Interview with "Kazakh Chubais»

Gregory A., scold your home. It is said that once the devaluation cooking. - And we've learned that we are always criticized, no matter what we do. I think this is due to the fact that the level of financial literacy among us still lower than in Moscow, but good business papers do not in principle. Therefore, some confusion. In addition, it seems to me, I still can not forgive the previous devaluation, which had to be carried out in 2009, a week after my appointment to the National Bank. It is believed that one could not do devaluation. But it was an objective necessity. The devaluation in Russia was 50%, in Ukraine - 60%. We in Kazakhstan devalued the tenge by 25%. That's right, I realized that the new risks of your critics have seen in a planned transition to a floating regime of the National Bank exchange rate? - We actually go back to him - he has been with us for many years. That is what we did from 1999 to 2009 - this is called a managed floating exchange rate. Because there are two extremes of the same - free floating and fixed exchange rate tightly. And between them there are plenty of options. And the IMF documents acknowledge this. February 4, 2009, we introduced along with the devaluation of the currency corridor, which in February 2010, greatly expanded. And due to the fact that the tenge actively strengthened in recent years because the market excess amount of dollars, no need for the corridor as an anchor of economic stability no longer exists. Therefore, we will from March 20 and cancel. But this led to what we were constantly talking about the second wave of devaluation - or after the completion of the corridor from 20 March, or after the holding of early presidential elections on 3 April (interview taken before the election - "F."). But with the current volume of commodity exports from the country and rising prices for metals, oil and grains such talk no rational explanation can not be. In this case the first two and a half months of the year we bought a $ 6 billion, to prevent too rapid appreciation of the tenge. Under these conditions, you as the chairman of the National Bank, probably more worried about a similar problem of Russia's inflation? How are you going to deal with it? - It is slightly lower than in Russia, but also high - 3.7% in the first quarter (in Russia - 3.9% as of April 4 - "F."). Generally more expensive food. In addition, rising prices for oil and petroleum products. This is the same theme with which we faced in 2008. Of course, on the one hand, exporters are happy. But these prices because we live in an open economy, will inevitably lead to the fact that increasing food prices, utility tariffs, and the chain it affects other sectors. Peak annual inflation in Kazakhstan took place in 2008, when it was about 20%. Moreover, almost 70% of this increase was a result of rising prices on world markets for food and energy costs. For what percentage inflation rates are responsible for the global market? - More than a half. We'll wait, of course, the outcome of the first quarter, and then make a more detailed analysis. But it is obvious that those prices that are established for wheat and oil, the situation is more or less predictable. But if prices rise by 20%, then it may be harder to keep inflation in a planned corridor of 6-8%. If this trend will grow, then the forecast will need to be reconsidered. How does the situation with the prices that you are exporting the grain? - We have exported relatively small amounts - 5-6 million tons of grain. Even at $ 300 per ton is $ 1.5 billion, of total exports is less than 3%. The attempt to keep the prices of grain, flour and bread, though we have seven thousand kilometers of border with Russia and we are members of the Customs Union is doomed to failure, because we all bought up. Therefore, we should take or any joint action with Russia, or try to get prices on some items did not greatly differ from the Russian price level. I myself have lived in Germany at the border with Austria and saw how people traveled to the neighboring country to buy boots. That is, it's all over the world so. Therefore, from the fact that sooner or later the world price would come to Russia and Kazakhstan, can not escape it. The only question is the lag. Sometimes the lag of 3 months, and sometimes - 6 times - a year. But sooner or later it will happen. You mentioned the joint actions that will need to take. Do you have any specific proposals to Russia? - In accordance with the signed documents on a single economic space, we determined that central banks should enter into an order of six agreements. Of these agreements in the field of exchange control, repatriation of foreign exchange earnings and monetary policy coordination is very important. We can again because of those circumstances or to enter the path of rising raw material prices, which may take several years. But if there is a sharp drop, it will happen again in Russia devalued and we too shall have to carry it out. Note that for internal reasons in the past 16 years, Kazakhstan has never devaluation was not performed. Each time we were helped from the outside. Therefore, the coordination of monetary policy, if we really are building a common economic space - is an important task for the future to us from these situations to leave. Because as it turns out: Russia has begun to devalue, then we did compensation, and then there were big problems in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, because they are our neighbors and for them it was also quite big shock. Therefore, those countries with which we are building a common economic space should be some mechanism of coordination and harmonization. What exactly - it is a question for discussion. Now, there are no drafts that could be discussed. There is still only an understanding of what it should be done with the Russian Central Bank and National Bank of Belarus. And what this document might look like - this is a subject for negotiation. But the move in this direction is necessary. After all, if we