Ref. No. 13 |VOOD dated “_14_” February 2017 Address: 400137, Volgograd
st. Zemlyachki, 44, room 47

 (8442), 36-10-33, 48-28-70
 8-902-385-1250; 8-927-502-7361; 8-917-840-7324; 8-909-380-5766
Email:
E-mail: [email protected]

Chairman of the Committee
State Duma for Defense
Shamanov V.A.

On February 17, 2017, the State Duma of the Russian Federation will consider draft federal law No. 631118-6 “On invalidating part two of Article 43 of the Law Russian Federation dated February 12, 1993 No. 4468-1 “On pension provision for persons who served in military service, service in internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, authorities for control of the circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and bodies of the penal system, and their families", introduced by deputy V.N. Tetyokin.
In this draft law, Deputy V.N. Tetyokin proposes to abolish the reduction factor of 0.54, taken into account when calculating pensions for length of service, applicable only to military pensioners and persons equivalent to them.

The author of the bill believes that the establishment of the so-called the “reducing factor” leads to increased social tension among military pensioners due to the state underestimating their merits, and the abolition of the reducing factor will restore social justice and the force of the letter of the law.

Moreover, since 2012, the introduction of a reduction factor taken into account when calculating military pensions and the further “freezing” of indexations of military pay and military pensions did not apply to following categories pensioners and their family members (Clause 6, Article 12 of the Federal Law dated 08.11.2011 No. 309-FZ):
- judges of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and military courts;
- prosecutorial workers (including military personnel of the military prosecutor's office);
- employees of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (including military investigative bodies of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation);
- federal government civil servants.

Therefore, Deputy V.N. Tetyokin and hundreds of thousands of military pensioners and persons equated to them believed and believe that the application of these restrictions only to them really leads to increased social tension among military pensioners and is contrary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Russian legislation.
Such selectivity of legislators in relation to military pensioners and persons equated to them, in limiting their rights, violates the principle of equality established by Article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated June 16, 2007 No. 12-P, which says - “In the sphere pension provision respect for the principle of equality means, among other things, the prohibition of introducing differences in the pension rights of persons belonging to the same category without an objective and reasonable justification (prohibition of different treatment of persons in the same or similar situations).”

This is confirmed by Articles 2 and 6 of the Federal Law of May 27, 2003 No. 58-FZ (as amended on July 23, 2016) “On the public service system of the Russian Federation,” which says “military service is included in the federal public service system and is a type civil service. The federal civil service system includes: state civil service, military service and other types of civil service."

You, your Defense Committee of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, legislators and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation know all this very well, but you continue to dissuade us of the opposite.

We, pensioners of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and persons equated to them from various regions of the Russian Federation, read with great indignation the Conclusion of the Defense Committee of the State Duma of the Russian Federation dated February 9, 2017 on this project law, signed by the first deputy chairman of the committee A.L. Krasov, which “does not support the concept of the bill by V.N. Tetyokin for the following reasons”:

"1) When establishing the above mechanism for calculating pensions, the legislator took into account that the calculation of pensions from January 1, 2012 is carried out on the basis of a new (higher) monetary allowance. Moreover, even taking into account the established so-called “reducing coefficient”, the amount of “military pensions” increased by an average of 60%.

A reduction factor of 0.54 was applied to military pensioners and persons equivalent to them in January 2012, and five years have passed since its application. Over the past five years, regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation from January 1, 2013 to January 1, 2018 suspended the following rules for pension provision for persons who served in military service, service in the internal affairs department, State Border Service, in drug control agencies, in institutions and bodies of the penal system, in the Russian Guard, and their families:
- indexation of pay and military pensions in accordance with rising prices for consumer goods and services.
- monetary allowance is taken into account when calculating pensions from January 1, 2012 in the amount of 54% and from January 1, 2013 it increases annually by 2% until it reaches 100% of its amount (indexation);
- taking into account the level of inflation (consumer prices) by the Law on the Federal Budget, the specified annual increase may be established for the next financial year in an amount exceeding 2%.

As a result of the suspension of the above actions, the state guarantee to protect the pay of military personnel and the pensions of military pensioners from depreciation has not been fulfilled for the past five years (2012-2017). This led to the fact that as of January 1, 2017, military pay and military pensions depreciated by more than 44%. The purchasing power of salaries has fallen by more than a third over five years. To return to the situation that was on January 1, 2012, they now need to be increased by almost 50%.

So to say in February 2017 that “the size of military pensions in 2012 increased by an average of 60%” is not entirely correct and out of place.

“At the same time, after the increase in military pensions in 2012, the ratio between the average “military” pension and the average “civilian” pension returned to the 2002 level, and today this gap has increased even more in favor of the military pension (1.8 times).”
Why do government officials compare the size of average military pensions and persons equivalent to them with the average “civilian” pension? During the Soviet era, the army was multi-million strong and there were also many military pensioners. Now there are fewer military retirees than federal civil servants and their pensioners. According to Rosstat, there are now more federal civil servants than there were in the USSR. According to his data, at the end of June 2016, the number of workers filling positions of civil and municipal employees amounted to over 850 thousand people (excluding pensioners and members of their families).

At the same time, the average monthly salary of civil servants in the first half of 2016 was 39.1 thousand rubles, municipal employees - 37.1 thousand rubles. While the average military pension only from February 1, 2017 amounted to 23,663 rubles, and the average “civil” insurance was 13,100 rubles.

