4 . R ozderzhavlennya commercial sea port in Ukraine.
Sea ports of Ukraine - almost the only objects in the structure of marine the country, which is in full public administration and is one of the largest taxpayers. Payment of income tax only by sea ports is estimated at a rate of about 6% of total revenues in over-budget.
Sea ports occupy a significant place in the whole of the sea trans-port Ukrmorrichflot: share in the total number of employees reaches more than 45% of salary deductions for sotsstrah - more 70% share of the total depreciation here is about 45% share of the ports in total revenue - more than 70% share of total VAT - almost 90% 2. This way of further development of transit potential stitutions of Ukraine, provision of export opportunities is to increase the efficiency of the formalities sea ports of Ukraine.
During the past 10 years the economic issues rather ac-worked actively deals with issues of port activity in the country, which practically always associated with the need or, conversely, irrationality tion attract commercial sea ports of Ukraine 3.
Accepted believe that privatization by itself ensures efficiency of economic activities due to the increased economic per-interesovanosti producers, and competition, in turn, provides effective nyy economic development in all areas of business. Meanwhile, as international experience shows, Privatization does not always lead to those results which it was designed. So, for developing countries, a model of liberalization was not just a brake development of national shipping and led not only to a significant increase in the price component of the freighting of goods, but also worked actively reflected nega-on rates Economic Development 4. On the contrary, China, you korystovuye-market instruments, along with quite substantial state-pidoy we acquired significant economic results and now is the leader in terms of economic growth 5. You can also give examples of countries such as Japan and South Korea. Meanwhile, loss (Generally in the world), we seaports their natural monopoly forcing ports to compete in nosvitovomu total scale and the global fight client that will inevitably attract to pursue a need for increased private participation in port development diyalnosti6.
Privatization Problems ports continue to be relevant for many countries in Central and Eastern Europe. According to the international company research Danube " 7, in Europe there is a tendency for the transfer of port facilities in the concession to private owners. However, as a rule, follows the principle of for state-con-trol landowners as security and use of port facilities, which zdiysnyuyet were generated in one form or another.
Yes, the Danube ports of Germany and Austria are the property of the state-class management which make municipal or regional administration. At the same time as terminal operators serve public and private companies.
Ports Hungary mainly under state control. Did, however, there are several private ports, including ports "Mapahi in Chepeli (ownership of the largest shipping company Mapahi"), Rehhorohi "- as in Chepel, port metallurgical plant Oypahehh" in Dunauyvaroshi.
Fully privatized ports are in Slovakia, with most greater part of the shipping company shipping Slovak and ports (78% share of the estate) acquired the company Vshhaizehuiz 8.
In Bulgaria, discussed the issue of introducing concessions for ex-staggered its sea and river ports.
Romania actively use various forms of privatization. Under the new concept of privatization, the country adopted the implementation of a triple system of transportation facilities. In particular, the owner of the infrastructure remains Transport Ministry, maintenance and infrastructure management provides local governments, private operation of terminals engaged operator.
past 7 years in Romania were conducted with the transfer of ports to conduct maritime Danube port authorities to local authorities. This port of Su-Linate - in 1997, the ports' Zymnycha "and" Turnu-Mehurele "- in 1999, Port-la Breyi" - In 2000
experts from Romania noted that in practice the transfer of his private concession operators of port terminals for a period of 10 to 25 years will lead to positive results in the ports. In fact, concession arrangements in Romania, from Romania implemented in the ports' Dokury "and" Bazinul in Galati, who took in Bucharest concession company that trades metal. The term concession for Faith-Mun ports are between 50 to 100 years 9. Activation process lead-tion port in the transport sector in Romania led to a noticeable increase in participation of foreign companies in the Ports and shipping.
For Ukraine is very useful experience could be privatized-tion in Greece. Here seaports transformed into closed joint-stock products-prises (JSC) with mixed ownership. Thus the main shareholder is the state, and then gets it right on the use of all port facilities and management on a concession basis. According to this scheme in 1999-2000 reformed ports "Piraeus" and "Thessaloniki", the largest port of Greece.
