[000:00:00;00] mysma of feedback in order for those people who are interested in discussing the program to see the opportunity and necessity, and the critics of the proposed project to be able to conduct this criticism from their constructive reasonable proposals to send us so that we take them into account when finalizing the program, of course, that the goal of any political force is the conquest of horizons in the future. and how does white russia, as a political party, relate to history. now there are a lot of interpretations, especially the belarusian history. here's to historical question, how will there be a surge of interest in our history last year. e, in connection with the year of historical memory and the maximum activity of both civil society and the state in this area. and hmm, belarusians have an interest in their history. he's not like he's awake. he never faded. he just became more so

mature, maybe more active. and what is even more important is that we have ceased to be afraid of discussing previously taboo, closed topics, there would be quite a few such topics, few, of course, especially in the soviet time they were afraid to offend someone. e, sometimes, they were afraid to call a spade a spade, when e we spoke about certain periods of history. and now we have discarded this false modesty, and we say, uh, based on, uh, how we see history as it really was, and people have an interest. eh, that's to these white spots of history, but in general, in the construction of a holistic worldview of the historical holistic concept. let your individual, but the concept of the historical past place the youth. uh, here in the future political force. belaya rus, let's start with the fact that the program itself contains a number of provisions that

relate to the youth, and here we are at the organizing committee for the preparation of the teachers' congress and the creation of a political party. we discussed the draft program. in particular. there was the head of the belarusian republican youth union, who expressed his proposals for improving the party program. and they are taken into account. uh, so uh youth is not forgotten, in addition, we will hold youth venues. a range of e-program discussions parties - this is both in the youth parliament and in the universities of our country. therefore, i think that the position of the youth of the opinion of the youth will be fully studied, as for the position of the youth in future activities, it will consist in the fact that a number of projects that the party will implement one way or another it will be aimed at youth and with the participation of youth, so uh, this work will also be a meaningful

dimension. uh, activities of the party. do you apply if needed? always happy to help. my name is elena evgenievna let's meet. underfoot has long made an offer. stopudovo inna could not get home, i took her to me. vetrova 18/1, apartment 4 on the wind, you sit under the house and wait for one of us to open the door for you,

and you left, you will have to be punished. girls, useless, talk more. i have

one person. this is my propaganda, let's start, the main event of the past week according to the belarusian political

tradition happened on friday alexander lukashenko lied to a large meeting of the council of ministers from the materiel, the most important thing for and that the council of ministers is not only ministers. and also what is obvious is the prime minister who is the chief minister of the government and his deputy, who are also chief, but a little less important ministers, and also the council of ministers in a wide composition is the head of the presidential administration, the chairmen of the national bank and the committees of the head of the academy of sciences and, as it is written in the law, other officials by decision of the president. now let's move on to the meeting , its main message is that despite the multitasking of the entire vertical of power, despite the complexity of the situation around us and inside from political sanctions to military, but the main task of the government is the legislature . here, any executive at all, and in general the entire vertical of power, is to improve the well-being of the belarusian people, of course, special attention is paid to the fight against inflation. prices

the number one question for people. such a surge, which occurred last fall , is absolutely impossible to allow any more. in whatever way you want, monetary regulatory administrative prices should be fair, while no less important condition is a full range on the shelves. shops. this is the social contract of the power of projectiles, while the concept of well-being is a bit of a tricky term that needs constant clarification in propaganda and ideology for our audience, well-being is not an increase in income in monetary terms. that is to be measured with the sum of the salary makes very little sense. let's take a couple of very simple examples of 100 belarusian rubles. after all, this is a very different amount at different stages, and the dollar has absolutely nothing to do with its exchange rate, especially since in recent years the american green paper is the most stable in belarus 100 rubles. today and 100 rubles. three years ago. it's very different 100 rubles. is not it?

and the question of the welfare of citizens is about what and how many belarusians, maybe for 100 rubles. buy yourself theoretically in the conditions of what is called a dictatorship in the west, but in fact. it's just a strong decision-making power. at least tomorrow morning you can draw whatever salary you want for everyone. these are just numbers, welfare is an increase in income and minimization of expenses for citizens of the second nuance. well, let's say they began to pay me those same 10,000 rubles. i happily go to a store where prices have not exploded. but there is a nuance, well-being is also the widest choice of what i can really buy with my salary, they are fantasy somewhere , because there will be no sense in my ten thousand if i come to a store where the shelves are empty on paper, i am rich, i can afford a lot, but in fact there is no difference 10,000 rubles. i have or a million, if i can’t spend this money anywhere and the third nuance, the most important. you know, maybe i have a salary of 10,000 and there will be