For federal civil servants, separate laws were developed on the state civil service and on the civil service system of the Russian Federation, which did not exist in the USSR. For some of them, the salary was increased and made equal to the salary of military personnel, but the reduction factor for calculating their pensions was never applied to them, although we belong to one type of federal public service.

So the question is, where is the justice here, where is compliance with the letter of the law?
If the people "contain" Armed forces and the “army” of federal government civil officials, then why are they not covered by the ratio of their average long-service pension to the average insurance “civilian” pension (1.7)?

Why did legislators establish a high salary for federal civil servants, calculated on the basis of their entire income, and hence the ensuing big sizes pensions that are many times higher than military and insurance pensions?
This especially applies to officials of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the State Duma of the Russian Federation and a number of state corporations.

It turns out that privileged pensioners are government civil servants and they are the ones who fight terrorists in Syria and other regions of the world, defend the integrity and independence of our state, and risk their lives and health.

Maybe it’s time to change this procedure for determining the ratio of pensions and apply the ratio of 1.7 to federal civil servants? They, like us, relate to the unified system of the federal civil service. Or medium military and insurance pensions calculate based on the ratio of 1.7 to average pension federal government civil servants?

Gentlemen legislators!

Why does the increase in geopolitical tension in the world, the introduction of a sanctions regime against our country, and the slowdown in global economic growth have an extremely negative impact only on the salary of military personnel, persons equivalent to them and military pensioners?

Why suspensions, restrictions, freezes, cancellations, downgrades, belt tightening, no money, etc. – does all this apply and apply mainly only to ordinary citizens of Russia, military personnel and military pensioners?

We think that it is high time to unite, tighten our belts, lower our salaries and long-service pensions, and reduce the number of social privileges for federal civil servants. It's time to introduce a progressive scale of excess profit tax, introduce confiscation of property from corrupt officials and embezzlers, and abandon the abolition of the death penalty.

Why is there always money in the budget for numerous mass sports and international political events - the Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, international championships, student festivals, the World Cup, various international forums, summits, etc., and for the defenders of the Motherland and the country's workers? no money left?

“The increase in “military” pensions proposed by the author of the bill will lead to an even greater gap between “military” and “civilian” pensions and will not only not relieve social tension, but will also lead to its greater growth.”

And here you are wrong again. Further preservation of the reduction coefficient, the division of federal civil servants into friends and foes, the enrichment of some at the expense of discrimination against others, the growth of poverty in the country, the introduction of food cards and the failure to take the measures we indicated above - this is what will really increase social tension and can lead to mass protests in the country.

The question arises: why do those who defend the freedom, independence and territorial integrity of our Motherland with arms in hand, carry out combat duty underground, in the sky and under water, and die in various hot spots, had to wait 23 years (and now continue to wait), to get what you deserve full pension?

Why can’t judges, prosecutors and investigators, federal civil servants of the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the State Duma of the Russian Federation and other regional and municipal officials wait 23 years for their full pension? Why did they immediately receive a 100% long-service pension from January 1, 2012?

How are such differences in the field of pension provision objectively justified? What constitutionally significant purposes do they serve? The answer is simple - there are no such differences and no constitutionally significant goals!

We fully understand the importance of justice in the State, but at the same time we believe that the introduction of such differences for the same category of federal civil servants has no legal, economic or moral basis.
Persons performing military service perform constitutionally significant functions, which determines their legal status, as well as the content and nature of the state’s responsibilities towards them. The need for military personnel to perform assigned tasks in any conditions, including those associated with significant risks to life and health, entails the obligation of the state to guarantee these individuals social protection corresponding to their special status.
“Checking the constitutionality of the second part of Article 43 of Federal Law No. 4468-1, the Constitutional Court came to the conclusion that, by establishing the so-called “reduction coefficient,” the federal legislator provided for an appropriate mechanism for appropriate compensation and recognized the norm in question as corresponding to the Constitution of the Russian Federation (for example, definitions dated July 17, 2012 No. 1433-O, dated September 24, 2012 No. 1800-O)."

We agree with the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation that “by establishing the so-called “reduction coefficient”, the federal legislator provided for an appropriate mechanism for appropriate compensation.” But he provided for it, but the executive branch refused to implement this provision of the law.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and you know very well that the “proper mechanism for appropriate compensation” has not been working for five years now.
So why then refer in the Conclusion to those provisions of the law that do not work in life!?

Why is no one, including the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, revealing the essence of introducing a reduction factor of 0.54 for military pensions? After all, this is a slyly veiled tax on military pensions in the amount of 46%, using the capabilities of elementary mathematics, not provided for by any laws. Even a 5th grade student knows that the number 0.54 corresponds in percentage to the figure 54%.

Such lawmaking and interpretation of Russian laws in favor of the interests of oligarchs and those close to power fundamentally undermine the faith of the people, military personnel and veterans in the triumph of the law and discredits state authorities.

“In modern socio-economic conditions, the possibility of such a sharp increase in federal budget expenditures for these purposes seems, at a minimum, controversial.”

But there is money in Russia, and you know it very well.
Gentlemen legislators!

As shown by the latest arrests of corrupt officials and embezzlers of mayors, governors, ministers, colonels of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and the continuing sale of the remains of state property, etc. - There are a lot of banknotes in Russia, but for some reason the authorities do not want to use them to improve the well-being of the people, to develop real sectors of the economy, but invest them in the purchase of US securities and for holding a variety of public, sporting and other international events.

