Yesterday at the meeting of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security and Defense, the Minister of Social Policy A. Reva, who introduced the members of the Committee to the concept of the draft bill on pension provision for servicemen (it is not yet a question of a ready-made bill, it is still in the works).
According to the concept, there are positive moments - for example, for those who quit from 1991 to 2014, disproportion in pensions is eliminated - when those who retired in the same years from the same positions, in the same rank / service, received different pensions.
But in general, the approach proposed by the concept, I believe, is very far from the principle of social justice. Since he divides all military retirees into two categories - those who quit until 2014 (they are offered a minimum pension for their retirement) and those who quit after 2014 or will retire later (for them, the pension is calculated according to a separate formula and increases several times ).
I repeat: I do not see this concept as adequate. And that's why.
If we are talking about the social protection of ATU participants, then I'm two-sided "for". To do this, it is enough to introduce a certain coefficient, and let the participants of the ATO receive a pension of 2, 3 or 4 times higher than the rest - there are no problems.
But according to the proposed concept, conditionally speaking, the ensign, who was not close to ATO and who had stayed in the rear for all these years, but is now retiring, will receive a pension that is incommensurably greater than the "Afghan" colonel who left earlier.
Where is justice here - I personally do not understand.
In connection with which several remarks:.
The bill, as stressed A. Reva, still in discussion with the "siloviki". it is possible to expect its changes before receipt for consideration in the Verkhovna Rada;.
The Ministry of Defense does not currently support the proposed concept, which was announced yesterday at the meeting of the Committee by Defense Minister C. Poltorak (quotation: "we have not yet found a consensus"), and his deputy O. Shevchuk;.
Probably the main thing. Even with the MO position, a powerful public response is needed to change the situation. Without it, it is difficult to expect fundamental changes in the proposed concept. At the same time, in my personal opinion, active speculation and PR on this topic of the Opposite make it "toxic" for other deputies, which should be taken into account by the leaders of veteran organizations (despite the fact that the real "return" of Opposobok in the form of laws passed by the Rada is practically zero) - As for me, I defended and will defend the rights of military pensioners in any case (at the same time, without personal interest - as a People's Deputy, I do not receive a "military" pension, but I care about the fate of more than half a million military pensioners,. my friends and colleagues who faithfully served Ukraine);.
An objective argument why the government will not implement Decree No. 704 - lack of funds. After all, in this case, pensioners need to find more than 30 billion UAH for this year, which are not in the budget. But is this the reason to arrange a "pension segregation" for the military for the foreseeable future - a big question.
After my yesterday's skirmishes with A. Reva about this bill (I apologize to him - maybe I was incorrect), we agreed to meet in the working environment and discuss the main acute issues. I will inform you in the course of events.
Original.