian marvel. You know, I flew over Grozny in those hard, dire years of fight against international terrorism. It was in debris and with machine gun firing, and many people thought of moving the regional capital to Gudermes, but the first president and the incumbent president said no, because Grozny is the traditional capital for the Chechen people, and we will restore it. So the results since then are marvelous, and this is the merit of the incumbent president, and the entire Chechen people is credited also, their hardworking character. And look at the mosque—spectacular architectural edifices and form homes. We take pride—we cannot but take pride in what has been done in Chechnya and Grozny over the past years. Congratulations on that.
Thank you, Mr. President. I recall your words when you were at the mosque talking to the mufti, and you said that Islam and Orthodox Christianity, all the conventional faiths, have one single moral root. And let me ask a question about the Russian Special Forces University. It now has your name; it's named after the Commander-in-Chief. What is your take on that university, on that visit?
Well, I think it is very useful, very instrumental. And Russian Guard forces have been using that, and fighters from across the country are trained there, and some of the fighters that are now in the conflict zone from Chechnya and from many other regions, they were trained in that center, which plays a pivotal role in enhancing the defensive capability of the entire nation.
Okay. I can see our Chinese friends from Xinhua Agency wishing to ask a question.
Mr. President, good day. My name is Huang He. I represent Xinhua News Agency. So glad to ask a question today, to be able to ask a question. I have two questions. The first one: what is your take on the current state of the development of Chinese-Russian relations? Will you tell us about the main outcomes of the cooperation between our countries? And my second question: next year, China and Russia will mark the 80th anniversary of the victory in World War II and the 80th anniversary since the United Nations was founded. According to your opinion, what is the role of interaction and coordination between China and Russia in maintaining global strategic stability and international justice? Thank you very much.
Well, we speak a lot about the bilateral interaction of China and Russia. Next year will mark the 75th anniversary since diplomatic ties were established. Over the past years, a lot happened and we've gone through a lot together. And in recent decades, the level and the standards, the quality of our relations have reached an unprecedented level, never seen in our history before. I'll mention the economic component, but this is built on mutual trust and confidence. All that we do and the way we act is built upon full trust and confidence on both sides. We do nothing that would run counter to our interests, and we have been acting in the interests of the Chinese people and the Russian people.
And as regards economic interaction, well, we have 120 to 140 billion USD, according to Chinese statistics, of mutual trade, which is very good. Over the past year, despite the high base, we've still seen a moderate pace of growth of about 3%. And my second point is about investments: we have around 600 projects of mutual investments to the tune of $200 billion, which means that our future interaction is safeguarded. Another important component is cultural and humanitarian interaction. We hold dual years of culture and youth exchanges that are very important for specific cohorts of our population, and this is the foundation for economic and political interaction.
Also, our regional interaction is of significance. Heads of regions speak to one another, and Moutai and vodka is on the table. But you know, they know the happy medium; they don't overkill. So they have some personal chemistry—I mean the residents of the neighboring regions—and student and university exchanges also take place. Then, mentioning the Great Patriotic War, Russia and China were the countries that suffered most during the Second World War, but still gained a victory. The casualties were colossal: we lost 25 or 27 million people, and China lost even more, around 30 million people in casualties. The things that the Japanese militarists did on Chinese land were horrendous, and the Chinese people went through that ordeal. And we stood side by side then, and we stand side by side now, which is a most important factor of global stability.
Originally, the United Nations was established for the sake of stability, and the permanent Security Council members include Russia and China. We almost always coordinate our approaches on the international arena, and definitely this is a very important pillar of international affairs. So, we'll keep acting in this vein. Please convey my best wishes to the leader of the People's Republic of China, a person whom I believe to be my personal friend, President Xi.
Please, I call on everybody to ask no more than one question and be succinct. Kuban region in the central sector, please ask yours.
Good afternoon, Krasnodar region, The Lights of Kuban newspaper, Marina Smirnova. The question is as follows: nowadays, talks arise about the migration issue, ways to resolve it are entertained. The Krasnodar territory is a big region and cohesive one; still, we have the issue of migration. We have restrictions in place—only the construction sector allows patents. What is your take on these restrictions? We lack manpower, and what is the way out?
This is a very sensitive and acute issue not only for this country, but for Europe also, and even more acute for Europe. We lack manpower, yes, this is true. We have unemployment at 2.3%, which means it's almost nonexistent. Our businesses and ministries have been telling me that there's a shortage in the construction sector and manufacturing—it's hundreds of thousands of workers. This is a hard fact. What the way out might be, you ask? First, in order to reduce the number of labor migrants, one needs to enhance labor productivity using new technological solutions that do not require lots of low-skilled workers, and hence you should focus on high-tech sectors so there will be no need to bring in more low-skilled migrants.
Second, if it's still inevitable, we need to act together with our partners, like in Central Asian countries, in order to prepare people in those republics in advance. They should get to know the Russian language, learn the Russian language, Russian language studies centers should be established, and the prospective migrants should be knowledgeable of Russian legislation. Definitely, requirements for those already on our soil must be tightened. They should respect the environment they live and work in, and this is the responsibility of the law enforcement bodies. So there are two components here: the economic and the law enforcement ones, and they should merge; there should be synergy between them.
We had lots of debates about establishing a separate body or just leaving it as a division within the Interior Ministry, but I believe still that it should stay inside the Interior, and a powerful, heavy-duty center should be established that should be in constant touch with the economic agencies and ministries, and regions definitely, to resolve those issues and keep track of things. There's a great deal of regulation on the regional level, and that must be governed from a single center. Later on, as the situation matures and they acquire new competences in that center, a brand-new agency may be established in the future, but it should have the law enforcement component and the economic one.
Certain steps in this direction have already been taken. The State Duma has passed a law about the right not to accept children of migrants who don't speak the Russian language. Well, it's understandable: how can you possibly teach a child at school if he or she doesn't speak Russian? Then that child needs to receive Russian classes, and who is going to pay for that? So we need to make sure that the rights of those who come into our country are not infringed. We need to provide health services and social services, but it shouldn't become a burden for the local population, and the comfort of those people should not be affected and impacted. So the government should pay more attention to this problem. I've just mentioned how we are going to address it: first within the Ministry of Interior, and then, if the situation requires, we could think of establishing a separate body that would involve representatives of law enforcement agencies and economic bodies.
Mr. President, we have monitored the situation with migrants. It is indeed a very acute and complex question and issue, but we've received many questions from those who travel into our country, not only those who come to earn money, but in many cases Russian people who want to return to their homeland, receive a Russian passport, and become full-fledged citizens of the Russian Federation. We received such letters from Ukraine, from Belarus—there are many Russian people in those countries. We received equal questions from Germany. For example, Lev Zel, who left for Germany in 1990 and returned to Tarusa in 2006, had a similar question. He stayed for many years in Russia, but he cannot receive Russian citizenship. According to the explanations given to him, only trust in Putin can grant citizenship because we don't have sufficient legislation. Only after he wrote a letter to Vladimir Putin was he told what documents are required. So it looks like the situation is on its way to being resolved, but we would like to see a successful end to it.
Indeed, citizenship is granted by presidential decrees, but it is a formal act that has to be prepared on the local ground, on the local level. But you raised some issues that fall into the category of work with compatriots, that is, those people who feel themselves to be part of Russia. They speak the Russian language, they consider themselves to be part of our culture, part of the Russian world, and as a rule, they are highly qualified experts and professionals. And we are interested in attracting high-qualified experts to Russia. We have established a specialized program for those purposes. Probably it's not efficient yet; we have to improve those mechanisms.
You mentioned Ukrainians. I believe there are lots of Ukrainians living in Russia, maybe no less than in Ukraine, and it's not a joke. I'm talking about those people living in new territories, in Crimea—those are millions of people. And I believe we have as many Ukrainians living in Russia as are living in Ukraine. We can only welcome it; those are people of our culture, they are part of our people. Those mechanisms, as I've mentioned, need to be improved. There's no doubt about it. We are interested in seeing more highly qualified people come into our country, and those people who are the carriers of our traditional values. In order to make this work effective and efficient, we have to continue our efforts. And please give me the specifics of the person you've mentioned; we'll provide him assistance.
Right in the beginning, we said that we have artificial intelligence at our disposal, and it assisted us in choosing the most relevant questions. Housing is one of the most acute topics, and if you look on the monitor, you see that this topic ranks number one. Now we are going to show you a video question from young people from Krasnodar.
Mr. President, for three months, we haven't been able to receive a family mortgage. Either the banks are out of limits or they increase the initial payment from 20 to 50%. What's the future of family mortgage? Because right now it's very difficult to obtain it. And apart from family mortgage, it is almost impossible to receive an IT or usual mortgage. Banks run out of limits and they don't want to approve claims. And recently banks have introduced the combo mortgage program where they add their interest, and as a result the interest increases from 6 to 13%, so they simply don't want to provide mortgage loans under the family mortgage program. Thank you very much for raising this question.
Well, it's a shame. It's outrageous. It shouldn't be the case, and we've already discussed it with the government. I was promised, and I am going to check whether this promise has been fulfilled, that there would be no additional interest rates, because it is a subsidy from the government, and banks should be only interested in receiving their 6% from those who use the family mortgage loans. And the difference between the bank interest rate and those 6% is compensated by the government, or it should be compensated by the government. So there are no limits on the part of the government. So the difference settles down in the banks; it means a significant income for them. If they deny an application, it means that the government doesn't send a subsidy to the banks. I'm going to check on it. But we agreed there will be no limits. That's my first point.
The second point: as for the 3% family mortgage loans and as for the usual mortgage loans, the ratio is 3% for the rural mortgage loans and 3% for the family mortgage loans. Last year, we constructed 110 million square meters of new housing. It is a record since Soviet times. 50% were individual houses, and most of them were built in rural areas. People aged about 40 years take these mortgage loans, they move into rural areas, settle down there, they build families. And these mortgage loan programs should have no limits. Several billion rubles are allocated from the budget for these purposes, and it should be preserved. Same for IT experts' mortgage loans: it is at about 5 or 6%. It is a preferential rate, and it applies to not so many people. Some experts suggested that this program should be closed, but I think it doesn't make any sense, and I ask the government to provide the necessary subsidies. And it also applies to the Far East regions—yes, 2% for the Far East, 2% for the new regions.
Yes. And now I suggest that we move on to another acute topic, that is phone frauds. Every day we appeal to our audience on TV.
Yes, I mentioned 110 million square meters that were constructed last year. This year the figure will be at about 105 million square meters. That is equally a very good figure.
Yes. Phone fraud—how topical this problem is, we can see from the amount of money that was stolen from the citizens by criminals. Criminals pretend to be representatives of the Central Bank or Federal Security Service, and they move citizens to take loans or give their money to the criminals. I suggest to hear a video address from one of the victims.
Good afternoon, Mr. President. My name is Yelena. I'm a pensioner. Recently, I became a victim of criminals. They hacked my account at Gosuslugi, and now I have a great debt, and I simply cannot pay it off. How is it possible that banks approve such illegal loans while I receive a very small pension, and banks don't request any information, at the same time they approve such loans? They draw loans that are much greater than my monthly income. There are lots of pensioners who fell victim to criminals. Shouldn't we ask banks to better control the activities of their officers and better check the applications from pensioners?
Thank you. I can only agree with you, Yelena. You are quite right. There are no more comments to be made. Indeed, banks can issue loans very quickly, momentarily, but they must check the ability of a person to pay. And there is a regulation according to which, if more than 50% of a person's income should be paid to service the loan, in that case such loans are more expensive for the banks, and the pressure on the bank capital increases. There is a relevant regulation of the Central Bank.
But what's happening now is a source of great alarm, because the scale of these fraudulent activities is outrageous. Recently, at a Sberbank meeting, Mr. Gref, head of Sberbank, told me that in the whole banking system, from the territory of Ukraine alone, where these criminal fraudulent activities almost happen as part of a state policy—it is conducted under the supervision of the special forces of Ukraine—from Ukraine alone did the criminals deceive our people for 250 billion rubles. It is almost the scale of what Hitler's Germany did: they simply printed money and spread it in order to undermine the economy of the UK. Almost the same is now happening in Ukraine.
