[MUSIC] And the last point which I need to mention about the development of economy and realization of constitutional principles in economy, is the protection of social interests, and social rights. I mentioned about this before when we discussed human rights issues, but I would come back to these questions because they are very important for regulation, for legal regulation, for constitutional regulation of the economy. The first point, which we had to start from is that the Russian federation is on a very tough choice when there is a line between social and socialistic state. Today, Russia is declared to be a social state or welfare state, social start. It's a principle which was taken from the European practice, probably at the mostly close to the German social start principle. And this was the principle which needed to be legally described to tell it from the socialistic approach to all the social policies in social sphere. The difference between these two is rather in the field of socialistic paternalism cares about the people so much that the people has no motives. They are not stimulated for their own economic activity and they are not stimulated to make their own business for looking for a better job. Because they are supported by the state and their wealthiness is sometimes depended more on the state than on their own activity results. Social state pretends to be different and pretends to keep a fair balance between state protection of people in those cases when people could not care about themselves. And in general, the social stage should make the basement for general, social development, but not to make it paternalism care about the people. For the Russian state, it was a quite practical problem to find this difference and to make the real distinction between the former practice. I mean, the practice in the Soviet time, and the practice which is required by the constitutional principles since 1993. And the state needed to look for this distinction and look for where this line to be to drawn, in under the high social burden, under the high social pressure. When all the people expect from the state that the state will care about the social interest quite much, the state should guarantee the payments for retired people, for those who needs some social payments and some help from the state. Because of their unemployment and in other crucial cases when the people has no opportunity to earn money for life. The state in this situation needed to get more resources than the economy could give. And sometimes it was one of the cause why the state needed to be more involved in economic relations and why the state needed to get some properties, some industry back to the state ownership just to get the source of income to cover all the social expenses. And this became much more current when the state needed to compensate the decreasing of oil prices in the world market. And when the state needed to still keep the social protection on the same level without the same resources. In this situation, the state tried to look for the proper solution of all this balance and finding. And the state tried to make different measures, different steps to make the regulation, the whole system, to work in the manner which is more close to the manner of free market and constitutional principles of free marketing and democracy. The state tried to get rid of some responsibilities of some burden of social payments through monetization of privileges. It was the compensation through direct payments to those people who got a certain privilege, well, say, that some people have a right to get some medicine for free. And instead of that right, they were given money to go to buy the medicine by themselves and to make the economy work in a free market style. The measures taken by the state was a matter of very big manifestations when the people did not believe that they will be fairly compensated. And though it was directly mentioned, directly written in the federal law, making this new system of monetarization of privileges, that the level of social protection should not decrease. Many people went to courts and argued that, in fact, they now get less than they had before. The constitutional court heard some cases about this and the constitutional court needed to compare the level of social protections before, and the level of social protection after. In some cases, the constitutional court found that it was not just compensation and the payments which were established instead of former privileges do not really compensate. But in the very end, it was I would say, point correction. But not the abolition of the whole reform in general. And the reform was finalized in a few years when all these matters were realized in practice. But when we talk about other measures which the state tries to take, whereas not so directly trying to get rid of those institutions which appeared in the Soviet time and which still is in a social mentality a part of state responsibility in front of the people. But the state, when the economic situation became much worse after the decreasing of oil prices, after year 2014. And the state tried to use another source of solution for this social responsibility for the other source of social protection. Namely, the state put on the private persons the burden of financial support of social payments. One example could be the binding force of those state prescription when employee should pay to its employers, some payments for their right to go for their vacation. If they live in the far north, they have the right to go on vacation to the south, and the employee should pay for this travel. This was one of the natural privileges paid by the private person in favor of other private person, but established by the state and as a system of fair social practice and fair social support. This case was a matter of consideration in the constitutional court and the constitutional court decided that the state had a right to establish this payment, when the employee has the responsibility in front of its employers. This could be a part of new regulation in realization of constitutional principles. But in general, the state is looking for making less responsibility in front of the people by itself and trying to look on more efficient economic measures, to keep both the social responsibility expected in the society and the free market principles, which are written down in the constitution.