Did the authorities ask the people whether or not, in the midst of an economic crisis, it is worth investing billions in sports infrastructure in order to raise prestige? Maybe this money should have been channeled into the economy, to fight poverty (there are more than 24 million poor people in Russia), to increase pensions for citizens and the combat capability of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation?

Thus, taxpayers of a number of developed countries, such as Spain, Germany, Sweden, Poland, refused to host the international Games 2022 for economic reasons, recognizing them as a meaningless and expensive whim, for which they have to pay not only with money, but with mutilated landscapes, cut down forests, ruined reservoirs.
This is a worthy example for the authorities of the Russian Federation.

Well, if there really is no money in the budget to abolish the reduction coefficient of 0.54, then it would be quite fair to introduce this coefficient into the calculation of long-service pensions for judges, prosecutors and investigators, federal civil servants of the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the State Duma of the Russian Federation and other regional and municipal officials.

Dear Vladimir Anatolyevich!

I would like to remind you and other representatives of the authorities the words of Emperor Peter I, who punished his descendants in terms of providing for veterans of the “sovereign service”: “Should he endure need in his old age, who best summer dedicated his to me during the service. Give him his full salary and not force him to serve..."
We see that many people in power have forgotten or simply ignored this order of Peter I, which, taking into account the current military-political situation, can lead to the fact that “if the government does not want to feed its army, then it will feed someone else’s.”

Taking into account the above, guided by the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Chapter 1, Article 3, Clause 2), which states that “the people exercise their power directly, as well as through state authorities and local governments,” in order to further prevent violations of the provisions of the Constitution RF and elimination of legal conflicts, we DEMAND:

Draft Federal Law No. 631118-6 "On invalidating the second part of Article 43 of the Law of the Russian Federation of February 12, 1993 No. 4468-1 "On pension provision for persons who served in military service, service in internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, control bodies for the circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and bodies of the penal system, and their families" to support and thereby cancel the application of the reduction factor of 0.54 for military personnel and persons equivalent to them.

Sincerely,

Chairman of the Internet Community
"Military pensioners for Russia and its
Armed forces"
G.A.Zavyalov.

Chairman of the Voronezh regional
branches of the All-Russian public
organizations of veterans of the Russian Armed Forces
Retired Colonel V.A. Sych

Chairman of the Volgograd Regional
social movement "Committee
protection of military veterans
and other law enforcement agencies." V.V. Dubachev

Comrade veterans of law enforcement agencies! This material has been viewed by about 61,000 people. Show solidarity, help yourself and send the following complaint to the Prosecutor General's Office according to the specified sample

To the question Composition of the State Duma of the Russian Federation asked by the author Browse through the best answer is Committee name
Own page
State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building
State Duma Committee on Civil, Criminal, Arbitration and Procedural Legislation
State Duma Committee on Labor and Social Policy
State Duma Committee on Budget and Taxes
State Duma Committee on Financial Market
State Duma Committee on Economic Policy and Entrepreneurship
State Duma Property Committee
State Duma Committee on Industry
State Duma Committee on Construction and Land Relations
State Duma Committee on Science and High Technologies
State Duma Committee on Energy
State Duma Committee on Transport
State Duma Committee on Defense
State Duma Security Committee
State Duma Committee on International Affairs
State Duma Committee on Affairs of the Commonwealth of Independent States and Relations with Compatriots
State Duma Committee on Federation Affairs and Regional Policy
State Duma Committee on Local Self-Government
State Duma Committee on Rules and Organization of Work of the State Duma
State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Information Technologies and Communications
State Duma Committee on Health Protection
State Duma Committee on Education
State Duma Committee on Women, Family and Children Affairs
State Duma Committee on Agrarian Issues
State Duma Committee on Natural Resources, Environmental Management and Ecology
State Duma Committee on Culture
State Duma Committee on Affairs of Public Associations and Religious Organizations
State Duma Committee on Nationalities Affairs
State Duma Committee on physical culture and sports
State Duma Committee on Youth Affairs
State Duma Committee on Problems of the North and Far East
State Duma Committee on Veterans Affairs
State Duma Commission on Mandate Issues and Issues of Deputy Ethics
Source:

Answer from freshly salted[guru]
Composition of committees and commissions of the State Duma of the Russian Federation
No. Committee name Own page
1 State Duma Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Building
2 State Duma Committee on Civil, Criminal, Arbitration and Procedural Legislation
3 State Duma Committee on Labor and Social Policy
4 State Duma Committee on Budget and Taxes
5 State Duma Committee on Credit Institutions and Financial Markets
6 State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, Entrepreneurship and Tourism
7 State Duma Committee on Property
8 State Duma Committee on Industry, Construction and High Technologies
9 State Duma Committee on Energy, Transport and Communications
10 State Duma Committee on Defense
11 State Duma Committee on Safety
12 State Duma Committee on International Affairs
13 State Duma Committee on Affairs of the Commonwealth of Independent States and Relations with Compatriots
14 State Duma Committee on Federation Affairs and Regional Policy
15 State Duma Committee on Local Self-Government
16 State Duma Committee on Rules and Organization of Work of the State Duma
17 State Duma Committee on Information Policy
18 State Duma Committee on Health Protection
19 State Duma Committee on Education and Science
20 State Duma Committee on Women, Family and Children
21 State Duma Committee on Agrarian Issues
22 State Duma Committee on Natural Resources and Environmental Management
23 State Duma Committee on Ecology
24 State Duma Committee on Culture
25 State Duma Committee on Affairs of Public Associations and Religious Organizations
26 State Duma Committee on Nationalities Affairs
27 State Duma Committee on Physical Culture, Sports and Youth Affairs
28 State Duma Committee on Problems of the North and Far East
29 State Duma Committee on Veterans Affairs
No. Name of commission Own page
1. State Duma Commission on Mandate Issues and Issues of Deputy Ethics
2. State Duma Counting Commission
3. State Duma Commission on Anti-Corruption
4. State Duma Commission for the consideration of federal budget expenditures aimed at ensuring the defense and state security of the Russian Federation
5. Commission of the State Duma to investigate the causes and circumstances of the terrorist act in the city of Beslan in the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania on September 1-3, 2004
6. State Duma Commission on Problems of the North Caucasus
7. State Duma Commission on the practice of applying electoral legislation of the Russian Federation
8. State Duma Commission for studying the practice of ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms, monitoring their implementation in foreign countries
9. State Duma Commission on Technical Regulation