The new draft law Ukraine on the ports' position is that ports can be public, private and communal. Especially superechly-tive is the question of possible transfer large strategic ports in someone ments (municipal) property. Positive experience of such rozderzhav-tion presented by Professor V. Chekalovtsem 10, but in our view, should not happen on-the adverse effects of the transfer of municipal property in Odessa and other ports of Ukraine.
Today clear tendency to broaden participation private sector in the development and commercial sea ports, above all, the port of Odessa, where passing almost all process is non-entities.
In favor of privatization of some port functions are 3 main Al-humenty.
Expanding the spectrum of service and increased freight. Practical teak shows that the state Department of Administration or unable It provides users with cotton-port all kinds of necessary business, consulting, organizational and other services. Participation of private commercial companies in the creation and operation of port facilities increases their interest in increasing the freight, improving port facilities, improvement of transit process to meet customer needs.
increase and facilitate the financing for development and maintenance of port facilities and equipment for loading and unloading. Of course, the world building and heavy construction equipment ports are very expensive, and governments seek to avoid funding that is necessary. Often these goals are involved in capital, which complements the state of the program is fully funded or retention of some port facilities and equipment which are operated by private firms.
Improved management. Private опера­ тор порту має більшу свободу дій у питаннях наймання (звільнення) та оплати праці персоналу. Такий оператор стійкіший до тиску ззовні; він змушений effectively conduct its operations as a private enterprise can not be unprofitable.
However, the work port state enterprise can also be an efficient (for example take the Port of Singapore). This could be useful, necessary only to practical activities of port management met support-ku to the executive branch.
Privatization associated with significant risks: can cause (even within a single port) monopoly structures that restrain con-kurentsiyu market, increasing emphasis on profit than on devel-ku production. This may provoke conflict situation of users, and thus the result of privatization will lead to better quality of port services and the efficiency of production.
the example of some ports that are faced with numerous difficulties, we can conclude that privatization is only capable of resolving the problem port. The trend towards commercialization of certain port functions became the answer to Noah response to increasing government interference in management. It was to role in resolving operational and commercial challenges, given the over-used at the same administrative and bureaucratic methods.
attention privatization process ports pay some financial and consulting organizations, including the World Bank reconstruction and devel-opment, which directly address these tasks are designed so-called "reform Tools Port, which generalizes the scheme presented in ri-diagram (see Figure). The feature of such instruments comprehensive assessment is necessary to implement the appropriate actions that lead to both positive and negative conclusions about the consequences of transformation port property.
With this tool, the strategic line of port privatization has become so-called "selective privatization. This need to carefully examine each function performed by the port based, above all, from what port (Sea Gate) - a principal place of foreign trade and a means-ness ties and transit potential of Ukraine. And most of these in-ring must determine which port functions and in what form should remain in public administration or control. These features define the scope and com-petentsiyi state of port management.
special importance should be given exposure features that are most effective, Later can do the private sector. Select models of privatization of this part requires a combination of commercial features private business interests with national interests. It should also ensure that the chosen form of property-name and type of organizational and economic structure allow-allow the creation of enterprises to respond quickly to changing internal and external conditions of functioning of ports.
After defining features that should rozderzhavyty need to install those operational, technical, economic and financial conditions that have to be reach-through privatization, and a new mission to determine how far th revised economic structure. In the course of privatization should also make sure that businesses - candidates to perform functions that are subject to privatization, professionally and economically able to perform such work at the appropriate level. In these subjects, above all, should be inside-nents to be a financial state that would allow them to invest and reinvestuva-ty of the profits to the development not only of the functions that Muta-they realize, but the port as a whole, expanding the scope of its operation.
Where the private sector can not perform the full scope its obligations and, in particular, make the necessary investment, the time-event may be a company with a state and private capital. When the port for the effective functioning znado-bytsya expensive equipment, and private enterprises themselves are unable invest, need to consolidate the efforts of state or even the government can take over some or all port functions.