And of course, we have to supervise this situation. We should keep it in the focus of our attention. Loans of up to 50,000 rubles should and can be issued online, but starting from 50,000 and up to 200,000 rubles is a sum that requires special checks. People should be given more time to double-check their decision and approve it additionally. And when it comes to loans for more than 200,000 rubles, then people should be given extra time to double-check their intentions. We need relevant regulations by the Central Bank, and the banks need to be regulated—those banks who issue such loans that are uncovered.
And there is another problem which the governor of the Central Bank and the Ministry of Interior have reported to me: we find out that there are people who seem not to be involved in those criminal activities, but when people become victims, this money is first transferred to third-party accounts, and then criminals receive the money from those third-party accounts. And those third people seem not to be involved when they open their accounts in the banks. So there is a suggestion to increase not only control, but also the responsibility of those people who are in reality involved in these criminal activities. These intermediaries understand why the cards are opened in their name. So there is a proposal for criminal liability for such activities. I'm not saying that it is a solution, but still that's a possible avenue for moving forward.
Do you know anyone who suffered from telephone fraud?
No, I don't know such people personally. Though there are people I know who reported to me they used to get calls, and will get calls, I guess. Yes, possibly. But when they hear an unknown voice and any offers that end up with certain actions, they put down the telephone or disconnect the call. And I suggest that all citizens of the country do the same.
Mr. President, quite often such unknown voices call from call centers that are situated in Ukraine. We've noticed that after strikes against the energy infrastructure of Ukraine, the number of fraud calls decreases; simply, they're cut off from the power. Maybe we could put those phone centers as one of the priority targets?
No. Priority targets for us are military infrastructure and military-industrial complex facilities, also possibly decision-making centers. However, phone call centers—we are not to waste our munitions on that. We need to make the necessary decisions domestically through the necessary institutions at the Central Bank, at the Russian government, and in the Ministry of the Interior.
Mr. Peskov is looking nefariously at us now. Let's get back to the audience. You've mentioned Ukraine, and I see the banner 'The Other Ukraine'. Could you give the mic to them, please?
Mr. President, Galina Mirolyubova. I'm deputy head of the media resources of the international social movement 'The Other Ukraine'. We represent the interests of millions of Ukrainian citizens in Ukraine itself, unfortunately still under the control of the Kyiv regime, as well as in Russia and European countries. We have opened 55 branches of our organization. Our movement believes that the only way to save Ukrainians from the criminal, illegitimate regime of Zelensky, which has usurped the executive, legislative, and judiciary authorities, is to unite the two peoples, the Russian and the Ukrainian. What are the conditions for you to begin negotiations with Kyiv? If not with Zelensky, then with whom? One more important aspect: right now, Ukraine sees the persecution of the Orthodox Church; the Russian Orthodox Church is basically eliminated. What do you think about that? Do you think that the position of the Russian Orthodox Church has been undermined?
Yes, okay. Now, first and foremost, and please sit down, about the illegitimacy of the regime. I have already spoken on the topic. As I understand, the inspirer of this movement—is this an organization or 'The Other Ukraine'?
Okay, it's a movement inspired by Viktor Medvedchuk. Yes, we don't see each other, but I know that he also thinks why the regime is illegitimate. And I'll repeat myself once again: the constitution of Ukraine does not have an indication of the possibility of the extension of the mandate of the president even during martial law. There is just one authority, that is the representative council, that is the Rada, the parliament, and their mandate can be extended during martial law if necessary without elections. And I understand that you know it.
The thing is that governance in Ukraine is built around the president, who appoints downward executives and authorities, that is the leadership of all intelligence and army institutions. So if a president loses legitimacy, the same happens downwards. So whatever they do when they execute his orders, they become the accomplices in his illegitimate actions. That's the first thing.
Now as for the preconditions for negotiations, we don't have any. We're prepared to hold a dialogue without preconditions, however, on the basis of what we have already agreed upon—and I have said it a hundred times—what we have agreed on during the negotiation process in Istanbul at the end of 2022, also regarding the reality on the ground right now. We have presented the position of the Russian Federation that was presented also during the June statement at the Russian Foreign Ministry. I don't want to repeat myself; it all has already been presented.
If not with the head of the regime, if he's illegitimate, then with whom? You know, if someone runs through an election campaign and proves his legitimacy, we're prepared to talk to anyone, even with Zelensky. But right now, if Ukraine truly wants to go through a peace settlement, they are capable of doing that. They can organize this process in any way they want. But we can sign an agreement only with a legitimate person. The Rada and the chairman of the Rada are the only legitimate people, but they're completely under control of the head of the state. But it's a formal issue. They can organize it in any way they want. We need to sign this document only with a legitimate representative of a legitimate authority in Ukraine.
There was a question about the Russian Orthodox Church as well. You know what's happening with the Orthodox Church: that's unparalleled. This is a blatant violation, an outrageous violation of human rights, of the rights of believers. The church is being tortured. This is akin to being slaughtered. And everyone in the world prefers not to notice that. And I think that those who are doing that will get a boomerang effect from that. They're tearing the church apart. But they're not even atheists. Atheists are also people who believe something; they believe that there is no God, but this is their belief, their conviction. And these are not atheists; these are people without any beliefs, godless people.
They're ethnic Jews, but has anyone seen them in a synagogue? I don't think so. They're not Orthodox as well, because they are never present at a church. And for sure they don't follow Islam, because we don't see them at the mosque. These are people without kin or memory, with no roots. They don't cherish what we cherish and what the majority of the Ukrainian people cherish as well. They won't go to church; they will go to the beach. And I think it's their choice. And I think that at some point in time they'll remember this, and the people in Ukraine, the majority of people in Ukraine who have something to do with the Orthodox Church, will evaluate their actions.
Two or three questions to the audience. I cannot help but give the floor to Purga Radio, or Blizzard Radio.
Blizzard Radio, Chukotka region, Anastasia Lavrentieva. Thank you for this opportunity. I am looking at the screens and they're showing the relevance of topics for the regions, and I get confirmation that my question is truly relevant and concerns many citizens of my region. It's about the internet and communications. We in Chukotka have high-speed internet only at the capital of our region, just one city. Other citizens of the region do not have such benefits of the internet: no entertainment, no banking services, no Gosuslugi app. They're unavailable to the majority of the people of Chukotka. Could you please help us with bridging the digital gap, if possible? Thank you.
I don't think there is a lot to say about that because we have a high-speed internet development program and communications program, our satellite constellation and so on, especially a constellation that has to do with communications. It will be done for sure. This data is widely known. The rate of work that is being done on that, the necessary resources have been allocated. There will be no shortcomings here; we'll move according to the plan. And I hope truly that the far-away regions such as Chukotka will reap the full benefits of modern civilization. It is extremely important for such a country as ours, because more and more people are working remotely, they're receiving education remotely, and here high-speed internet is of utmost importance. We'll do that for sure, no doubt.
Alexander Gamov, the front row, one of the oldest Russian journalists.
Thank you very much. Komsomolskaya Pravda website and newspaper. I'm here with girls from Marina Putin team representatives. We haven't spoken about that, but I wanted to congratulate all of us and you, Mr. President. I think this is the 20th press conference, though colleagues are trying to correct me here in saying that it's the 21st press conference. This format is unparalleled in the world, and I hope we'll have even more editions of that to come.
My question is: contrary to skeptics' prognoses, the presidential program 'Time of Heroes' did not become just a single-use program, just a rubber-stamp program. What were your personal hopes for this program? Were they fulfilled? What kind of expectations do you have now? And just a last-moment question: why don't we cherish and protect our heroes enough? I mean not only the death of General Kirillov—he was mentioned as an aside today—but there were plenty of cases when our participants of the special military operation were offended, or later law enforcement interfered, but there were many cases.
Now more to the 'Time of Heroes' program. I represent the heroic newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda during the Great Patriotic War. This was a newspaper with frontline correspondents, and right now since 2014 we have been producing a newspaper in Donetsk and Donbas and Luhansk as well from the front lines. Next year we're celebrating 100 years on the 24th of May. My colleagues asked me to give you the invitation for you to come to us. We have Mikhail Petrov here, and he spoke how we celebrated 120 years of TASS and they received an order. We're waiting for you on the 24th of May at 12:00 sharp. Will you come?
I will try. Thank you very much for the invitation. Komsomolskaya newspaper is part of life—please sit down—this is part of life of many generations of our citizens. People wake up with this newspaper; that was a morning routine for many. They read it throughout the day. It's becoming more and more modern mass media. It works in all information spheres. This is a loadstone and objective media, and I would like to congratulate you on the results of your work. Thank you for the invitation.
Now as for the 'Time of Heroes' platform, I said that I came up with this idea after meeting students and participants of the special military operation in St. Petersburg. I sat there and it occurred to me that I had in front of me the people who were the future of the country, and that's when it occurred to me to build this platform. I won't hide it: I came back to Moscow, I spoke to my colleagues, I asked the administration to work this through, and they came up with the name 'Time of Heroes'. And I think it's very apt. 43,000 applications came in during the first stage, and of course we...
went forward with a very rigorous selection process. Just 83 applications went through to the next stage. We need to make sure that they've got the education, they fit the parameters, because they will have to work in the government and big companies and municipalities, ministries, and agencies. I spoke about this during my meeting with United Russia. But I have to say, all of them, every one of our people fighting for our country in the special military operation are worthy. But we have to make sure that they fit the field they want to work in because they need some experience and education, because it's one thing fighting for your country and another working with people. You have to have a certain predisposition as well as a talent, because these activities are somewhat different, and we have to choose the people who are willing and capable of working there. And so far, there hasn't been a single hiccup. All of them have fit perfectly.
Right now we've launched the second stage. 15,000 applications have already been filed. The period for applications has been extended until mid-January, mid-February, or something like that. And this process will keep going. As far as the first batch is concerned, many of them are working. Some of them have been appointed as heads of Russian regions. Many of them have found themselves in business, in entrepreneurship, in the government at all levels—federal, municipal, regional levels—working in big companies as well. And I would like to reiterate something that I spoke about during the United Russia convention.
I've recently visited a rehabilitation center. There are soldiers with trauma, with injuries. Some have missing limbs. But I can see a spark in their eyes because they are willing to work and they're capable of doing that, because modern rehabilitation techniques allow that they can work in a fully fledged manner without any health restrictions. The only thing they need is a helping hand. You know, I remember the face of one of those guys. He said, 'Yes, I understand. I do not have the education. I have neither education nor experience, but I want to do that.' And these are precisely the people we need: those who are willing to work, who want to work, and all they need is a little help.
You know, when I was still doing judo, our coach Rakhlin said, 'Do as many pull-ups as you can.' And some of them did a lot more than I did. And you know, we asked him many years after, 'Why did you decide to take in some of us who didn't make as many pull-ups as others?' But he said, 'You know, you went to the end. Your hands were trembling, your arms were spasming as well, but you made as many pull-ups as possible, whereas the others did as many pull-ups as they required and they didn't fight. So you were willing to go all the way.' And these men are just like this, and they need some help.
Oh yes, that's a very important question. I understand. Yes, you're right. First, these attempts are not the first ones. We are aware of what the adversary is seeking to do, and these attacks are not just targeting our military. I spoke about that when I talked to your American colleague. There are assassinations like that of Madame Dugina, which was terrible. There are attacks on journalists, on civil leaders. These are terrorist actions perpetrated by the current Kyiv regime. And that means that our law enforcement agencies as well as our special services are missing these strikes. What can I say? I can say that we need to improve our work and make sure such things never occur again.
You know, the right part of the central sector, I saw a very popular blogger right there. Yes, he just stood up. Well, this is an unconventional guest.
What do you mean unconventional?
Mr. President, my name is Vlad Bumaga. I'm a video blogger. I've got more than 80 million subscribers, mostly young people. And as we know, young people spend much time on the internet every day, from 5 to 8 hours. And half of that time is spent watching video content. And just as many other content creators, we're actively pursuing the development of our Russian platforms such as VK Video. Yes, these platforms are not yet great, but they're growing steadily and they provide a high-quality service. Which brings me to the question: why block YouTube when our platforms are doing quite well on their own because they're competitive and they provide good conditions, good terms for authors and content creators? And we can post content there and broadcast our ideas, our narratives to a wider audience than the Russian-speaking audience. And on another matter, as I said, almost all children know me and watch me, almost all children in our country. And this year, I became a father as well.