In the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation (in the State Duma Committee on Defense)

Dear Vladimir Anatolyevich.

At the end of 2011, your predecessors passed two laws reducing military pensions. Federal Law No. 306, Article 13, which reduced the bonus for length of service from 70% to 40% and Federal Law No. 4468-1, Article 43, Clause 2, which established the amount of monetary allowance for calculating the pension at 54%.

There was a lot of dissatisfaction, letters, complaints, petitions and lawsuits. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation put an end to this issue with rulings No. 1433 of July 17, 2012. and No. 1800 dated September 24, 2012. Thus, I recognized clause 2 as not contradicting the Constitution of the Russian Federation, because clause 2 contains a mechanism for bringing the monetary allowance for calculating the military pension to 100%. In 2013 and 2014, it was not clear how this mechanism worked, but it still worked. For 2015 and until the beginning of 2018, everything became clear. With three federal laws, you suspended the effect of clause 2 of Article 43 of Federal Law No. 4468-1 and introduced a monetary allowance coefficient for calculating pensions.

In all the media, this was again presented as an increase in military pensions, and not bringing the monetary allowance for calculating the military pension to the required 100%. Okay, at the very least, you brought this ratio from 54% to 72.23%. Thus, the difference of 46% between the full pension and the cut-off pension was reduced. The media inflated this reduction in the difference to 27.77%, as a pension increase of 33.7%.

In February 2017, you did not accept draft law No. 631118-6 on invalidating clause 2 of Article 43 of Federal Law No. 4468-1. Okay, there are economic reasons. But for 2018, you adopted Law No. 365 and left the coefficient the same 72.23%. Apparently you decided that I will index the military pay for 2018 by 4%, and the pension will also increase by 4%. This is true. But this is an automatic increase in accordance with Article 49 of Federal Law No. 4468-1. This has nothing to do with bringing the coefficient to 100%.

And everywhere they say that military pensions have been increased by 39.1% since 2012. In 2020, this figure will increase to 50%. This is also true, but it is from the evil one, because we are paid pensions not in absolute terms, but in relative terms. Not in rubles, but in percentages. So, in reality, the cash allowance for calculating pensions was increased from 54% to 72.23%, which means that the actual increase is 18.23%.

Initially, the task was to bring 54% of the monetary allowance for calculating the pension to the required 100%. For five years you have been coping with this task. Slowly but surely, the coefficient increased, the difference between the total due pension and circumcised was reduced, and the period for receiving a full pension from 23 years was reduced. Since January 1, 2018, you have not easily stopped the process of bringing the monetary allowance for calculating military pensions to 100%, you launched it in reverse side. Your law violates decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 1433 and No. 1800. The difference between the full pension was 27.77%, now it is 28.88%. This difference will continue to increase if the percentage of salary for calculating pensions is not increased. In 2020 this will already be 31.25%. And then it’s a stone’s throw to the situation in 2012, when the difference was 46%.

The prospect of receiving a full pension is postponed indefinitely. For this difference to decrease in 2018 by at least 2%, the coefficient must be 78.23%. If you add the inflation rate of just 1.77%, it is 80%. Then your work will be visible to bring your military pension to the full deserved one. And please, do not make statements in the media that you are increasing military pensions. Be honest that you are trying to bring them up to the required amount by increasing your allowance to calculate military pensions to 100%. Military pensioners hope that before the holidays you will pass some kind of clear law and launch a mechanism for bringing the monetary allowance for calculating the military pension to 100%, in the direction of increasing the coefficient.

Military pensioner R.Kh. Rakhmatullin regarding military pensions, which he received by email.

*****

R.KH.RAKHMATULLIN

Your appeal regarding pension provision for citizens discharged from military service has been considered by the State Duma Committee on Defense.

From January 1, 2012, the size of military pensions will increase by an average of 60 percent; indexation of military pensions will be provided twice a year - from January 1 of each year and from the day the salaries of military personnel are increased, which in our opinion, cannot be considered a violation of the rights of military pensioners.

The new procedure for calculating pensions will ensure that the average size of military pensions exceeds the average size labor pension by 80% and to further maintain the material support of military pensioners at the proper level through an annual guaranteed increase in the size of military pensions, including regardless of the indexation of military pay.

As the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has repeatedly emphasized in its decisions, compliance with the constitutional principle of equality, which guarantees protection against all forms of discrimination, means, among other things, a prohibition to introduce such differences in the rights of persons belonging to the same category that do not have an objective and reasonable justification ( prohibition of different treatment of persons in the same or similar situations); under equal conditions, subjects of law must be in an equal position; if the conditions are not equal, the federal legislator has the right to establish different amounts of social guarantees, taking into account differences in their actual situation.