enough goods. at normal prices, there will be plenty of them, but as a person i still want to go to work on a good road in the morning, and work in a modern office with all amenities during the day. i want to have lunch at a decent place, and in the evening after work, pick up my daughter from school and my son from kindergarten to go to the cinema. and all this should be provided to me by someone, so that there is a road, an office, a restaurant, a school, a kindergarten , and a cinema. it's called infrastructure which the state provides us, because this is one of the tasks of power. and this is also our well-being, including specifically mine, and this is precisely the task of the government to evenly distribute income. between simply accrued money to citizens, they sent money to minimize the cost of goods for us , they sent money to provide a wide range of goods for all citizens and sent money to create and maintain infrastructure. i personally do not need. at least a million rubles a month, which nowhere and nowhere will the money be spent - that's all

only physical. actual reflection of opportunities and opportunities in the real economy for 10,000 rubles. much more than in the fantasy economy even for a billion? everyone probably already has a story about how some acquaintance received a salary of 2,500 rubles in belarus. that out of 1,000 dollars he lived quite well, but he went somewhere to the west and began to receive 2,000 dollars. that is, his income has doubled, but there is a nuance. at the same time, expenses quadrupled, and simple mathematics suggests that, in general , a citizen began to live twice as bad, because he pursued his stupidity not for well-being, but for figures of income this wonderful balance between income and expenses. in our country , it is provided through exports. nine and a half million of our population is a very small market with all the enterprises with all the organs. how many new tractors are needed in belarus this year, each viewer personally does not need a tractor now, but in general for organizations. ok then. let them need 100

per m. makes not 100 tractors, but makes 10,000, because he can do it. but then the task is to sell somewhere those 9,900 tractors that no one needs inside belarus in order to get money and buy from someone at an adequate price what all of belarus really needs. we sold something to the countries of the collective west and other states, which today we consider unfriendly, and then there were sanctions and there we sell little, like little. what we buy from there is a problem. yes, this is her. well, the beauty is that all problems are solvable, if they are also solved in general, a strategic problem, personally the president has already decided by breaking through for us the opening of the markets of russia and china without any restrictions , there has been a serious turning point. and if we make it. if we do not sleep, we will have russia , china, the rest is enough.

for growth now, this is why to hell with them with europe using the example of tractors and schematically in the european union 450 million people who, yes, have money nominally, that is, by the availability of money, they can buy a lot of our tractors, but there are nuances, they don't have territories. children, tractors would work, there is russia where 140 million people live, which is three times less than the european and money on average from the russians. yes, less than these, but there is a colossal territory on which our tractors are needed, and there is in china whose territory is half the size of russia, but twice the size of the european union and at the same time lives there almost one and a half billion people who, in theory, need our tractors and to which the territory allows our tractors to want and for our economic model. it is much more profitable to sell not 100 expensive tractors to europe, but 10,000 average-priced tractors to russia and china. something new for the audience, everything that is called quality standards in any country. there is not only concern for citizens, but also a legal

measure to protect your market from someone else's products. it is difficult for us to supply tractors to europe because they require standard engines, euro-5-6, and so on, all the talk about environmental friendliness is noodles on the ears, specifically on the environment, everyone there does not care about the scheme, simple european concerns are the first to develop some kind of new lotion. and as soon as they are ready to produce engines with it. this becomes the standard, so that no one else in europe could sell any engines at all, if it were specifically about the environment, then the standards should be the complete absence of emissions into the atmosphere, and everyone would be transferred back to live carts and our state standard as well as our gosts - this is also and more than once the protection of its market. we do not introduce gosts that we ourselves cannot comply with, because this would be extremely stupid. well, we know how to make high-quality natural and well, sausage, so it is in our guest. and who is not knows how to do the same goodbye from our market. if we didn’t know how to do it, then this theoretically correct gost for sausage

would have buried our production, which we could not sell anything domestically. we would not have been able to lower the gost requirements a little lower, and now the main chinese market and especially the russian market are close to us in terms of their conditions for protecting their market, their quality standards. i will remind. this is more often than a measure of economic warfare. they are exactly the quality, similar to ours and we don’t have to wander around too much to enter their markets with all our products. and also these are bottomless markets for our production volume and that russia alone and china alone are more than able to buy from us everything that we produce, because they need everything in export diversification, good and necessary. but this is more of a political question, you never know if someone will start to protect their market from us with their standards, but from the point of view of a strictly economics, they could. everything is either to russia or to china and do not bathe, but the economy from politics, alas, is inseparable, therefore alexander grigorievich is a great fellow, he personally resolved

