The politician considers that Ukraine must not only be proud of the successes of Kharkiv and other national producers, but also to support them creating the conditions for their development.
Kharkiv perfectly corresponds to the name of the capital of European machine-building: for the quality, technologies and geography. I think that it would be great to start with the organization of the international exhibition of armoured vehicles with the name Tanks World Kharkiv or maybe Kharkiv TankEx. It should be noted that Kharkiv is the native land of the best tank of the World War II; it is the capital of tank-building on the post-Soviet space. Our city disposes of design solutions, which still remain the best in the world. It is necessary to use this legacy correctly, to develop all achievements and groundwork. Correspondingly, our economic policy must be aggressive.
You may say: that’s too much for a politician! We should at least maintain what we have now. I share the similar concern as well.
I traveled to America many times, but I have never had an opportunity to visit Detroit. Once a prosperous industrial centre turned into a ghost town. This happened not so long ago in one of the most prosperous countries of the world – the USA: the plants started to shut down, the most skilled people moved, and there is only the wind searching the empty workshop premises. There are several reasons for this: oil, economic and energy crisis and the fact that Detroit itself was not accommodated to life with cars. Inconsistency between its structure and the super goal “A car to each family” put an end to the life of the world centre of motor-car construction. Of course, there are the other hypotheses of the destruction of this automobile magnate.
For me, the example of Detroit is the most convincing evidence of the fact that prosperous are those cities, which not only have the high value-added production, but also the ones, which are ready for it to prosper. Only in this case, the city will have improvement, culture, comfortable infrastructure, work places, because this is the source of city’s wealth.
It is possible to install thousands of new benches for pensioners near the entrances and to build thousands of new children’s playgrounds for kids in the yards. But if there are no proper work places for the most active, educated and capable people, if the city has now qualitative roads, there will be no budget, no life today, and no future.
In the USSR, Kharkiv was the third city of the huge country by the industrial potential. Our production facilities were the most qualitative for those times and were important.
Today, they say that Ukraine must become a “granary of Europe” and a “Silicon Valley.” Yes, we have all conditions for this. But it should be noted that even in prosperous Europe, there is still a big gap in living standard between the poor, agrarian countries and the rich, industrial ones. Sometimes this gap may be noticed in one country, like Italy, defining the living standard between the agrarian south and the industrial north.
Everything is interdependent in economy, and it is necessary to manage it so as not to admit disproportions.
Kharkiv can develop and produce excellent turbines and electric generators, aerospace machinery, planes, tractors and road machinery, tanks, machines, cables and more. Everything is made by the unique people, which are taught at the unique departments of higher educational institutions. To save, to develop and not to let this heritage to fall into decay by losing the legacy means to guarantee the decent future for our children and the prosperity for our dear city.
Attending various economic forums, I often here lamentations about the low competitiveness of our high-tech products, about the outdated equipment and the production, which is allegedly noncompetitive on European markets.
I am not going to analyze the situation in the whole country. But in Kharkiv, the enterprises, which successfully overcame the crisis of 1990s, managed to start active modernization. Selling their products abroad, they spend the earned money on the purchase of the best European equipment, on the product certification according to European standards. Some of them, like Yuzhkabel plant, even opened their representative offices in European countries.
Therefore, I continue asserting that the statements about noncompetitiveness of the products of Kharkiv’s plants are a delusion. To tell the truth I even lose my temper when I hear the words of some capital snobs about the alleged “poverty” of our enterprises. Have you ever been here? Have you seen what we can do?
Kharkiv is not ashamed to enter even the global markets with its high-tech production. And Ukraine can and must be proud of this. And not only be proud but also support the productions and create conditions for their development.
Is there a possibility for the Ukrainian enterprise to compete with, for example, the French one, if there is a great distance between our and its financial abilities?
Let’s start from bank crediting on development. French enterprise pays a credit interest of 2-3%, while Ukrainian one pays 20-30%. It is a tenfold difference. Without the solution to this task we will never be able to improve the situation.
However, one might expect that with devaluation of the national currency, the export potential of Ukrainian enterprises must increase. But our producers of high-tech products have to purchase raw materials, components and materials for foreign currency, which increases the product’s cost price in the end.
I’ve heard a lot in the Parliament about the support of national producers, but now we are talking about reforms and nothing is said about it. Instead, we are listening about the language, which must be used by a tired Ukrainian engineer to write technical documents. As for me, I don’t care what is the language used by a scientist or an engineer in the workshop or design office, if he/she creates unique innovative products. Only the fact that he/she creates it is important. Internal closed technological chains could significantly increase the competitiveness of our enterprises on Ukrainian and foreign markets and to push up the industrial growth.
Despite all difficulties, Kharkiv has all chances to become a centre for not only Ukrainian, but European machine-building. We have human capital for this (engineering research schools, engineering higher educational institutions, competent workforce), production sites for investments and for new innovation productions. Of course, it will require efforts. But no one has even tried to start. Look how the leading European states defend the interests of their producers on the domestic and world markets, how they promote their technologies and industries. Let’s learn from them in order Kharkiv not to suffer the same fate as Detroit.