Taking into account the above, the establishment of different levels of increase in pay for military personnel and pensions for citizens discharged from military service is in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Pension limits exist in all countries of the world, as well as in the Russian Federation for other categories of pensioners.
For example, for federal civil servants there are restrictions on the size of the pension and the age of payment of the pension.

To calculate pensions for federal civil servants, all types are taken into account. wages, however, in accordance with Article 21 of the Federal Law of December 15, 2001 No. 166-FZ “On State Pension Provision in the Russian Federation” (hereinafter referred to as Federal Law No. 166-FZ), the amount from which their pensions are calculated (average monthly earnings ), cannot exceed 2.8 times the official salary.

Military pensioners in accordance with the Law of the Russian Federation of February 12, 1993 “On pension provision for persons who served in military service, service in internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, authorities for control of the circulation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, institutions and criminal authorities executive system, and their families" (hereinafter Law No. 4468-1) receive the right to a long service pension regardless of age, at the same time, in accordance with Federal Law No. 166-FZ, federal civil servants have the right to a long service pension years only simultaneously with the old-age labor pension, i.e. upon reaching the age of 60 for men (55 for women), regardless of the time when the length of service necessary for granting a pension was acquired.

The size of the old-age labor pension in accordance with the Federal Law of December 17, 2001 No. 173-FZ “On Labor Pensions in the Russian Federation” is established based on the amount of insurance contributions received to the employee’s individual personal account with the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation. Currently, insurance premiums amount to 26% of an employee’s salary. At the same time, the amount of wages on which insurance premiums are calculated is also limited to 463,000 rubles per year.

In accordance with Articles 1 and 9 of the Federal Law of November 8, 2011 “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation and invalidation of certain provisions of legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the adoption of the Federal Law “On monetary allowances for military personnel and the provision of certain payments to them” "and the Federal Law "On Social Guarantees for Employees of the Internal Affairs Bodies of the Russian Federation and Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation" (hereinafter referred to as Federal Law No. 309-FZ), official salaries of military prosecutors and military personnel of military investigative bodies are established using a coefficient of 1.5 , which is not taken into account when calculating pensions in accordance with Law No. 4468-1, and the salaries of employees (who are not military personnel) of the prosecutor's office, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation and judges as part of the reform of the pay of military personnel and employees of internal affairs bodies do not increase. Thus, if a coefficient of 0.54 is applied to the size of their pensions, the size of already assigned pensions will decrease.

Therefore, in accordance with Part 6 of Article 12 of Federal Law No. 309-FZ, the provisions of Part two of Article 43 and paragraph “b” of Part one of Article 49 of Law No. 4468-I (as amended by Federal Law No. 309-FZ) do not apply to judges of the Military Collegium the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and military courts, prosecutors (including military personnel of the military prosecutor's office) and employees of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (including military investigative bodies of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation), pensioners from among these persons and members of their families. In addition, in accordance with Part 6 of Article 12 of Federal Law No. 309-FZ, pension amounts for these categories of citizens are not revised from January 1, 2012.

On January 1, 2009, the Federal Law of July 22, 2008 No. 146-FZ, adopted by the State Duma, came into force, which amended paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Federal Law of December 17, 2001 No. 173-FZ “On Labor Pensions” in the Russian Federation" (hereinafter referred to as Federal Law No. 173-FZ). These changes provide for the inclusion in the insurance period of periods of residence of spouses of military personnel undergoing military service under a contract, together with their spouses in areas where they could not work due to lack of employment opportunities, but not more than 5 years.

In addition, from January 1, 2009, in accordance with the Federal Law of March 21, 2005 No. 18-FZ “On federal budget funds allocated Pension Fund Russian Federation for reimbursement of expenses for payment of the insurance part of labor pensions to certain categories of citizens", the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation is allocated funds from the federal budget for reimbursement of expenses for payment of the insurance part of labor pensions for the period of residence of spouses of military personnel undergoing military service under a contract, together with their spouses in the localities , where they could not work due to lack of employment opportunities.

The established limitation (up to five years) on counting the specified period into the insurance period should be correlated with the fairly low requirements for the duration of the insurance period necessary to acquire the right to a retirement pension - according to Article 7 of Federal Law 173-FZ, five years of insurance experience is enough for this.

It should also be borne in mind that the mere increase in the duration of the periods during which insurance contributions were not paid does not affect the size of the labor pension. The size of the insurance part of the labor pension is influenced by the amount of federal budget funds included in the estimated pension capital of the insured person allocated to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for reimbursement of expenses for the periods of residence of spouses of military personnel serving under contract with their spouses in areas where they could not work due to lack of employment opportunities.

It should be noted that for spouses of military personnel, the total length of service required to establish a pension includes the entire period of residence with their spouses until 1992, regardless of the location of military units, and since 1992 - in areas where they could not find employment in their specialty due to with a lack of employment opportunities.

Chairman of the Committee V.P. Komoyedov

*****

Many provisions of the answer are quite controversial and require careful study. However, this is the only real answer from the authorities, which attempts to justify discrimination against pensioners of law enforcement agencies.

— The most pressing topic for us now is the military campaign in Syria. Do we still have a chance to jointly resolve the conflict together with the United States?

— If we speak in the language not of a parliamentarian, but of a military man, the current situation in Syria is more than difficult. And the whole burden lies in the unpredictability of American politics and in the passive behavior of the world community, which I do not understand.