My congratulations, and my congratulations to your wife, because first and foremost, she's the one to be credited with that.
Yes, I'll do that. So, I am a person who creates video content which many children are growing on. So, what are the values I have to broadcast, and is there anything that I shouldn't do? What are the values and the narratives that I have, and we all have, to broadcast to the younger generation? What are your instructions?
Well, starting with the slowing down of YouTube. Indeed, there are more issues on YouTube's side. In order—I'm sorry, Vlad Bumaga, is that your pseudonym? Is it your pen name?
No, it's my real surname.
Oh, great. Bumaga, because you know it's Russian for paper, and we know that paper is stronger than stone. You said 80 million people, which is unparalleled. That means that the content you're creating is in line with the expectations of these 80 million people who are following you. This is the fruit of your creativity, and I would like to offer my congratulations to you on that.
Secondly, Google is the one owning YouTube. When Google was creating its network in Russia, they set up subsidiaries, legal entities that created those services, and they had to be maintained. So, Google was working through these subsidiaries. Once the West started slapping restrictions on us, Google started diminishing its funding and it also reduced the supply of equipment, thereby creating problems for itself. Moreover, Google needs to be in compliance with our legislation. They have to avoid any type of wrongdoing. They shouldn't abuse the internet network to secure foreign policy goals of their respective governments. See, when you are searching for some topic, for music, for culture, and all of a sudden your search result gives you links that have no relation whatsoever to culture or music—rather, these links lead you to some propaganda of a political platform or something like that, or they are trying to take out of circulation the names of our artists, our bloggers, or political leaders—which is all something that constitutes a violation of Russian legislation, and hence the grievances Roskomnadzor has with them. That is the organization that is responsible for the control and supervision of the internet. If they're in compliance with our legislation, they can come under some restrictions in their respective countries. But if they want to work in Russia, they have to comply with our law. And you know, you say that nature abhors a vacuum, so Telegram, VK, all of that is growing rapidly. And if YouTube understands that and tries to reconfigure its presence in Russia, then they will have no problems here whatsoever.
Now, as for the material we need to use to rear our children, I'm confident, Vlad, that giving such type of advice is basically pointless because people like you, especially now that you have become a father, now that you have a child, you feel this weight of growing responsibility. You feel responsibility towards your child and towards the future of the child, as well as to the country your child is going to live in. And this sense of responsibility is going to serve as a beacon for you. And it's got to be even better than any instructions or advice I might provide to you with regard to what I think is useful for the future of our children, or what is perilous and nefarious for our children and is something you have to fight—not because this is what I instruct you to do, but because your heart tells you to do that.
Unfortunately, I skipped TV3. I'm sorry. Since we're talking about children, we've got a young lady there—duping families with children, maybe the allowance.
Well, I'm going to tell you.
My name is Elena Osmanova. Mr. President, I'm from Tatarstan. Yes, Tatarstan once again, an online newspaper. First, thank you for choosing Kazan as the venue for the BRICS summit. But my question is not related to that. There is a group of fraudsters who have duped hundreds of families in Kazan who were dreaming of having children of their own. They drew out a mortgage with government support, but their houses have never been built. So I'd like to ask you whether they will get any help, as you in the past provided help to those who paid for their housing before the houses were built, because right now these families have to pay back their mortgages. So when will people get support rather than the banks?
Well, please stay there with the mic. Here, the thing is, we have set up a system for escrow accounts. If a person draws out a mortgage, then the money is channeled to an escrow account, and this money is frozen until the house has been built. I'm talking about individual houses, not apartment houses. The thing is, individual houses are in compliance with this program. It's the same, it's 3%. And you know, we built 105 million square meters last year, and 50% of that was accounted for by individual houses. But the money was supposed to stay in the escrow accounts. Where did the money go? I do not understand what you're talking about.
Well, this is what we had in Tatarstan. Hundreds of families ended up in this situation.
Where did the money go? Can you tell me?
I don't know the details.
Yeah, Lena, those details matter a lot. Let's get to grips with—
It wasn't about escrow accounts.
Lena, it may probably be the case when people are hoodwinked and their money is taken from their accounts, and probably we should compare and contrast it with other cases of similar kind and we should prevent such cases. So we need more detailed information, because I'm not in the know, because these are very important things and we should rectify such flaws. Actually, we have some of the housing still under construction, and the money resting and registered with the escrow accounts constitutes around 7 trillion rubles in totality, more than 65% of what is needed to complete the construction of the purchased houses. This will be constructed in 2025, and no one will be left without their purchased flats, and the money in the accounts is protected, hedged, and insured. If you know about some practices that are obfuscated, please let us know.
TV3 or Turkey? Turkey. We will come back to you later.
Agency. Mr. President, Israel has been breaching international law, killing tens of thousands of people, including children in Palestine and Lebanon. Currently, Israel has been capitalizing on the situation in that region to occupy Syria, breaching its sovereignty. How can you comment on the action of Israel in that region? Have you had a conversation with President Erdogan? Thank you.
Please have a seat. We are in constant touch with President Erdogan. Well, I cannot remember the exact date when we talked last time, but we definitely talked about the situation in the region, in the Middle East. And the attitude of President Erdogan and Turkey to the Middle East developments is well known, and our position on Lebanon and Palestine also is common knowledge. Our stance is not subject to political expediency, and we believe that the resolution of the Palestine issue can be attained only with the help of removing the root causes. The Security Council back in the past opted in favor of a two-state solution: Israel and Palestine. Israel was established; Palestine is yet to be established. This is the issue, this is the problem. And Israel has been continuing its unlawful settlement activities to date. I'm not sure what goals Israel pursues in Gaza, but you know, this merits only condemnation, and we did that on many occasions at all levels, including the public and civil level, and expressing our position in the Security Council of the United Nations. Nothing to add here. Same refers to Lebanon.
As regards Syria, I believe, frankly speaking, Turkey has been trying to safeguard its safety on its southern frontiers and create conditions for the return of the refugees back home from its own territory to Syrian land. And those territories are now under more or less control actually of Turkey. Probably they want to move away the Kurdish troops from the border. Probably those might be the goals, and the outcomes may be attained. But the main beneficiary of this Syrian development, I believe, is Israel. This is my personal belief. You may have any sort of attitude to what Israel has been doing. Russia has been condemning the seizure of any part of Syrian territory, but Israel has been trying to resolve its security issues.
And you know, the Golan Heights line is well known, and Israel has moved 63 to 64 kilometers on the front line, inserting around 25 kilometers into adversarial territory. It's similar to the Maginot Line from 20th-century history, and real formidable, solid fortifications have been built. We hope that sooner or later Israel will withdraw. But now they have been pulling in troops—several thousand, 12,000 troops—and they are going to reinforce the contingent there, I think. And local people have appealed and called on Israel to include those territories into the Israeli state. And if it all boils down to the disintegration of Syria, this will be decided by the UN in line with the UN Charter and the self-determination rights nations have. This is a very convoluted, complex issue, not for today's forum.
And you know, Turkey has had problems with the Kurdish Workers' Party for decades. I hope there will not be an aggravation. But you know, some of the European leaders told me that after World War I, Kurds were promised their own state and were duped and deceived. And Kurds resided in Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. You know how many of them live there? Around 30 to 35 million Kurds. And the Kurdish issue is a major one, and the Kurds are formidable fighters. And the Kurdish issue should be resolved. It should have been done under President Assad, and it should be done in dealing with the current authorities in control of Syrian soil. Turkey also needs to ensure its security. This is not for today's event, you know, but there will be lots of issues to resolve. We abide by international law, and we believe that all nations', all stakeholders' interests should be safeguarded, including the current Syrian authorities. On this issue, we are on their side, and we are in touch with all the major groups that control the situation in Syria.
TV3 military correspondent Alexander Malkevich. Just in a nutshell, the fighters asked to convey words of gratitude. Last week you met with Human Rights Council members and supported the idea of creating a museum of the special military operation. This will be our media beacon, so to say. And our legendary Leningrad regiment has been granted the title of Guards Regiment. So, gratitude for that. And what is your assessment of the fund on a scale of 10 points, and what are the main goals for the foundation for next year, and the main criterion of the efficiency of the foundation?
Have a seat. With respect to the work of the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation that was established in June: this foundation was established after my meeting with the mothers of the special military operation participants, with the widows. And I figured that the regular support methods to back our servicemen and support the families of the fallen heroes are insufficient, and we need a special arrangement to be established, including for those who get out of touch with the army. So the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation was established for this sake. When they leave the military service, they still need the attention and care from the government, and it should not be formal; it should be targeted and individual to each family, to each fighter.
So this is the statutory goal of the foundation. It has to resolve social and welfare issues like allowances, payouts, prostheses, and artificial limbs supply for those who need that. And they procure the entire service, not just the limb. They have been carefully preselecting the prosthesis types, and post-operation care also is part of what they work on. Still, some of the patients have to travel far and wide across the country, and they have to resolve that. I talked with Anya, who has told me that now requests start coming from the fighters with respect to future employment, which is very important, and also about practicing sports and participating in cultural events. And this is so good. So it means that we are seeing a change for the better, which is very good. But you know, future employment is the overarching objective of ours, because those servicemen and ex-servicemen are so enthusiastic and they want to be trained for a peaceful life, or sometimes they can stay with the military and work at the draft commission offices, or they may move to the IT industry or work in sports, in military or civil sports. There's a great number of opportunities given the level of technological advancement and individual wishes, and overall they have been successful.
There are still some issues remaining, but some of the people working there were directly related to the military operation. Those might also be widows of the fallen fighters or mothers of those who are still on the battlefield. So these are caring, non-indifferent people, and the servicemen that came back from the front line also work in that foundation. This is why it is efficient in its operations. I didn't want to allow the director of the foundation, Tsivileva, to become part of the Defense Ministry, but I ceded to the proposal of Belousov, the Defense Minister, who said that he believed that for the sake of a seamless process, that is needed, because part of the servicemen will be under the Defense Ministry—some of them are on the front line and others have left the army. So we need this seamless mechanism.
If I'm not mistaken, it was in summer when we established a special social center under the Ministry of Defense together with the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation. They work under a single window system where people—those who remain in the Ministry of Defense and those who have left the pyramid of the ministry—get united and work on the two tracks. On the whole, there are lots of problems, but we try to fine-tune this work. As you know, they also participated in the elaboration and development of decisions. Previously, everyone received 3 million for small injuries, even for small scratches, and those who were severely injured entailing a disability also received the same amount of compensation. And fighters themselves requested that the system might be changed, and we started paying those severely injured 4 million rubles. But when I was receiving these reports, I saw that those soldiers who were severely injured and got disabled previously got 3 million, and after that the changes were made, meaning that those who had been injured before were underpaid. And we fine-tuned the system, and those who were injured previously received 1 million more. I see that Ksenia raised her hand.
Mr. President, you touched upon a very important topic: the topic of single window and the capabilities of the Ministry of Defense. I would like to offer a different perspective to this question. We—stars of show business, journalists, and those who are indifferent—implement various projects. In particular, for more than two years we've been involved in a large-scale project offering assistance to those people from Belgorod and Kursk, our compatriots and co-citizens who were affected by the attacks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. We have provided assistance to hundreds of people, and I believe there are many people who are not indifferent. What do you think: how could we provide assistance to those people and establish a single window in order to bring together the civil, public initiatives and the state work of the state structures and bodies that already exist? I'm talking about voluntary work that could be provided via a single window system on all tracks, because we face difficulties with employment in the new regions, problems with receiving places in kindergartens, and other problems that families with children are facing when they relocate. Would it be possible to establish a single window system for civil initiatives? Thank you.