the issue not only with the absence of restrictions for us in these markets, but also with the creation of special conditions for us. this work is political and economic work should be done by the government. everything they didn't get. have last year. we have to add to this, but you see that we have solidly tied up with russia, china and iran, we will agree with india , the minister of foreign affairs of his area of ​​responsibility, is actively working. and then there are the emirates and then there are good trends in africa and there are trends, so even for the future uh, something to work on. at the same time with regards to tasks for the government. and this is the main body of executive power. there was another one in the country. in my opinion , this is an extremely important assignment from the president, but before that i will sum up the idea. the journalist's observations are completely normal that there was and will be a certain difference in views, and most often in the views of each other, among representatives of the executive

branch and leaders of the real sector. to put it simply, the official of the executive committee and the director of the enterprise will always argue and discuss. and this one is not the conflict, but the tension between them, those who are in high offices and who work on earth , is absolutely everywhere in the world , the director of the plant will consider that the executive committees do not fully understand how to work. his name does not know all the complexities, they do not take into account all the nuances, in general, in order to know, you must first work at the conveyor, and not command immediately after universities. even the best ones, on the contrary, will think that just those who graduated from these same universities and who are in the executive committees, because the government ministry is responsible for the strategic development of more in addition, they are sure that the director of a particular plant does not see the whole situation in the field and does not take into account experience. their enterprises are in the sphere, and in general, he has a smaller array of data to work with, which is true, who is responsible for the result is clear that together helping each other and

insuring in theory. this is exactly the case, but in practice it often turns out that where responsibility up to personal is blurred, where they answer, it seems like everything is a little bit, but no one specifically comes out of krylov's classic about the cancer swan and the pike. and this is what alexander lukashenko says now i believe that the speed of economic decision-making is important in any sector of the economy, as monitoring by region has shown , it is vitally possible for enterprises to make decisions themselves for the regulated conditions in which they work today slow down the whole process, so simplify all procedures as much as possible. here are davidich's purchases of finished product certificates. let the governors, at most the governors, make all the decisions, there is no need to sharpen them. them up to the president. and it fits very well with logic. president.

and what alexander grigoryevich repeats many times now is such a time that it is important to be in time, if the final decision on exporting to change the product line on markets and competition mechanisms will be taken at factories autonomously and without approvals, then the main thing is that this will speed up the decision-making process and as a result of the action, when there are 10 curators over the director of the plant. of course, they will help the director to insure against mistakes to see the future more clearly and so on. that is, will make it work and work the factory is better here. there is no doubt, but the problem of such a scheme is precisely in the speed of decision-making, if the western bolt manufacturer conditionally leaves the russian market and a huge contract becomes available. the director of the plant in belarus can single-handedly decide that tomorrow the bolt and nut plant will stop making nuts and start making only bolts in order to maximize situationally. profit, but if the director of the plant needs 10 for this approval, then he will receive them sometime, i'm sure, 10 curators they will prompt that after all it is necessary not

to switch to one bolt, but to make at least 10% of the nuts so as not to lose competence. this will be a very correct decision, but while 10 supervising bodies are working out a strategy, the russian contract on the nut will be taken by someone else, and then we will get a balanced decision with everyone, coordinated with everyone worked out. the most correct is the best, but belated, because the very subject of discussion. and this contract for nuts has long gone somewhere. does the probability of error increase when the plant is mainly responsible for the result and it is his director who makes independent decisions, obviously, yes. and of course, when not if a, when i am sure of this, then what the president says will be executed, then by itself there will be nine correct decisions of the factories and one wrong. this is at least and in the statistics of wrong decisions there will be a surge, by the way, but there will be a greater effect. from the decisions of the faithful, and as a result, we will quickly cope with the restructuring of the economy and will have time to quickly gain import independence. yes, how

here the sanctions were shouted and that's it. this objectively, everything is difficult, but now they have calmed down, everything is fine. the worst thing is that they calmed down. we calmed down there somewhere, the war in machulishchi was pierced, and then we begin to heroically seek to catch to catch. and how much does it cost, so you can’t calm down, i asked you to give me the economy. the government governors chair the entire vertical of power, give the economy everything else, i will not involve you. time is the main thing now, and now you need to take a little more risk. and this is not only normal, but sometimes it’s right for heads of enterprises, why are their hands tied there, because follow the thought of the ministry from the plant requires the volume of production. the prosecutor's office requires the absence