The world does not realize that further escalation of events in Syria could lead to dire consequences.

At the same time, no matter how difficult it may be for us, we must continue to look for sane negotiators both in the Trump administration and in the leadership of leading states. In addition, in addition to diplomatic channels of interaction, make wider use of professional military personnel, as well as expand the range of parliamentary efforts and, above all, try to establish a dialogue with the US Congress.

As you can see, these are not easy tasks, but they cannot be postponed, they must be solved today.

— Do you continue to monitor your family? Airborne troops? What tasks are currently relevant for the Airborne Forces?

— The word “follow” is probably not entirely appropriate in this situation. I still keep in touch with the Airborne Forces command and with my colleagues - generals and officers, veteran paratroopers. I am interested in their problems, both professional and personal. After all, most of my life is connected with service in the “winged infantry,” and this cannot be erased by transferring to the reserve or moving to another job.

It doesn’t seem correct to me now to talk about the current tasks of the Airborne Forces. This is the prerogative of the new commander and the Military Council of the Airborne Forces. But I would like to note that the troops are constantly working to improve the quality of selection and training of personnel, social protection military personnel and members of their families; development, adoption of new equipment and weapons, bringing the ratio of new and obsolete equipment to the level determined by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

— They say that Duma deputies of the current convocation are complaining about harsh measures to increase discipline in parliament. You, as a military man, probably, on the contrary, welcome this process?

— Firstly, I want to say right away that the deputies of the State Duma of the seventh convocation do not express any complaints. The decision to strengthen discipline, primarily regarding attendance at chamber meetings, was approved by all factions.

Now a friendly atmosphere reigns in the State Duma, and the entire deputy corps is focused on the work process.

Active improvement of legislation in all areas continues, so there is no time for demagoguery. Deputies of the Defense Committee fully support all changes made to the regulations.

— How does the committee now interact with and? What are the significant changes compared to the previous composition of the committee?

— The committee works with all law enforcement agencies. We have the closest ties and relationships with the Ministry of Defense. Recently, we have held a number of thematic committee meetings with the first deputy ministers of defense, and on February 22, 2017, we held a “government hour” with the minister of defense.

In addition, I personally participate in the military board of the Russian Ministry of Defense and in the single day of acceptance of military products. Representatives of the ministry are present at almost every committee meeting. Therefore, as you can see, we have close and fruitful interaction with the ministry and its structural divisions.

By the way, thanks to our joint actions, justice was restored for “military” pensioners in terms of receiving a one-time cash payment in the amount of 5 thousand rubles.

In the work of the Defense Committee, we ensured continuity in legislative activity with previous convocations. During the winter session, we completed work on six bills proposed by our predecessors, deputies of the VI convocation. Our committee implemented three bills from scratch.

Currently, 14 bills introduced in the VI convocation and eight bills of the current convocation are still in the works. They address issues of defense, protection of the rights of military personnel, military retirees and members of their families, the activities of the Armed Forces, as well as other troops and military formations, mobilization training and mobilization.

— At the end of last year, amendments were adopted on short-term contracts (from six months) with military personnel to participate in foreign operations to combat international terrorism. Explain their purpose?

“This is a very important law, since its implementation makes it possible to prevent a decrease in the combat readiness, combat capability of the Armed Forces and, most importantly, warships. The essence of the changes made is that previously, at the legislative level, the period for concluding a contract was two years, and this law allowed concluding a contract for the positions of privates and sergeants for a period of up to a year.

These changes provide the necessary level of combat readiness and combat capability of troops and forces that will be involved in carrying out tasks abroad to combat terrorism, combat pirates and take part in sea voyages. Based on the events in Syria, we see more than ever that we need to quickly, quickly respond to terrorist threats: the faster we respond to emerging threats, the more lives will be saved.

— What legislative initiatives are currently being considered in the committee in connection with construction work?

— The relevant committee for legislative activity on the National Guard troops is the State Duma Committee on Security and Anti-Corruption, and our committee, as a rule, acts as a co-executive committee. But as for the social block for protecting the rights of military personnel and pensions, these are the bills of our committee. They apply to all law enforcement agencies, including the Russian National Guard.

So, on March 22, the State Duma adopted and sent to the draft law, which proposes that if an error is discovered in the assignment of a long-service pension to a “military” pensioner, discovered after three years from the date of assignment of the pension, such a pensioner should be paid an amount equal to the amount of the pension paid on the date error detection.

Now the committee is working on another bill from the social block - on pensions for people who have lost two or more breadwinners.

This bill was adopted by the State Duma in the first reading and work on it continues.

— The pensions of veterans of the Armed Forces are significantly inferior to the pensions of employees of other law enforcement agencies who were transferred to the reserve. What is the Defense Committee doing in this area?

— To be honest, it is difficult to understand what “significantly” means and which law enforcement agencies we are talking about. The Law of the Russian Federation “On Pensions” regulates pensions in the Ministry of Defense, the Federal Service of National Guard Troops, and, as well as in relation to military judges, prosecutors and employees of military investigative bodies.

So, pensions in all departments are calculated in the same manner, namely from the salary of military personnel or employees. To calculate the pension, the following are taken into account: salary for a military position or official salary, salary for a military rank or salary for a special rank and an allowance for length of service (length of service).

The salaries of military judges, prosecutors and investigators are set relative to the salary of the first person of the relevant department.