Well, first of all, thank you very much for all your efforts. It is a tremendously important thing when we provide assistance to very specific persons. Second, when volunteers provide such assistance—and I would like to thank all volunteers without any exception—they risk their lives. There are losses among volunteers, unfortunately. But when they work, they reach out to a specific person, and they have a bit better feeling of where the government succeeds and where something fails. So I've already mentioned with regard to the Kursk region, there is a program aimed at restoring the Kursk region, and funds have already been allocated. And the same happens in other borderline regions—in the Belgorod and Bryansk regions. No one will be left unattended. But you probably have a better feeling for that, and I'll think about how to proceed myself, and I'll request our bodies—the Ministry of Defense and the governors. I'll ask them how we can pool these efforts. We could establish a single window system or think of a different instrument in order to coordinate the efforts. Thank you. I don't have an answer right now, but I agree with the problem that you've raised.
On the topic of the special military operation, I suggest that we continue taking questions about the support measures for the family members of those fighters. There have been requests for assistance in finding those people who are missing now, people with whom any connection was lost, or with those people who, according to the information received by their relatives, were imprisoned. Would you give an instruction to collect information about those people? Could we fine-tune this system for informing the families of military servicemen?
It is a very sensitive issue for many people. It's one thing when a person is fighting on the battlefield, God save him, there are various types of payments. We are talking about big amounts of money. There are so-called travel expenses for those servicemen who were sent to the borderline regions, to the regions of the special military operation before the hostilities broke out there. So they were paid the so-called travel expenses. Since they receive allowances for participation in the hostilities on the front line, there are small differences in these allowances. But as a person disappears, then we should provide assistance and support to their families. The Ministry of Defense is aware of this problem, and at least two things need to be done on this track.
First, what we need is to reduce the time for taking final decisions when there is no information, when families no longer receive the payments and the allowances because there is no person—he doesn't participate in defensive or offensive campaigns and doesn't receive the respective allowances. So the family doesn't receive the financial support. And together with the government, the Ministry of Defense has to take a different decision: what could be done in order to provide at least some assistance to those families, maybe some payments for children? And we should take the decision regarding temporary measures, and we also need to accelerate the decision-making process, the process of making the final decision. I'm not going to go deep into details, but the Ministry of Defense is aware of this problem.
We've been working for more than 3 hours. There are lots of questions. Shall we try with a small blitz?
We'll start with the following question: when you conduct meetings, sometimes officials ask your instruction to initiate some work.
Well, don't be angry with the officials. The decision-making process is a complicated one, and when they reach out to me, then normally it is about problems or questions to which there are different attitudes. Some colleagues believe that it should be addressed from one perspective, others offer a different perspective, and instructions are needed in order to see which way to choose when there is a difference in opinions. Then colleagues come to me, and at a meeting they ask me to take the final decision and they ask for an instruction to make sure that nothing is forgotten, that a clear final decision has been formulated. And you know, there are some bureaucratic tricks when everyone agrees it needs to be enshrined on paper to make sure it is a regulatory document.
A second question: with whom of those who have passed away already or those who still live today would you like to have a cup of tea?
Well, from those living today, I would like to have more time to spend with my relatives, with members of my family and my friends. I would like to have more opportunities to drink a cup of tea with them. As for the world leaders who have passed away already, I've had contacts—not so close contacts, but nonetheless for quite a long time—I had contacts with Mr. Kohl, the German Chancellor. He was a world-scale figure, not only due to the fact that he was a corpulent man, but also thanks to his beliefs. After my very first meeting with him back in 1993 and for a long period of time after he no longer was German Chancellor, he regularly—not quite frequently, but regularly—came to visit me, and it was my distinct pleasure to talk to him. He was an important figure of his time. He had done a lot for his homeland, for the German people, and he was a real world leader. I still have warm memories of many of our conversations. They were useful for me, and it is no exaggeration, they were useful.
President of France Chirac was a very interesting personality. He had encyclopedic knowledge. He knew everything, whatever you asked him, and he had his own opinion on anything and he stuck to his opinion. He was a very gallant and polite man, and I learned a lot from him. I learned a lot from Kohl and from Chirac, too, his manners in particular. A bit different sort of personality, but nonetheless a very warm person was Berlusconi. Just as Chirac, he accomplished a lot for the development of Russian-Italian relations. Regardless of what's happening right now, we feel some affinity to Russia among the Italian population, just as we feel the same affinity to Italians. They've all made a large contribution to the development of our bilateral relations and world policy, and it was interesting to talk to them. They were true personalities. They had their own opinion and they were focused on achieving the best possible results for their own countries and strengthening the sovereignty of their countries.
Even now I have many friends in Asia. I've mentioned the friendly relations with China and India. I have warm relations with the Prime Minister of India. So I have people to talk to, but just as for any human being, those are my family members who are most important to me, and I have some friends from my childhood.
I have a semi-question or request for advice: do you have any banking investments? If so...
I used to have a deposit in Sberbank. But when Bank Rossiya fell under sanctions—that was the first financial institution—I transferred my money there as a demonstrative act, and I put my salary there.
Did Elvira Nabiullina tell you about the interest rate tomorrow? I think it's interesting not only for Valery Simonov, who wrote from the Pskov region.
No, she does not tell me the interest rate. She possibly does not know herself, because they're discussing it at a meeting of the Board of Directors, their own internal meeting, and during the discussion they take the final decision. However, I hope that will be a well-balanced decision that will be in line with the challenges of today.
The forecasts of Vladimir Zhirinovsky for the situation in the Middle East and the Caucasus are coming true. Will other forecasts of Mr. Zhirinovsky come true?
Naturally, I knew Mr. Zhirinovsky very closely. He was not a fortune teller. He was a person that was larger than life, and he did it remarkably. He was a polymath. He was well-trained. He was actually a specialist trained in Middle Eastern studies. He was a true expert. So what he said is indeed coming true because he said it based on analysis of what was happening in our country and in the world. So he was forecasting the situation. It is indeed coming true. However, this is a forecast based on true knowledge and the experience that he had as a specialist.
I suggest we go back to the Q&A.
Yes, we can do that forever, and we have 200,000 questions.
I don't see what's written on your paper, but you've been raising your hand for a while now. A man in a mask. Okay, you'll be next. Okay.
May I? Yes, please. Svetlana Shevchenko, Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk region. We are an agrarian and industrial region. We create value-added products, we export goods, but we have an acute lack of talent, especially young people. Despite the agricultural mortgage and development of agricultural lands, we lack people. What measures should be taken in order to preserve those who are already living in the village and to attract new generations there?
That is a very important question. Agriculture is one of the key industries of the Russian economy. As I have already mentioned, it shows a good growth rate of 3% annually. We are very happy with what is happening in the agricultural sector. I have already given the example: if I'm not mixing anything up, I can tell you that in 1986, the Soviet Union bought 35 million tons of grain. Last year, we exported 66 million tons. In 2000, we started to export grain, however it stood at about 1.2 or 1.3 million tons, and now we have 66 million tons. It seems impossible, but it's true. Look, we are ranking as one of the three major exporters of food in the world, and as for wheat, we are number one.
Last year we had a record crop of 148 million tons. This year we will have 130 million tons. For the past decade, we've had more than 100 million tons. We have tremendous export capacity. We are fully self-sufficient in meat, and we're exporting meat. We have issues indeed with fruits, vegetables, and milk, though we have a special development program, but we see growth everywhere. One of the most important questions is social issues in rural areas: culture, education, housing. We have a social and economic development program for rural areas; it already has funds earmarked for that. Possibly that is not enough. But most importantly is to improve the standard of living for people in rural areas and their income. That will solve all other questions. I'm sure we'll move towards that goal.
As for talent, indeed, one of the key issues. Traditionally, even back in Soviet times, we dedicated great attention to human resources, and now the work in rural areas is already a business, and it's very interesting. It requires highly trained professionals at different levels: in biology, chemistry, agronomy, and so on. Geneticists, for example—genetics is a very important science, and now it is developing in the interests of agri-produce and showing the greatest growth. I think it's very interesting, and we should talk about it not only at such events once a year, but we need to talk about it all the time and create conditions for talent to go into those sectors of the economy. As for the state, it will do everything that's needed to engage new students. And the producers should also do what's being done in other industries: to create conditions, to create specially targeted programs for new students, to find the pool of talent, to ensure they work at production, and to engage them in hands-on internships. All that together will help.
We promised the journalist in the mask.
I have already taken my mask off. I travel by subway. Andrei Nazif, Argumenty Nedeli, from Uzbekistan, here as a volunteer and head of the studio of young students and bloggers, The World of the Young, Moscow. 45 years is the time I've spent in journalism. I started in Uzbekistan, and now here I see that paper journalism is dying out. Maybe such bloggers as Vlad Bumaga can help newspapers that are independent? They don't depend on the state or businesses; they depend on readers only. What do you think should be done for the weekly press not to go extinct, because bloggers are not always smart and not always good? That's a short question.
Now another question that I asked to many authorities, including Madame Zakharova, spokesperson of the MFA, and she told me to go to Vladimir Putin and the Direct Line. That's why I'm asking questions here. Many of our scientists and many people who see the future are telling us that within 10 or 12 years, the countries of Europe, Japan, the US, and beyond the continent of America might land underwater, might submerge in water, and they will try to ask to resettle into our country, but they're against us. Maybe we should tell them ahead of time? It is a hypothetical situation, but there are such forecasts. I read a lot of newspapers, not some Telegram channels and those liars. That's my question.
I don't know whether I should say it or not, but I'll tell you the story. You know a famous joke: a family sitting around the table, and a small boy is saying—they're doing crosswords—a word of three letters. His mom hits him on the head with a spoon. 'Why? The word is a house.' And the father says, 'Yes, you need to think about the house.' So you were talking about some continents going underwater, and they need to think what would happen to them, but you need to think about home, not about—I was listening to you so attentively, you're so energetic, but let me finish, please. Thank you.
Why am I saying that? Those forecasts that you've mentioned, they're not just ephemeral calculations; these are done by serious scientists. They're saying that the permafrost will defrost, and that's a tremendous hazard to the environment. There will be greater emissions of carbon, more than all cars around the world. And if permafrost melts, that means that the coastal regions of the Russian Federation might be jeopardized as well. We have villages and settlements that are built on stilts put in permafrost. It's already melting. We need to think about that. As for our coastal cities, including St. Petersburg, keep that in mind. Yes, we've built the dam there—that was the dream since the times of Peter the First—but we need to think ahead: what will happen to coastal regions? We need to think about our home first and foremost.
What about paper? Yes, hold on a second, please. If someone is going to resettle here, we have 2.3% unemployment—basically no unemployment. We have labor migration and issues in connection with that. We need to think about that as well. If we have a tremendous inflow, we need to consider that: where to settle people? We are the largest country in the world in terms of territory. However, beyond the Urals, do you know how many people we have there? 12 million. That's not enough. We have territory to resettle people, but we need to think about the social and other types of infrastructure, about the rules. This is not just an idle question. You're presenting it with great pomp, but indeed the question is there. But we need to think about our domestic issues first and foremost.
As for paper journalism and help from Vlad Bumaga, I'm sure that such people will support you because they're talking about paper journalism. I have a feeling that paper journalism would also find a place in the ecosystem and in the changing landscape, just like a paper book. You can leaf through a gadget, you have better fonts, for example—sometimes I use it myself. However, taking a book, a paper book in your hands, not just because you have pictures there, it's also interesting. This is also a piece of art; quite often this is a piece of art in your hands. So paper journalism—sometimes taking a paper Izvestia newspaper or Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper, if you just leaf through it, there is also a certain pleasure in that. And I hope that those who do that will keep that in mind. And I'm sure that there is interest from the public towards paper journals. But the most important thing is the content. Whatever the vehicle, whatever the media, as Vlad Bumaga said, most important is the content. And if a paper has decent and interesting content, compared to some internet foam.
Let's talk about health. This is one of the topics that is of great interest for Russians; it's ranking number two: lack of doctors in clinics, lack of drugs, and so on. I suggest we connect to Irina Sychyova from Nizhny Novgorod. Your question.
Mr. President, good afternoon. My name is Irina Sychyova. I'm from Nizhny Novgorod city. I have an appeal to you: please take a look at our medicine that is free of charge, our healthcare. I would like to thank you for the renovated facilities of the clinics. Thank God they're being improved. However, the clinics are lacking specialists as well as GPs. Doctors are leaving for commercial clinics. What are we to do, we pensioners? I cannot sign up my father for a visit to a cardiologist. The doctor receives patients only once a week. There is no electronic queue because the doctor is not fully employed at the clinic. You have to start standing in the queue at 5:00 a.m. to get signed up for the visit, and the queue is standing outside till 7:00 a.m. Many elderly people cannot stand up to the test of that. We hope that you'll be able to look into that and sort this out. Thank you.