understand that we have the circuit operates when the rate a few years strengthened, it may be, should not need much to strengthen, so you do not make a sharp devaluation? Clearly, this is more manageable model will be more intervention, but in terms of the overall economy, I really do not think that the devaluation of once in 10 years to 56% - that's good. How can we fight inflation and simultaneously buy the currency? - If the main objective - inflation targeting, while the amount of intervention should be minimal, it is. Although there are exceptions. The classic example - the Bank of Israel, which for decades and watched for inflation, and for the course. We, by virtue of the fact that we have a good demand for our tools, all tengovuyu liquidity, which is releasing to the market, carrying out foreign exchange intervention, sterilize by issuing notes. We are still currently can afford it, because profitability is very low - on three-month notes about 1% per annum, for six-month notes - 1.45% (at CBR yields on two-year bonds maturing in 2013 is about 6.5% - "F .. ") With inflation at 7-8% in real terms we can afford it for very long. That is, we take away from the market more liquidity than to return in real terms. But if the free liquidity of banks will go on lending to the real sector, which we all hope and have to raise rates, for us it would be very expensive. Then have to go to greater appreciation of a need to in order to have someone shared the costs. It turns out that for the benefit of the financial market customs union has not yet begun to work? - This is a long-term project, so the impact should wait for a long time. De facto, he began to work only from July 1 - that is not even passed the year. Customs officers will leave July 1 this year. A number of agreements that were signed in the framework of the Customs Union will take effect from 1 January 2012, and another part - from 1 January 2013th. So no need to wait for returns right now - it does not happen. I as an economist with the experience of other regional associations, I believe that the Customs Union - it is still good. More than 7 thousand kilometers of the border, which runs on a flat area, it is impossible to administer. You will need to put it on 10% of the population of Kazakhstan. And then we also know, at your and our customs are not Vereshchagin, and about the fact that "I do not take bribes" and "I hurt for power" - this is a very nice phrase, but not all employees of customs authorities of our countries guided by these principles in their daily activities. The introduction of the Customs Union is already affecting the economy of Kazakhstan? - We have a very interesting statistics, which sharply reduced imports of official cars. According to our records, people with cash left for the Russian Federation and buys a car there. In Russia, cheaper? - Cheaper, because the market anymore. I think that in many other positions too, it will happen. It is normal for many years we were at the customs division, and now markets more and more will be integrated. If someone figured out how to use this situation to his advantage, he will work on it and as it was in Europe. In some countries, entire industries declined sharply or disappeared. But in general, consumers and citizens benefited greatly. Because the general price level declined due to increased competition, and I think that we have the same thing will happen gradually. Is it possible that something in Kazakhstan to buy cheaper than in Russia, following the example of cars? - Theoretically, a very big concern in Russia, should cause the possibility of unregulated imports from China through Kazakhstan. That is when Chinese companies will open assembly plants in our territory and the results of this assembly will be imported to Russia. I think that the interest would cause the food industry and its products - not only in the grain sector and by-products of grain, and meat production. Russia, especially Moscow, a huge amount of meat imported from abroad. If we can solve problems that relate to processing, storage and sanitation, will benefit all. You will have good quality meat, which do not have to be imported from Australia or Argentina. The same applies to fruits and vegetables, although there is a more southern countries - Uzbekistan and Tajikistan - have a competitive advantage. I always give an example with flowers. Here you'll excuse me, but we all know that a substantial proportion of flowers that we buy in Moscow and Alma-Ata, or made in Colombia, or Kenya. And in Azerbaijan, of course. They carry aircraft. And despite the fact that tulips actually come from the North of Uzbekistan and southern Kazakhstan. So it makes sense to restore historical justice and restore the Kazakh tulips in the Moscow market. We have people who, for example, crossed the Dutch tulips with those that are called autochthonous tulips, which grow only in Kazakhstan. This allows, on the one hand, to obtain resistant varieties, on the other hand, they are beautiful not inferior to the Dutch. National Bank of Kazakhstan today is not the supervisor for the banking system - its functions moved to the Agency for Financial Supervision Authority (FSA). However, you as the chairman of the National Bank is a board member and chairman of the FSA Board on financial stability. 