Salaries in other departments are established by decree of the government of the Russian Federation. At the same time, salaries by rank are the same for everyone, and salaries for typical positions in the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Federal Security Service, the Federal Security Service and the Special Objects Service under the President are approximately 20% higher than in the Armed Forces and other troops and military formations. This is due to the specifics of the tasks performed by these bodies and more stringent selection.

According to the Ministry of Finance, the average pension in 2016 was: for military service pensioners - about 23 thousand rubles, for law enforcement service pensioners - 17 thousand rubles, for security agencies - 30 thousand rubles.

In any case, the size of the pension for all people in uniform depends on their position, rank and length of service. These are the main criteria that determine the amount of the pension, regardless of the department.

— Indexation of monetary allowances has not occurred for more than five years. How does the Defense Committee intend to solve this problem?

“Indeed, taking into account the fact that the indexation of military pay was not carried out in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017, the guarantee of protecting the military pay from depreciation has not been fulfilled for the past five years, that is, virtually for the entire period of validity of the federal law.” On monetary allowances for military personnel and provision of individual payments to them.”

The provisions of this law, which provide that salaries for military positions and salaries for military ranks are annually indexed taking into account the level of inflation starting in 2013, are suspended annually separately federal law.

The Defense Committee has repeatedly noted in its conclusions that, taking into account the importance of the tasks performed by military personnel and the role of this social category of citizens in the life of society and the state, the decrease in the level of social security military personnel is unacceptable.

In order to preserve social guarantees for military personnel, the committee proposed returning to the issue of indexing the pay of military personnel based on the results of the execution of the federal budget in 2017.

At the same time, I would like to note (this also applies to your previous question) that, despite the difficult economic situation and a significant reduction in the total volume of federal budget revenues, the indexation of the “military pension” took place annually by increasing the so-called reduction coefficient, which, in accordance with Art. 43 of the law “On pension provision for persons who served in military service...” in 2012 was 54%, and from February 1, 2017 it was 72.23%.

Its real increase was: in 2013 - by 8.2%, in 2014 - by 6.2%, in 2015 - by 7.5%, in 2016 - by 4%, and from February 1, 2017 - by 4%.

Thus, over the past five years - from 2013 to 2017 - the “military pension” has increased by 30%. And from 2011 to 2017, the “military pension” increased by 90%.

— The government is currently discussing reforms in the field pension payments. Will it happen that working military pensioners will be subject to additional taxes? Is this issue currently being discussed?

- I don’t agree with you here. Let me explain. Yes, the Ministry of Defense pays pensions to “military” pensioners. But at the same time, in accordance with our legislation, “military pensioners” who, after entering the reserve (retirement), continue to work in positions not related to military service, have the right to a second, “civilian” pension upon reaching the retirement age established by the state (for women - 55 years, for men - 60 years) and the minimum required length of service(in 2017 it is 8 years and will increase by 1 year to 15 years by 2024).

As far as I know, the initiatives you are asking about did not exist at the legislative level.

Any legislative initiatives regarding pensions for military personnel will be coordinated with the Defense Committee. No one will be able to deprive a “military pensioner” of his insurance pension if he has the appropriate age and insurance experience.

— If we talk about social guarantees, how do you monitor the housing construction program for military personnel?

— I would like to return to the history of the issue. In the period from 2009 to 2012, during numerous organizational changes, 115 thousand officers were subject to reduction, and the entire institution of warrant officers and midshipmen was liquidated, that is 140 thousand people.

At the end of 2012, that is, at the time Sergei Shoigu took office, the waiting list was more than 82,400 people. Now it has 29,800 people. That is, the queue has decreased by almost 3 times.

Specifically, from 2012 to 2016, 342,300 military personnel exercised their right to housing.

Of these, 175 thousand received apartments in in kind, 88.9 thousand received permanent housing, 64.5 thousand received housing under the savings mortgage system. 4.1 thousand received housing through state housing certificates, 17.6 thousand military personnel received housing through the implementation of housing subsidies.

In general, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that thanks to this new form of housing provision - a housing subsidy, as well as the savings-mortgage system, the Ministry of Defense will not build housing in the future. With the exception of spot service housing.

Practice has shown that over the past three years, more than 17 thousand military personnel have taken advantage of housing subsidies.

By the way, the maximum housing subsidy was 19.5 million rubles. It was received by a midshipman from the Pacific Fleet.

This form performed very well.

In 2015, compensation for rental housing was significantly increased. Currently, military personnel are compensated throughout the country, with the exception of Moscow, 100% of the amount they spend on rent. But in Moscow, this amount is significantly increased and depends on the composition of the family. For example, for three people this amount is more than 34 thousand rubles.

— Now another one is being formed Government program weapons development. Are her priorities clear now? How much will it be funded?

“I believe that it is impossible to skimp on defense and security. At the same time, I would like to clarify that when forming the SAP, not only challenges and security threats to the state are taken into account, but also its resource capabilities. The Defense Committee takes part here in accordance with its area of ​​competence. After all, he is responsible for the issue of financing defense spending.

Considering that we are talking not only about the security of the state, but also about people’s money, the issues of optimizing military spending, their careful planning and effective spending of budget funds are also under our special control. Therefore, I am confident that the new state armament program for 2018-2025 will be balanced and fully funded.

The priorities of the future SAP have already been outlined by the military leadership of our country. The program provides for the complete preservation of the “nuclear triad” as the main guarantor of the country’s security with the simultaneous further development of samples of general-purpose weapons complexes and systems.