Irina Sychyova, Madam Sychyova, the issues of healthcare are something we have to look at in a broader context. It ranks second in terms of importance, and the same goes for any country, for developed nations in particular, because there this issue sometimes is even more relevant. But we shouldn't think about them; we should think about ourselves, about home. So thank you for pointing out that the clinics are being renovated. It's a good sign; it means that something good is happening. We have a whole program dedicated to this matter. But the most important thing with the specialists, with the personnel, is related to the first stage of our healthcare system. You know we've got the hospitals, and there the problem with doctors is almost non-existent. Whereas in the first stage, the clinics working with patients directly are a weak link. And the most important thing is to organize healthcare across different regions of Russia.
If we look at the use of beds in hospitals, we see that they are not filled throughout all the year, whereas the first stage of the healthcare system has this problem. The thing is how we reallocate the burden and how we make sure that it's spread out evenly throughout the year. The Healthcare Ministry is trying to attract as many new graduates as possible to hospitals in rural areas and smaller towns and settlements. We're giving an additional 50,000 or 29,000 rubles as a premium to those young people who are willing to relocate to smaller towns. And we have seen an influx of 17,500 new specialists to rural areas. And we have to continue working on that, and we have to move at a higher pace than we are doing right now. Colleagues will probably help me, will jot all of that down, and we'll help you with your father.
Of course. Let's keep on medicine. We have a smaller number of questions as compared to last year related to the deficit of drugs, but there are problems with drugs on prescription. A pensioner from Kursk is writing that she needs drugs against cancer, but unfortunately drugstores cannot provide her with that because they're simply not there on the shelves, and she has to pay from her own pocket. And there is also a lack of saline solution. People who've got diabetes are facing challenges with the supply of insulin. Rashida Yuzhina writes to us that in Nefteyugansk she cannot get insulin from the hospital, nor can she buy it from a pharmacy. From the Saratov region, a person writes that he has problems with insulin and also blood sugar test strips. So Mr. President, what do you think the current stage of our pharmaceutical industry is, and how do we provide our patients with the medical care they need, in particular the drugs they need?
This is a question of the utmost importance, just as the supply of medical specialists. The pharmaceutical industry is one of the most important avenues we are pursuing. When I was the Chairman of the Russian Government—that was back in 2008—back then we embarked on the path of building our own pharmaceutical industry. Back in 2008, we started talking about that; we drafted programs dedicated to the subject. In 2009, the first programs were set forth. They bore different names, but the substance has always remained the same, and that substance is building our own pharmaceutical industry. I do not remember how much money we allocated back then. The pharmaceutical industry was being developed thanks to government support to a large extent, using money earmarked from the federal budget. Whereas currently, our pharmaceutical companies, for the first time in history over the several last years, have started channeling their own money into research and development to the tune of dozens of billions of rubles—I think 40 billion rubles or so. They've got their own development programs.
They are using their own formulas to create new medications. They are creating new chemical substances, which is a first in our history. We've come up with our own medications against cancers. St. Petersburg is one of the leaders in that field. And the same goes for insulin. As far as the blood sugar test strips are concerned, this is just a malfunction. This is a shortcoming on the part of the local organizations, because the money for all of these medications is allocated in a timely manner.
Procurement process has to go through smoothly. I'm going to talk to the leadership of the Russian regions. Everything has to be done on time, and of course, you need to take into account the requirements of the market. We have a special program dedicated to the development of the pharmaceutical industry, which is currently part and parcel of the technological leadership program. There's a special subsection within that project related to essential medications by 2030. We need to supply 90% of our own medications, and as far as medical equipment is concerned, the figure is 40%.
So we are making good headway, but of course, we've got all of this big work cut out for us, and malfunctions do happen. I know that you have spoken about a deficit of insulin. Well, actually, we have enough insulin. The same goes for saline solution. I'm aware of that. I'm trying to follow all of that. As far as saline is concerned, it's not about saline; it's about packaging. It has to be supplied on time. Two ministries, the Ministry of Healthcare and the Ministry of Trade and Industry, did not take the timely decision on the price of the packaging. The producer certainly had to buy some of the packaging from abroad. Right now, the decision has been made, and I'm hopeful that these malfunctions will not happen in the future. But we'll have a look at all of that in the future. Mr. Peskov, over to you.
Yes, let's move back to the audience.
You know, we won't get far this way. Well, let's not do it like this.
You know, we'll be plunged into chaos and we won't be able to deal with that. I'm sorry. Spas TV channel. You know, there's a person whom you have great respect for, that is the spiritual father Iliy Nozdrin. He said that we need to prohibit abortions, four-letter words, and we also have to bury Lenin's body. The first thing the patriarch has said that abortions have to be prohibited because they only mutilate the bodies of our people. Secondly, you have spoken about four-letter words, you said that it's basically invoking dark forces. And I would like to ask you about dark forces, because right now Russia is plunged into nations of occultism, readily available pornography, and people spend more money on pornographic websites, extra senses, and spiritualists than on anything else. And the third component is burying Lenin. I'm not talking about the assessment of his activities, but about respecting the will of his family, because, you know, an embalmed body in a mausoleum is a godless tradition. What prevents us from burying the body of Vladimir Lenin?
Well, I am confident that these are not the questions for the big press conference. These questions are very sensitive. As far as abortions are concerned, of course, we have to think about respecting religious convictions. They have to be protected, of course, on the one hand. On the other hand, we have to address the demographic issues, but we also have to think about the level of welfare of Russian families with children. We have to think about their future, and we also have to think about the right of women to make these decisions. This is a very sensitive matter we cannot address during the press conference. Nor can we address the issue of pornographic websites.
You know, there are some people who are not happy with the fact that YouTube is being slowed down. I think porn websites are visited all across the world. It's as easy as ordering a beefsteak on the internet. I think it's an issue not just for us, but also for everyone. What can our response be? You know, there can be bans and prohibitions, but you always have to come up with an alternative. We have to come up with something which is more interesting than a porn site, so that you go for an alternative—because you've been to a porn site and now you have to go for something more interesting, more passionate, something that causes greater interest. But in Russia in particular, we shouldn't make any step that would drive a wedge in our society. This is what I think. But Father Iliy is correct. Of course, I like him, and he told me that, and I listen to what he has to say.
Let's move to the other sector. You know, there's Kolesnikov.
Good afternoon. Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant newspaper. Good afternoon, Mr. President. It's been almost 3 years since the beginning of the war. We've all changed profoundly. The war has changed each and every one of us. But what has changed inside you? Have you come to understand something about yourself? And another question if you don't mind. Maybe no one is going to ask that question. Some time ago, Joe Biden, US President, pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, who had been convicted for perjury in the course of buying weapons. Everyone has expressed their opinion on this subject, whereas you chose to keep mum. So, what do you think about that? Can you comment on it? You know, silence is good, that's what they say. Sometimes it's better not to say anything.
Thank you for the question. Incidentally, as for the pardon Joe Biden gave to his son, even though he had promised not to do that, you know, this is a very delicate subject. We've got examples in our country's history. We know this famous painting, Ivan the Terrible and His Son. We know about this painting. Maybe that's a legend, or maybe it's not, as is probably what happened to Peter the Great's son, Alexei. What happened to him? Maybe it's a legend, maybe it's not.
Or what happened to Stalin? This was not a legend, when Stalin refused to swap his son Yakov for the German Field Marshal Paulus. He said he would not swap a soldier for a field marshal. And back then, even surrendering into captivity was considered treason. And you know, the nation was on the verge of not a defeat, but a total annihilation, I would say, of the entire nation. So it was a matter of life and death, of survival of the nation. And the measures and policies taken to win were rigid, tough, and sometimes cruel. And given that sentiment that was supported by Stalin, he wasn't able to save his son. He said what he said, and he did what he did. And his son was executed in a concentration camp. And Field Marshal Paulus was used during the Nuremberg trial, and no one expected to see him when he entered the courtroom.
With respect to Biden, you know, he is a politician. So whether you have more of a politician or a human is always an important question. It turned out that Biden had more of a human being. So I wouldn't condemn him for that. And there was also part number one: whether you have changed over the past 3 years. You know, we all keep changing every day, every hour. All the visitors of this room, all the streamers, we are in a flux. And those two-something years have been a tribulation for everybody, for the entire country and for myself. Despite that, it has been a trial. And you know, I now laugh and joke much less. And there is also one more circumstance: I started improving the skills that I have in the search of key points and issues and my concentration capability to resolve them.
The opposite sector, I can see RBC news outlet. Will you pass the mic?
As a follow-up on the question, you said that you now laugh and smile less. If we could return to February 2022, would you have changed your mind?
Well, that is a hypothetical question. Had we had a chance to go back, looking with hindsight, knowing what is happening now, I probably back in 2022 would have thought that the decision made in early 2022 ought to have been taken earlier. This is number one. And number two, we ought to have started getting ready for those developments and the special military operation before. Those Crimean developments were kind of off-the-cuff, offhand, impromptu. And 2022 also, we started because we could not tolerate it anymore and wait for the situation to deteriorate further. The Kyiv authorities stated directly, in so many words, that they would not implement and fulfill the Minsk set of measures, and they claimed to obtain WMDs. We figured out that we had been deceived with respect to the Minsk arrangements, and the massacre had lasted for 8 years, and they just dropped it aside. We saw that the military stationing of those territories began, and the annihilation of all things related to Russia began. We could not carry on like that anymore. They compelled and forced us. Had we known in advance what would happen, we would have prepared in a systemic, real, serious way. This is what I would have thought.
Dear friends, we've been working for more than four hours, we've exceeded the 4 hours duration. Let's allow these colleagues—will you please stand up, lady? Pass the mic.
Thank you, Mr. President. RIA Novosti news agency. You have mentioned some of the European leaders, so I would ask the following. In 2025, Russia will mark the 80th anniversary since the victory in the Great Patriotic War, and you start inviting international leaders. If we recall this year, France celebrated the Normandy landings day and they didn't invite us, and the Auschwitz liberation anniversary also was celebrated and you were not invited. But have you submitted invitations to the former anti-Hitler coalition representatives to attend this future forthcoming anniversary? Is it important for you to see the US, France, and Great Britain represented?
As regards inviting us to events, we are not seeking anything like that. We are fine at home, and we should strengthen ourselves, and this is the branching policy of ours. And second, we will never forget the sacrifice suffered by our nation and brought to the altar of the victory. We will never forget that. And other countries, naturally, today are trying to pass that into oblivion. This is part of their anti-Russian campaigning, but this is up to them. We will be glad to see everybody wishing to attend this glorious red-letter anniversary.
Well, I do sign some invitations, but it's principally the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry. My position is that we'll be open to anyone wishing to attend. We'll be glad to see everybody, including the anti-Hitler coalition members who back then contributed considerably to the victory over Nazi Germany: the United States and Great Britain with their northern convoys. There were very many feats and heroes there, and some of the veterans have survived to date. The British sailors were heroes. And when they disembarked in France, in the north of France, the Americans also acted in heroic ways.
But their casualties, their participation, and their contribution is not comparable to ours. The Soviet Union lost 27 million, the United States 500,000 people only, the United Kingdom less than 400,000 people. In the First World War, they lost 1.5 million conversely. So the contribution had different weights, but their participation was important. When I became president, we repaid everything. You know, the Lend-Lease debt also, the Americans recovered that from us in full, and we have repaid that despite so many years. But we appreciate the contribution of the allies, and we'll be glad to share the joy of victory with them. We have lots of questions still. Let's ask someone in the room. Please don't make that much noise, otherwise I will conclude. Yamal, I can see Yamal wishing to take the floor.
Mr. President, good day. Yamal-Media. The Western countries have imposed more than 20,000—40,000—well, I stopped counting, but imposed 40,000 restrictions against us. But our progressive development in the Arctic is something that they have a grudge against, and they actually say that their goal is to do away with the LNG projects in the Arctic. What do they fear so much? Why are they so much afraid? Will they be able to hinder our pace of development in the Arctic?