In large countries, the level economic development which can put a lot of port functions to the private sector (eg, Sina), was con-nyate legislation aimed to prevent any abuse and implementation of incentive measures (reducing the size of concession fees during the growth of cargo handling and, conversely, the application of penalties for incomplete downloads port equipment). There zastosovuyet-Xia registration rates which are set private sector agreements that they enter into, and on this basis are controlled and limited opportunities for the emergence of monopolies. In the latter If possible reserves are also rendered to some berths or facilities for public use and so on.
possible variant, when the state sells Port of shares (state-state) enterprises. It should be decided on maintaining the state's control over time or blocking stake. The offer shares for sale can be oriented on the open market or in separate groups of individuals. In some cases buyers shares may only be a national investors, in others - even foreign.
State may decide to sell its assets to her port without losing ownership of assets such as land, buildings and so on. or can give them a concession to the private sector, subject to certain requirements regarding the use and responsibility.
Without loss of property rights and rights to operate the existing port facilities, the state could allow private sector participation idea of the implementation-hee functions on the basis of joint activity, contract agreement, lease, etc.. An example is the practice of operating container terminals.
choice of model port development potential among the following options: denatsionali-ing - ports and port services are independent of management; commercialization ports and port services operated by NGOs cre-ation of joint stock companies in which control of the state remains or a blocking stake, privatization - a form of commercialization in which the action creation ryuvanoyi stock company mainly or entirely owned by private ac-Meeting.
denationalization and commercialization is not necessarily interdependent. De-nationalization may be the following options:
zero, corresponding centralized management;
partial, where some functions are implemented centrally;
full, in which central government public authorities are not involved in the management of ports.
Accordingly, the determined and the degree of commercialization, though he has features. Zero degree corresponds to commercialize a situation where the action ports that are publicly owned, municipal authorities, not transferred in trust non-governmental sector. Partial con-fine - most or all shares owned by the state and local government, is transferred in trust non-governmental sector. Higher form of commercialization - private ownership of all means of production for all functions related to the operation of the port and all port activity is provided by private firms.
From the standpoint of the interests of national economy, during the con-nutyh measures pursued such goals as improving competitiveness petitiveness ports due to high productivity handling com-plex, increasing the rate of return on capital by increasing the efficiency of the formalities of stabilizing or even reducing price level at ports-servants; international transport security, improving working conditions and social security of workers, increase of transit; preservation of jobs, wages according to the quantity and quality of work.
port customer requirements associated with growth as services, reduction of chennyam terms of freight, cargo processing, and price stability-and-reefs, all security activities.
in terms of improving efficiency of the port is diyovishym means free competition in the port activities between private businesses, rather than control by administration. This should be provided for the principle of free pricing of port services for commercial dynamism activities with mandatory application of preventive measures against unfair competition.
Each country has its peculiarities. Therefore, foreign reform experience of port management can be used only in light of their national and local differences and conditions of each operation port. Tear-zhavlennya port functions consistent with the principles of market economy, but when his conduct is necessary to set certain restrictions To avoid the appearance-wise the monopoly entity.
Thus, the institutional transformation of port activity should be in the creation of v'yazuvaty State of favorable conditions for development of ports and far-oral activity. This, above all, should be provided:
upgrade, development, construction and in good condition far silicon structures approach channels and other facilities to ensure safety of the ship-plavstva are of strategic importance;
compliance with the current state of marine and inland waterways of the Euro-pean and international standards;
competitive access of subjects to the organization of activity of commercial services in sea and river ports;
comprehensive reconstruction assistance and improve handling capacity of port facilities, the introduction of clean technologies reloading works, environmental safety of coastal waters;
comprehensive promoting cooperation and coordination of the ports of Ukraine to enhance their competitiveness at the regional and world-tural market of port services;
improve navigational safety in national waters, sea ports and their protection from acts of terrorism;
create legal and economic conditions for the inclusion of seaports to unified logistics networks;
promoting measures to enhance the role of seaports of Ukraine in the transit transport systems, including international transport corridors.
0 comments:
Post a Comment