More specifically, we will talk about the modernization and development of nuclear deterrence forces, aerospace defense, communications, control, reconnaissance and electronic warfare systems, robotic strike systems, unmanned aerial vehicle systems, modern transport aviation and Navy, primarily in the Arctic zone and the Far East.

— Today, for defense industry enterprises, work on state defense orders is practically unprofitable. It's good if they are not unprofitable. Top government officials are warning defense industry enterprises: get ready to survive without state defense orders in the near future. The conversion experience with, let us remind you, was simply terrible. However, with practically zero profitability of the state defense order, enterprises have no opportunity to accumulate funds for investments to switch to the production of high-tech civilian products. We need to invest in research, development, and production organization. Where to get funds from?

— Are they unprofitable? I wouldn't say that. Contracts for state defense orders allow enterprises to receive guaranteed funds for the supplied products. This is especially true for enterprises that manufacture products with a long technological production cycle, which gives them the opportunity to effectively plan their activities.

In the contracts concluded, primarily for the sole performers, an agreed profit is included, which is transferred to enterprises when fulfilling the state defense order. The amount of profit is determined by the formula “one plus twenty.” Here, 1% of the profit is added to the costs incurred, that is, the purchase of components, semi-finished products, works and services, etc., and 20% is added to the remaining cost items, that is, to the products of one’s own production.

If we talk about modernization, then both enterprises’ own funds and state funds were allocated for its implementation.

Thus, the state has already allocated about 3 trillion rubles for the modernization and re-equipment of defense industry enterprises.

Currently being developed new program development of the military-industrial complex for the period until 2025, which is projected to support the State Program for 2018-2025.

We can safely say that enterprises of the military-industrial complex are leaders in the implementation and use of new technologies. The re-equipment that has taken place at many defense industry enterprises already makes it possible to produce high-tech products not only in the interests of defense and security, but also for many sectors of the national economy.

— The transition from the military sphere of production to the civilian one is characterized by the fact that in the civilian sphere there is a higher level of competition. However, the creation of large holdings practically killed internal competition within the defense industry. The functions of struggle for the market and the competencies necessary in this regard simply die out in such conditions. And suddenly defense industry enterprises find themselves in an environment of fierce competition. What to do about it?

— As practice shows, in recent years the share of modern weapons sold abroad has increased significantly. Believe me, no one would purchase non-competitive products. It was competition that made it possible to accumulate financial resources, scientific and technical potential and make a breakthrough in the creation of new, some of the best in the world, models of military equipment.

To resolve the issue of the transition of defense industry enterprises to the production of high-tech products civil purpose A lot of painstaking work remains to be done by both the executive authorities and the deputy corps. Legislators determine the rules of the game by which the country's economy should live. The development of the civilian market sector of the defense industry must be carried out carefully in accordance with the development strategy of the state's industrial complex. The main task is to prevent any distortions in the development of some sectors to the detriment of others.

Work in this direction has begun. Issues aimed at improving the activities of integrated defense industry structures, developing and implementing measures to diversify production, primarily using dual-use technologies, are already being worked out.

As for competition, I think it should start at the level of ideas and design bureaus.

“Currently, the system for ordering weapons involves announcing tenders and various kinds of competitions. However, in 95% of cases we are talking about a single performer. And instead of the required weapons, he does what he can do, and not what the troops need. Are any measures being taken in this regard?

- I don’t agree with you. Where did you get these numbers from? Let me remind you that, in accordance with the federal law on the federal contract system, when making purchases, customers use competitive methods to determine contractors, including those you are talking about, or make purchases from a single supplier. Depending on the needs, the customer determines one method or another. But all options are aimed at increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of procurement of goods, works, and services for state and municipal needs.

As a rule, mass-produced weapons, military and special equipment are purchased from the only contractors.

Here the performers have already gone through a natural selection in terms of meeting deadlines, price and product quality.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in the interests of defense and security, only equipment that meets the given strict requirements is purchased, and its quality is monitored by military representatives of the Ministry of Defense.

— The new Duma also declares a course towards increasing the role and quality of the expert community, and new expert councils are being formed. Can such councils become a civilized institution for lobbying the interests of, for example, various defense industry enterprises?

— I can speak for the Defense Committee. An expert council will be formed in the near future. It will include experts and specialists from various structures, including military academies.

There are problems in our area, and they need to be solved by everyone together, comprehensively. I believe that only a comprehensive consideration of problematic issues by all interested parties will allow us to confidently make well-considered decisions.

— What bills in the field of defense and security does the Defense Committee intend to propose in the near future?

I have already talked about some of the bills that the committee worked on. Legislative support for the country's defense is a process that, as a rule, is aimed at finding compromises between the financial and economic capabilities of the state and the needs for material and human resources necessary for the defense of the country.

Since the main thing in military affairs was and remains man, Special attention The committee focuses on the social block of legislative initiatives in the field of defense.

— The first meeting of the board of trustees of the Military Patriotic Park of Culture and Recreation of the Armed Forces “Patriot” was held. You are a member of the council. What exactly was discussed at this event?

— First of all, elections were held for the chairman of the board of trustees, where a famous military leader, Hero of the USSR, Colonel General was unanimously elected. The immediate plans were discussed both for the development of the infrastructure of the Military Patriotic Park of Culture and Recreation of the Armed Forces "Patriot", and the creation in all four military districts and the Northern Fleet, as well as the creation of a naval cluster in Sevastopol and Kronstadt. All this will make it possible to systematically carry out military-patriotic events throughout the country.

— By the way, about patriotic education: you headed the Moscow branch of the Youth Army. Tell us about your work in creating this organization.