Well, they fear competition, actually. This is why they use politics for unfair competition. Novatek is a well-known company that is not a global leader—other companies and countries produce more LNG—but ours keeps growing, and they want to impede that growth. This is unfair ways to restrain competitors, and this is bad for them. If they fight competition like this with non-economic means, they will lose their competitiveness one day. It may not happen tomorrow, but that will happen for sure if they continue in this vein. Have they been impeding us? Yes, they have. They have been putting handicaps on us. Will they be able to kill it off completely? No. They will do damage to us, but we will find a way out supplying energy, given the fact that the demand for energy will keep growing in the global economy as it develops. This is the data of the global economic institutions and their opinion. So this product will enjoy demand in the global markets, and we will keep advancing our projects and increasing our share in the LNG market.
And with respect to pipeline gas supplies, Ukraine has declined to extend the transit contract. It was Ukraine, not us. You know, Ukraine declined to extend the gas transit contract despite the fact that they received 700 to 800 million per annum for gas transit. Now the question is what is to be done about that, but this is not our problem. Ukraine has cut off our gas supplies to European customers and consumers. They've been eating from the hands of the West because they are not self-sufficient; they can live and wage this war only with Western help. But at the same time, the Ukrainians create problems for the Westerners cutting off gas supplies. This contract will cease to exist. Okay, we can live with that and Gazprom can live with that.
Not long ago, our special services reported to me that sabotage actors were detained in Slovakia, and maps were found on them with energy facilities and installations spotted on their map. I received information just yesterday, so I would ask via the special channels to find out why so and what was happening, because they wanted to commit terrorist attacks in Europe. They live off the West and now they start perpetrating terrorist attacks in Europe. But our option is to cooperate, and we will attain our goals. Space and BBC—I also see BBC. You will be able to attack us shortly. You keep attacking us, and we just defend ourselves.
Thank you. I represent Chinese television.
But you look very much like the Chinese people of ours. I feel that.
I'm a Russian citizen, despite the fact that I'm considered a foreign journalist. Let me start with a question from the state television of China, CGTN. Thanks to them, I'm employed. The program is titled Outcomes of the Year, and in the course of that year you kept saying that the Chinese peace-building initiatives are more workable and feasible than all other things by other intermediaries. If we cast everything aside, the West has exhausted the limit of trust, and Russia was deceived and duped by European leaders. But if we speak in concrete terms, Mr. Trump and his aide Mr. Kellogg keep saying that one can put an end to this war even before the inauguration on the 20th of January. But actually, we're not now saying about acceding to NATO or not, just cease fire in an instant. Is that possible? Is Russia ready to make these important steps if the European and American partners manage to persuade Kyiv? Because the entire world is tired of the Ukrainian crisis, and people in this country also want peace, and this would be a simple step. No one risks anything, just in an instant stop where things are. If someone fails to implement that and would not keep their word, this can resume. No one would lose anything, just put it at a halt.
And my second question—it is a hybrid format. I live in Korolyov in the suburbs of Moscow. I'd like you to hear about the biggest scientific town in Russia. Now at the Khrunichev Center, the National Space Center is being built, and the residents of the town of Korolyov—there's a quarter million people—are bewildered and they do not know whether we maintain this space capital status. Because actually we need to have a special economic zone on the territory of the house-building plant, because we should reinstate Korolyov as the historical space exploration capital of our country. And we need a third entrance to our city, because we have huge congestion—4 hours we spend in those traffic jams. So we need a flyover and bridges. I apologize, I'm just winding down and saying everything.
You're wearing two hats: that of a citizen and that of an international journalist.
A third entry into Korolyov is an active problem. You probably know that we need it. We cannot spend so much time in traffic jams, and I believe that the whole population of Korolyov is applauding me right now. If you are able to resolve it, we will be just happy. I'm sorry for having taken so much time.
Well, your employer wouldn't thank you for the second part of your question. It's not what he sent you here for. But you got my message correctly: you should think about your home. Well, actually, we raised the issue of the entry into Korolyov. I remember it. I know it from our previous debates on the development of Korolyov as a space capital of Russia. In Moscow, we are already constructing an important center. It is important for the development of the space industry, but the town of Korolyov is a recognized center of the space industry. I'm not going to go into detail, but Korolyov as a scientific town undoubtedly deserves its due attention. I'll necessarily raise this issue with my colleagues, with those who deal with aviation and with space.
There are different plans. The idea of establishing a special economic zone does have its justification and its reasons. I'm not going to pronounce the final judgment, but it is something we have to think about, and indeed we should think of using the potential of the city. You are absolutely right in this regard. Now turning to the peace initiatives of the People's Republic of China, the Federative Republic of Brazil, and the Republic of South Africa. Why we find it important is because it is a sincere attempt to find a solution. From our point of view, this attempt is a balanced one and it is not imposing anything on any of the parties, neither on Russia nor on Ukraine. And it is being done by neutral countries that don't interfere into the conflict like Western states do, that de facto fight against us with the hands of Ukrainians. So what they are proposing is something that we should think several times about, because they are not a party to the conflict.
About the proposal regarding the ceasefire: you know what's happening on the ground is attrition of the military equipment, munitions, and most importantly the troops on the part of Ukrainian armed forces. We see the attrition. That's what's happening really on the battlefield. Our army is advancing. The adversary cannot get a foothold and entrench on the positions that it has left. They leave the areas, and even if they take over some areas, they cannot entrench in these regions. If we declare a ceasefire for a week, it will give our adversary the opportunity to entrench themselves, to receive munitions—which is very important—and something that is equally important from the point of view of training the troops.
Right now they are simply recruiting people on the streets. They simply catch them like stray dogs. But stray dogs are at least put into special centers, and here they simply catch people in the streets and send them to the frontline. That's what we see on the battlefield. They are not trained properly. It's not how soldiers were trained during Soviet times. Even those who received training in Western countries cannot be compared to those who had been trained in Soviet times, because they are prepared and trained by those who have never been on the battlefield. So how can they train others? So a long ceasefire, a relatively long ceasefire period, will give an adversary the time for training and retraining of personnel. In the battalions they have 35% of the necessary troop numbers, so they'll receive time to re-equip their divisions.
What we need is not a ceasefire; instead, we need a lasting peace with guarantees for the Russian Federation. It is a complicated question how we can ensure these guarantees, but we could think about it. As for short-term ceasefires, it was a proposal by the Prime Minister of Hungary, Mr. Orbán. That's what he said. I hope Viktor will not be angry with me if I reveal at least one part of our conversation. He said, 'What would it cost you if you declare a ceasefire for at least a day or two? It could be a Christmas ceasefire. The adversary will not be able to accomplish anything within these two or three days.' And I said, 'Yes, probably you are right. But would you first talk to the Ukrainian side?' At least three times did we agree to similar actions when it came to navigation in the Black Sea, when it came to energy infrastructure, and so on and so forth.
Erdogan made proposals. He was a mediator, and as a mediator he made a proposal. I said I need time to think about it. The next day I called him and I said, 'Okay, we agree.' But the next day, the head of the Ukrainian regime said, 'No ceasefire, no talks.' I called Erdogan later on and he says, 'Well, those are our partners.' And now I asked Orbán. He suggested a Christmas ceasefire and he also proposed a prisoner exchange. I didn't say no. I said, 'Well, we'll have to think about it in principle, but go and ask them.' He went and asked them. The next day, the head of the regime said there would be no ceasefire and no prisoners exchange. That's the answer to your question.
We've been on air for more than four and a half hours. We are going to an end. Now over to the BBC. They promised to attack us. Well, they do so without any promises. That's what they receive money for.
Exactly 25 years ago, Boris Yeltsin resigned office and handed over power to you, telling you to stay on guard. 25 years later, would you say you have succeeded in it? Because from our part, we see significant losses during the so-called special military operation that you have declared. We see Ukrainian soldiers in the Kursk region. You criticize NATO expansion and enlargement, but there is now a greater NATO presence at the Russian borderline—I mean Sweden and Finland. We have demographic and economic problems. What do you think, have you succeeded?
Yes, I believe I have. I believe we have moved away from the brink of an abyss, because what happened to Russia before that and after that was leading us to a complete and total loss of our sovereignty. And without sovereignty, Russia cannot exist as an independent state. I would like to draw attention to what you said about Boris. It looked good: one patted him on his shoulder, one preferred not to notice when he drank a bit more than he should, and he was warmly received in all Western circles. But when he raised his voice to protect Yugoslavia, when he said that it contradicted international law and the UN Charter, as soon as he said that it was unacceptable in modern Europe to attack Belgrade, the capital of a European state, without any sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, immediately he was persecuted and immediately one started criticizing him. Don't you remember it?
And I've done my utmost to make sure Russia is a sovereign and independent power that is capable of taking decisions in its interest and not in the interest of those states that tapped on the shoulder in order to use it for their own purposes. That's where I could stop my answer. I understand that you provided many arguments to substantiate your point of view. You mentioned inflation. Yes, we have inflation. We are going to fight against it, but we have good economic growth. We rank number four worldwide in terms of purchasing power parity. Please share it with your audience. We rank number one in Europe. We have left the UK behind. But we are ready to work with the UK if the UK wants to work with us. But if it's not the case, we can do without it. We can do without our former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition.
Mr. President, there are many questions from Russian citizens, so I suggest that we move on to the blitz format. Do you have a personal dream?
Of course I do. But it is a personal dream. May I please keep it to myself?
A question from social networks. Alexandra Okulova asks, 'Are you a happy person?'
Do you think it is a question for a blitz? Shall I say yes or no? Well, how can I put it, yes or no? It's a well-known fact that I was born in a regular working-class family. As for my forefathers, they used to cross the Dnieper River, and I have a document that says that one of my forefathers was awarded the St. George's Cross for that. Later, all of my relatives on my mother's side and on my father's side fought in the Great Patriotic War. Every second of them died. My father was invalided out of the Great Patriotic War. I used to serve in the Foreign Intelligence Service. So my work has always been connected to serving the motherland.
The fact that Russian citizens, the people, have entrusted me with leading the Russian state is a tremendous honor and tremendous responsibility. In essence, I could say I'm happy with that, and thank you. However, I should be more God-fearing, maybe, and say, 'What else could you expect? What more can you wish?' However, the happiness will not be complete until all of our guys return from the front line, until they meet their mothers and wives, until their children hug them, until our young people—girls and boys—create the necessary number of families necessary for Russia and have children. I really want our scientists and cultural figures and so on to fulfill themselves, and then I can say that I'm happy.
There was a question from St. Petersburg: 'Why are you being called different names by foreigners and you don't respond in kind?'
It depends on the level of class. As I said before, they call names due to their impotence. Why should we show our impotence when we have enough arguments to clearly present our position?
An SMS from Stavropol region: 'Do you have a task that you hate?'
No. If people have trusted me enough to perform the function of the President of the country, there are certain responsibilities. So I approach it in the way that I must perform them in full, giving it my all. But I know if I start hating something or not loving something that's part of my duties, then I will not achieve the necessary result. Therefore, I have created a mentality for myself that I need to do everything with pleasure.
Whose portrait do you have in your office?
I don't have a portrait. I have an icon in one of my working offices. In another one, I have a bust sculpture of Lomonosov.
Would you give political refuge to Zelenskyy, because he will need it very soon?
I don't think he will need it. It is quite possible—well, I don't know how he will act, but quite possible, just like some people from the supreme leadership of Ukraine, they have traveled abroad, and quite possibly he will do so. People whose interests he is serving right now will take care of him. But if he appeared out of somewhere like a jack-in-the-box, well, Russia does not refuse anyone.
A question from Tatiana Kosenko: 'What is Russia for you?'
This is a comprehensive question. Russia is a map, just like any country; it's a tremendous territory. It's not only territory—this is history, culture, our customs and traditions. All of it is Russia. However, the most important thing is people. You know, sometimes I find myself—well, I don't often watch TV, I don't have quite enough time, I'm not on the internet a lot—but when I look at the success and achievements of our people... There was a World Swimming Championship, and I saw guys working out—huge guys, very confident, performing, world champions—and beautiful girls. I was looking at boys and girls who are achieving great success at the Olympic Games. I'm looking at my young scientists whom I met quite recently.
Honestly, I look at that and I'm so happy about it. I rejoice at that as if they were my family members. I rejoice as if they're my loved ones. Therefore, I'm looking at Russia as our family.
We've been working more than 4 and a half hours. We have answered many questions, millions of viewers, and we have many questions ahead of us. Is there anything that you would like to tell the citizens of our country?
I talked right now about treating Russia as my family. Therefore, this is what I wanted to say. We're talking on the eve of festive holidays: New Year and Christmas. I speak to many representatives of different religions and they're saying that we all celebrate Christmas, just like our neighbors celebrate Eid al-Fitr, Pesach, and so on. You know, when I meet with representatives of different religions, I ask them, 'When you talk to people in a regular conversation, what do people tell you? What do they regret?' It's not, naturally, the secret of confession. But you know what people regret? They did not spend enough time with children or did not dedicate enough attention to children. On the eve of the New Year, which is a family holiday, and especially Christmas, I would like to wish everyone to dedicate more attention to your loved ones. I wish all of you success, well-being, and health. Thank you.
Before we start asking questions from the people and the mass media, just a general question on my part to begin with. We feel that the world has either gone crazy or is going mad. The conflict potential is soaring. The global economy is in a dire situation. How is Russia managing to keep afloat and keep growing?
You know, when everything is calm, tranquil, and stable, we're bored—stagnation, we want some commotion. As soon as some commotion starts, and we see bullets whistling and time flying rapidly, we get scared to our wits. It's horrible, a great deal of horror. But it's actually all about the economy. And we start with the economy despite your provocative question. The economy underlies everything. It's the main foundation determining the living standards of our people and the stability and defensive capability. Everything is based on the economy, and the economic situation in this country by and large is normal and stable.
We keep advancing against odds despite external threats and attempts to impact us. Last year, economic growth was at 3.6% in annualized terms, and this year it's going to be at 3.9% or even 4%. We'll have to double-check that because at the end of the year we will see some numbers and we will recap in the first quarter of 2025, and probably the level will even be 4%. The growth of the economy was some 8% total over two years. In the United States it was 5.6%, in the European Union it's 1%, and the leading economy in the European Union, Germany, is zero growth, and it looks like they're going to have 0% next year as well.
International economic and financial institutions are putting Russia as the number one economy in Europe—we're speaking about purchasing power parity—and number four economy in the world, and only China, the United States, and India are ahead of us. So we are ahead of Germany, and this year we have outrun Japan as well. But this is not an indicator that we should get complacent about, of course not. Everything is developing, everything is advancing, and while the European Union is slipping, there are other centers of global development and they are making progress. In Europe and in the United States, this situation is changing as well. So we should keep up this pace that we have gained to improve the quality of our economy.
There are other indicators that are satisfactory, to put it mildly. One of the serious indicators for all the countries in the world, for all the economies, is the unemployment rate, and it's record low in Russia at 2.3%. We have never had anything like this. That's one. And secondly, the growth of individual industries: our industry growth is 4.4%, and the processing industry is 8.1%. If we look into certain individual industries, the growth is even bigger. Yes, of course, there is inflation that causes certain concern. Yesterday, when I was preparing for today's event, I spoke to the Central Bank Governor, and Elvira told me that it's 9.3% or 9.2%. But wages grew by 9%. If we speak about real wages, I would like to emphasize this, if we do not take inflation into consideration, the population's income is also growing and overall the situation is stable and reliable.
We are faced with certain issues because the economy is overheating a little bit, and the government and the Central Bank are trying to moderate this pace to make it slower, and according to various estimates next year we should have 2% or 2.5% to land it softly and maintain macroeconomic indicators. That's what we are striving for, and we will speak some more about this during today's conversation. But the situation is stable and reliable.
There is one clarifying question if you allow. You cited Germany and Japan as an example. I would like to speak about Germany. You said economic growth is at 0%, but it was previously a center of economic growth. Does it have to do with politics and sovereignty? Because recently at the Russia Calling! forum you said that when you celebrated the Schröder anniversary, all songs were sung in English and there were no German songs.
Yes, it was a long time ago. Mr. Schröder celebrated his anniversary and he invited me and I attended. There was a small concert, and everyone sang songs in English. I said even a choir of girls from Hanover presented songs in English, but it was one troupe that sang songs in German: it was the Kuban Cossack Choir. It was unexpected for me. I asked them how they learned this song, and they said, 'Out of respect to the Germans, out of respect to the host, we learned this song during our travel and we presented it in German.' Later I was approached by many guests—I'm telling you how it was—and many people told me, 'We are ashamed. We are ashamed that only Russian Cossacks sang in German.'
And I said it to my colleague who was present at that forum. I told him sovereignty is an important thing; it should be deep in your heart. And I believe in the postwar era the German people no longer feel their sovereignty. They are Europeans; they are proud of being Europeans. But above all they are French, German, Italian, Spanish, and only after that they are Europeans. But instead they try to polish things, and in the end you see it impacting everything, including the economy. I mentioned the economic growth in our country, and largely it is the result of strengthening our sovereignty that is projected on the economic situation.
Many producers lost our market, and our industrialists started producing the same products. It necessitated various research, so we involved various institutions, including development institutions. On the whole, it translated into the strengthening of our technological sovereignty. There might be different sovereignties in the fields of education, industry, and military. It is important for our country, and for our country it is of particular importance because if we lose sovereignty, we lose our statehood. That's crucial, and strengthening sovereignty is also a result of economic growth.
Mr. President, now I suggest that we move on to questions from our citizens. You mentioned economic growth. Indeed, if we look at the economic figures, they look all right. Most Russian plants are working tight, but the payments are below inflation. We have made a rating of regions in which citizens asked most questions about price growth: in Kamchatka, Sakhalin region, and in the most western region of our country, Kaliningrad Oblast. Price growth was the relevant question. I will add some more figures. Our GigaChat provides us with some statistics. Most popular questions had to deal with price growth of bread, fish, and butter. They also ask about growing fuel prices. According to Rosstat, the Russian statistics body, we see that fruit and vegetable prices have grown by 3.4% over the past week. In particular, cucumbers got 10% higher, and butter grew by 43% over the past 10 months since November.
Those who are following our work via the internet may know that when I spoke about economic growth, price growth, and high inflation rate, apart from that there is income growth and the growth of salaries. We have a vast country, and some people might say, 'How can we speak about welfare growth?' while some people would say that income was reduced. But I'm speaking about average figures. When we plan something, we have to base it on something, and we cannot base it on anything else but average figures.
As price grows, there are objective things and subjective things. Objective things are the following, and most crucially: supply on the market should be in line with the purchasing power of citizens, and it should be also in line with the volumes of produced products. But production growth was higher in our country than income growth. Let me give you an example. Food production is growing constantly in our country—plus 3% annually. In terms of meat production, we completely cover our demand. It is a good figure. But why is it so? Meat consumption per year is at about 80 kilos per person, while it is 42 kilos as an average in the world. It would seem that it is enough, but at the same time meat consumption has doubled over recent times—doubled.
As for milk, annually milk production is growing, but milk consumption is growing too. It is not enough in order to produce butter. And I know that the growth of butter prices amounts to 33% to 34% in some regions, and it might be even higher in other regions. Consumption has grown faster than production. There is a second objective reason: the growth of prices of certain products in the world, and there are sanctions and restrictions. They are not playing a decisive role, but they have their impact because they make logistics more expensive through objective reasons too. Some experts believe that the Central Bank could be more effective and efficient, and it could have started using certain instruments not related to the growth of interest rates a bit earlier. Yes, the Central Bank started doing so in summer, but according to some experts, it should have been and could have been done a bit earlier.
There are lots of reasons; I'm not going to list all of them and bore our audience with all these considerations related to various ways of regulation by the Central Bank. As for the government, it is working efficiently. I'm quite satisfied with its performance, and it is doing a lot when it looks into the future. We always should look into the future even in the hardest, most severe times of the Great Patriotic War. As it turns out later, that's what our government is doing: it sets out national development goals, national projects, and so on. That's great. But it would be not bad to work with industries to think about the development of certain industries and products for which there is a broad demand. Timely decisions have to be taken. Price growth is something bad, but I hope that on the whole, while preserving macroeconomic figures, we will be able to tackle this as well.
Mr. President, we have a mixed format today, a direct line as a press conference, and I suggest that we now give the floor. We see that the audience is willing to ask questions.
Yes, indeed. Mr. Peskov, well, if we do what you propose, it will mean disrespect to the others.
What's your name, please?
Alina Khasanova, the 15th Region, North Ossetia. In today's realities, the human rights potential is a very important issue in the North Caucasus. There are many educational institutions preparing military experts, particularly the North Caucasus Military Institute. It is a legendary institution: seven alumni are Heroes of the Soviet Union, some of them are Heroes of Russia. They continue to perform military tasks for our country. Anatoly Kulikov is one of the alumni, and one of the most recent alumni is Sergey Khairudinov—he became a Hero of Russia during the special military operation. Is it possible to revive this military institution that is so relevant and so important not only in the North Caucasus, but in Russia?
Thank you, Alina, for this question. This is a very good question. Please don't be cross with Alina. Why? Because North Ossetia has always been at the forefront for Russia in this regard in the Caucasus, and throughout the times it's proven to be useful in performing this high duty. We know how the citizens of the republic treat their motherland and their homeland. They have always defended the motherland, they have always performed this function nobly and with great success.
You spoke about the decrease in the number of military vocational institutions. It's not about just closing it down in Ossetia; it's a thing that the network for military colleges in general, as military specialists and the Defense Ministry thought, was out of proportion. There was no need for such a number of specialists for such an army as the Russian army used to be. Now we are increasing the army in numbers up to 1.5 million people, as well as a number of other institutions. I cannot say that we will do that tomorrow, but we will work on it—that I can promise. Thank you.
Working with the audience, let's go back to the center. TASS, you have the floor. The mic please to the center.
Thank you. Mikhail Petrov, TASS Editor-in-Chief. Before asking the question, Mr. President, I would like to thank you. This year, TASS is celebrating 120 years. We're the oldest information agency of the country. This year, in August, you signed a decree to award the Order of Honorable...
labor to our institution, and I would like to thank you for this. This is a high evaluation of our work. Thank you. As for the question, I think it concerns everyone today. I guess during the Great Patriotic War, TASS was relaying information from the front. I think it happened the same way as our guys are now working in the special military operation zone. They're also worried about that. What is your take on the course of the special military operation that's been going on for three years now? Is the victory any closer now?
Naturally, I've expected such questions. There are many incoming questions that were coming in the past days. Moreover, I would like to thank you for this, and it gives us a chance to show what we are doing there, what's happening, and what our guys are doing at the line of engagement. You know, the servicemen whom I talk to regularly give some souvenirs to me. They give me their shoulder patches and so on, sometimes weapons as a souvenir. And quite recently, the servicemen of the 155th Marine Brigade gave me a copy of the military flag, a banner. Can we ask someone to help? Could you please come up here? Yes, please. Please. And someone on this side as well. So, I have a request for you. Please stand over there, and you over here, and please unfold the banner the other way around. The Marines of the Pacific Fleet. I took it with me for a reason. Number one, I wanted to thank the guys for this gift. Second, let's think that this 155th Marine Brigade represents all military banners of our guys fighting right now for Russia, for the Motherland throughout the line of engagement.
I have to say that the situation is changing drastically. You know it very well. I just wanted to confirm that we see movement all along the front line every day, and as I have already said, it's not about moving 100 or 200 or 300 meters ahead. Our military men are regaining territory by square kilometers every day. That's what I wanted to highlight. Why is it happening? First and foremost, throughout the last year, this is a classic scenario of warfare. First, the enemy goes at you, he's defeated, he incurs losses in personnel and equipment, and then we start moving forward. That's what's happening. Warfare is complicated; therefore, it's hard to think ahead and to foretell the future. But we are moving forward, and as I said, we're getting closer to solving our primary tasks that we outlined at the beginning of this special military operation. As for our men and women in uniform, I will continue repeating that because I have every reason to say that they're acting as heroes. The capacity of our armed forces is increasing.
Right now we see the banner of the 155th Brigade. It's fighting in the Kursk region, pushing the enemy away from our territory. They're not alone: the 810th Pacific Fleet Brigade, the 76th and 106th Divisions of paratroopers, the shooting regiment of the North Caucasus, the motorized brigade—everyone is working there as heroes right now. They're fighting, and let's wish all of them, everyone who is fighting in the Kursk region all along the line of engagement, we wish them good luck, victory, and for them to return home safely.
Mr. President, I just came back from the Kursk region. Those units and brigades that you've mentioned right now are doing their sacred duty freeing our territory. We've worked with them for several weeks at the front line. We shot a video. The 155th Brigade liberated several settlements, and we showed in our video that when the adversary has been pushed out of the settlement, he starts to shell that very settlement with artillery fire. We traveled to Borki, Snagost, and Lyubimovka, the liberated settlements. You can see that on the map. First the houses had been intact, and now they're being destroyed, and people from the border regions have nowhere to return to. They have no homes. They're trying to rebuild their homes. But now I suggest we call Tatiana Zibrova. She was forced to leave during temporary settlement. Do you hear us? Tatiana, your question to the President, please.
Mr. President, good afternoon. I am from the Kursk region, from the Bolshesoldatsky district. I have a question from all citizens of the Kursk region: when will our region be liberated? When will the Ukrainian army be pushed far enough so they wouldn't even dare show their face to us, or even look towards us? When can we go back to our houses, or somewhere so we can live in our own homes? One more question: will small villages that have been destroyed be rebuilt, and will the infrastructure be rebuilt there? And now the question from the Bolshesoldatsky municipality: will our citizens be put on the list for housing certificates, because they are not issued to us right now because the Ukrainian army did not go there? So we're not listed as qualifying for the housing certificate.
Madam Zibrova, no question here. I don't even want to name the specific date when the adversary will be pushed out. Right now, at this very minute, the fight is ongoing. The fighting is quite serious. It's not quite clear—it makes no military sense—to enter the Kursk region, by which I mean the Ukrainian armed forces, or to keep on staying there sending their best storm brigades and units as cannon fodder. Still, this is happening. It is for sure that we'll get rid of them. But as for the specific date, I cannot name you the specific date, but there are certain plans, so I know the date. It is reported to me regularly. But to say that by this very date would not be correct because our servicemen can hear us right now. If I just name the date, in a day or two they will try to deliver on that without regard for their own lives. A day or two would not have a great significance, but it is for sure that the adversary will be pushed out of there.
And number two, we will evaluate their detriment. And number three, everything will be rebuilt. There is no shadow of a doubt about it. We will rebuild everything: the road network, communal infrastructure, socially oriented facilities, schools, kindergartens. We'll rebuild social clubs and naturally housing. We'll provide certificates to rebuild housing. Those who want to move there, we will help them out. Right now we have allocated already, I think, about 108 billion rubles. The first tranche has already been delivered. The administration will be working throughout all of the holidays. They'll be meeting with people and solving the questions, also regarding the housing certificates. There is nothing good about what's happening to you. People are suffering; they have losses and tremendous inconveniences, especially with children and so on. But we'll do everything. Please do not doubt, Madam Zibrova, we will rebuild everything, and everyone who requires housing to be rebuilt will be covered. Everyone will receive everything that they're bound to receive. And I truly expect that the new head of the region who has been appointed to the Kursk region—he's an experienced person who knows how to work with people directly. That's why I appointed him there. He's been working at the state for quite a while, he knows how to work with voters, he's good at it, and I'm sure that it will happen. He will work individually, case by case.
Mr. President, our servicemen who right now are liberating the Kursk region do not have the status of participants in the special military operation. Why? Because they're participants in the counterterrorism operation. It has an impact on the payments that they receive. We received several appeals, mainly by the wives of the servicemen. 'My husband is serving in an assault brigade in the Kursk region and he's taking fire. He received 42,000 rubles in November, though he is at the front line.' Some servicemen do not receive payments for three months already since they're in the counterterrorism zone, not in the special military operation zone. Yet another appeal: Kursk region servicemen receive 25,000 per month, not 210,000 rubles as promised by the Defense Ministry contract. Can it be amended?
Yes, it can and it must be. This is my shortcoming. This is unexpected for me. I know what is sad here. Our servicemen who used to fight in different parts of the front line are participants in the military action, and if they have been moved to the Kursk region, they're bound to receive it. I think I'll check it, possibly. There used to be a category that was not at the line of engagement and then they landed in the Kursk region. Possibly they were not certified as the category of participants of the special military operation. Honestly, I didn't even think about it. So, my apologies. All of that is going to be corrected. It's a pity that the Defense Ministry overlooked that because it's their responsibility. But we're going to sort this out and everyone is going to get everything they're entitled to, and the military who are performing their duty at the line of engagement will get everything, and we will recalculate everything retroactively. There should be no doubt about that. Yes, I know personally military personnel who are waiting for that. I want them to hear me: rest assured, and your families rest assured, that everything is going to be recalculated. Everything that you're entitled to, you will get.
Mr. President, you said that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are basically sending their brigades as cannon fodder to the Kursk region. And we can see that: we see so many bodies of their military that they have abandoned, and there's a lot of NATO military equipment left there—Leopards, Abrams, and Bradleys. So basically the Kursk region serves as a concentration, like the biggest graveyard in the world for NATO military equipment.
That very well may be the case because the amount of military equipment in the Kursk region is almost the same as the military equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine that had been destroyed over all of the last year in the territory of Ukraine.
So I would also like to ask you whether they will get rewards for the military equipment that they have managed to destroy. Are there any problems with that?
Well, yes, the situation is grave. Yes, I know that the Defense Ministry is listening to this press conference. Everything is going to be done, and no one should have any doubt as to that.
Maybe we'll move to the room, to the audience?
Since we're talking about the military sphere, let's go to Zvezda TV channel.
Konstantin Kalashnikov, Zvezda TV channel. I have to ask you about the statements we've been hearing from you over the last several weeks. You spoke about the first military test of Oreshnik. It seems as if it is a perfect weapon, even though in the West it's still dubbed as a modification of an old Soviet missile, saying that the air defense system can bring it down even at the moment of launch. Can you comment on that? And what about the sense behind the name of this Oreshnik, because there are different theories as to why it received this name?
First, whether that is an old weapon or new weaponry: it's a cutting-edge type of weapon. Of course, anything that is being done anywhere is based upon previous achievements, and then we make a step forward. The same thing applies to Oreshnik. Yes, there were certain developments in the past, some of them dating back to recent Russian history. And based on that groundwork, our researchers and scientists have been thinking what else they can do. They talked to the client, namely the Defense Ministry, and it was even brought up to my level, and I weighed in on the final decision on whether this new missile has to be produced and in what volume. This is new weaponry—a short-range and intermediate-range missile.
You said that several experts in the West believe that it can be easily intercepted and destroyed, especially at the moment of launch. What can I say to these experts? The thing is, there are different types of air defense systems, because you should know that there are Patriot air defense systems, and there are also THAAD systems. I don't know whether they have those in Ukraine. Maybe if Americans want, they can supply those systems; let them. It's similar to our S-400, whereas the Patriot is more or less like S-300, and this high-altitude air defense system is more or less like S-400. Let them do that, and we'll ask our guys in Ukraine to find some good solutions. When I say our guys, I say that without irony, because there are those we can talk to in Ukraine, because there are many people in Ukraine who are dreaming of ridding their country of this neo-Nazi regime.
But the thing is, THAAD is basically an anti-missile system, and for many years before we had been asking the Americans not to deploy those systems, otherwise we would have to find systems that would allow us to penetrate those systems. You know, we had to come up with the Avangard system, which is kind of a cruise missile which follows the landscape without going too high. So basically all of that is only leading to new expenses, especially for American taxpayers, without giving anything in return. That said, this system has been developed and deployed. There are two positions in Romania and in Poland, and there are 24 anti-missiles deployed there. I think they're called Standard 3. In Romania, it's the 1B modification with a 300-kilometer range and it can intercept missiles at 80 to 250 kilometers of altitude. In Poland, there is a new modification. It can intercept as far as 1,000 kilometers and at the altitude of up to 500 kilometers. Whereas Oreshnik is an intermediate-range missile and it's 1,000 up to 5,500 kilometers. That's the range of Oreshnik.
Now just imagine: our system is deployed 2,000 kilometers away. Even if the anti-missile is deployed in Poland, it's not going to be able to intercept. They say that the missile is very vulnerable at the launching stage, but they won't be able to intercept those missiles so far away. Moreover, the launching sites are protected. Moreover, it takes time for the anti-missile to get to the missile, but it takes several seconds and then it's too late to catch or to intercept it before the separation. So there is no chance that the missile is going to be brought down by the anti-missiles. So if the experts in the West think so, well, let them come up with a proposal to us and to the US. They can suggest a technological experiment, a high-tech fighting duel of the 21st century. They can designate a target, say in Kyiv, concentrate all of their air defense and anti-missile defense there, and we will strike it with Oreshnik and see what's going to happen. We are willing to conduct such an experiment. What about the others? Are they ready?
Well, we understand all of their anti-missile and air defense systems are on high alert. They're ready. But you know, what I've just told you is what I have learned from our engineers, from our scientists. And of course, the American political leadership also gets their information from their experts. So, let's conduct this duel and look at the outcome. It's going to be interesting because it's going to be useful both to us and to the American side. And what about the name? Honestly, no idea. No clue.
Well, let's ask some questions from the audience.
Yes. Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Maybe you'll ask something about peace.
Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Mr. President, you have recently signed the amendments to the nuclear doctrine. Do you think the signal has been received and understood in the West?
I don't know, you should ask them. I know what the amendments are. The doctrine is not new, but the amendments are somewhat new. I'll tell you about the key changes. We talk about the new emerging military threats that can turn into military threats, like the emergence of anti-missile systems and several other factors, and they're all named in the doctrine. We also speak about raising the responsibility of non-nuclear states that might participate in aggression against the Russian Federation together with those countries that are in possession of nuclear weapons. And if these countries, just like their allies, create any threat to Russia's sovereignty or to the very existence of Russia, then we believe we have the right to use our nuclear weapons against them. And there is another component which is also related to managing our military arsenal. We've made an announcement that if similar threats are created to our allies, to the member of the Union State of Russia and Belarus—to Belarus namely—then Russia is going to view that in the same light as creating similar threats to Russia. So we're going to do everything in our power to ensure Belarus's security. This is something we're doing in coordination with and with the consent of the President, Alexander Lukashenko. I think this is a very important component of Russia's updated nuclear doctrine.
Another question from the audience.
Well, we have agreed not to shout out. Let's show some respect for one another.
Yes. But before that, let's give the floor to the lady who wants to ask about the Arctic.
Daria Shutova, Respublika newspaper. Thank you for sending Rostislav Goldstein back to our region; he started working right away. He's a very good leader.
Yes, he is very sensible, very reliable, and very consistent. I hope that he is going to succeed.
Thank you for sending him to us. My question then: in the Russian High North, in the Russian Far East, in the Republic of Komi, there are many settlements with a population of under 2,000 citizens, but unfortunately, they are not entitled to this program of building cinemas. And we know that some people want to stay in these settlements, but unfortunately there's not many opportunities for spending leisure time. Maybe some changes, some amendments could be made to the federal program so that the settlements of the Russian High North of under 2,000 people could still be entitled to this program? And I know that as a student you worked there somewhere in the North and you know how efficient it is, but unfortunately these student brigades could be used again. Maybe amendments could be made to Federal Law 44 so that when construction sites are organized based on municipal budgets, then at least 15 or 20% of that could be carried out by students, because it provides students with very good experience and it's also a huge help for Russian regions. It helps building social facilities.
Yes, 10% of money allocated for construction could be funneled to that.
Well, I'll talk to Marat Khusnullin. If that's possible, we are trying to revive this program. I think this very movement has been revived right now, and this funding mechanism could be used. It's already in use, but I'll check it and talk to Mr. Khusnullin.