2 years ago Bank "BTA" unable to pay its obligations, and the government effectively nationalized it. Now the bank feels like? - Normal. The main thing is that by September 1 of last year solved the problem of external debt restructuring. The judgments of the UK, U.S. and Russia supported the restructuring and the bank is now working normally. The main question that everyone keeps asking - what will happen to the plans of the Savings Bank, but we have no part of these negotiations, they are carried out between the Fund, "SK" and Sberbank. The last thing we heard - that for the year, when you are audited, the negotiations will be resumed. But the parts we do not know: it's just a negotiation between the owners of a controlling stake and potential strategic investor. If the bank feels fine, is there any sense in selling it? - There are statements by the government and the leadership of the fund, "SK", that they would like one of those banks, which entered the crisis period, to leave within 2 years. If I understand correctly, just as from 1 September 2010, after the end of the restructuring, we can assume that these 2 years. That is, to September 1, 2012, they have to go from there. We also had a lot of talk about why one of the largest banks need to sell to Russian investors. I am on this subject too many times spoken. But the $ 6 billion in assets of BTA are in Russia - mainly in Moscow and Moscow region. Controversy over him with the former majority owner has not yet been completed. Therefore, if the buyer will not Sberbank, then it should be "Gazprom" and VTB - that there are organizations that can conduct detailed work on the return of Russian assets to the bank. This work is in any case, you need to do: to restructure the terms of 50% of the recovered assets should belong to the creditors. But in order to avoid losing these assets, needs a strong Russian partner. That's it. That is, if the assets were in China, would need a good Chinese partner. And so on. It's just an objective situation. But when I say this, some accuse me that I was an agent of Moscow. Just Mr. Ablyazov (former beneficiary of the BTA - "F.") at the time purchased from the bank's assets is in Moscow and Moscow region, and therefore I say that the bank needed a Russian partner. A collaboration with Sberbank profitable by the fact that some assets were given loans and BTA, and Sberbank. But I repeat: the negotiations leading fund "SK", we are in it will not interfere. If they agree - well, if you do not agree, you will need to negotiate with some other non-Russian or Russian counterparts. After a rather unpleasant situation that has evolved around BTA and in particular its Russian assets, is it profitable to produce its investors to Kazakhstan to the Russian market? There is a desire to limit their activity? - My position is rather the opposite - I am for the purchase of foreign assets in the Customs Union. After all, under normal circumstances, in 2020 we will have a single financial market. That is, we believe that the restrictions on withdrawals, which were introduced during the crisis have been removed: in terms of Kazakh investors, there should be no difference in principle the purchase of Kazakh or Russian assets. We need to move it, because 2020 is not far away and have to start now. For what is a single financial market? Kazakh banks, insurance companies, Russia's Pension Fund of Belarus will be able to operate in the territory of our common economic space based on their national licenses. That is, we will have a single market for goods, labor and services, including financial ones. And if we begin to move in this direction, some additional restrictions that here in any case not necessary, and act now to gradually get out on the basis of reciprocity. Can someone from the private Kazakh investors to return to the Russian market in the near future? - Before the crisis, the bulk of Russian acquisitions made two large banks - BTA and Kazkommertsbank. Until August 2007 it was the twins, who were very aggressive, gave a lot of loans and invested in real estate in Russia and Kazakhstan. But when, in August 2007 began the first phase of the crisis (in Kazakhstan earlier than for Russia, because our banks are more tied to external financing), shareholders and managers of Kazkommertsbank sell or refinance for more than 20 facilities in Moscow, including the "Ritz Carlton" and in Kazakhstan and the money paid on external debt. A BTA represented Ablyazov continued to bet on real estate sector because it sincerely believed that he was going to "bounce", and continued to invest in real estate and in 2007, and in early 2008. That is Ablyazov, a physicist by training, was very bad banker, using the bank as a tool to finance their projects in real estate. With perseverance worthy a better cause, he believed that property prices will rise all the time. When they crashed in the Alma-Ata, and he said, and I'm including what to sell and close a Russian real estate debt, he did not, but rather how he could pull out money. And when, in November 2008, I realized that in Russia the real estate market began to fall, then he began to pull money from the bank and withdraw through offshore companies. Gregory A., scold your home. It is said that once the devaluation cooking. - And we've learned that we are always criticized, no matter what we do. I think this is due to the fact that the level of financial literacy among us still lower than in Moscow, but good business papers do not in principle. Therefore, some confusion. In addition, it seems to me, I still can not forgive the previous devaluation, which had to be carried out in 2009, a week after my appointment to the National Bank. It is believed that one could not do devaluation. But it was an objective necessity. The devaluation in Russia was 50%, in Ukraine - 60%. We in Kazakhstan devalued the tenge by 25%. That's right, I realized that the new risks of your critics have seen in a planned transition to a floating regime of the National Bank exchange rate? - We actually go back to him - he has been with us for many years. That is what we did from 1999 to 2009 - this is called a managed floating exchange rate. Because there are two extremes of the same - free floating and fixed exchange rate tightly. And between them there are plenty of options. And the IMF documents acknowledge this. February 4, 2009, we introduced along with the devaluation of the currency corridor, which in February 2010, greatly expanded. And due to the fact that the tenge actively strengthened in recent years because the market excess amount of dollars, no need for the corridor as an anchor of economic stability no longer exists. Therefore, we will from March 20 and cancel. But this led to what we were constantly talking about the second wave of devaluation - or after the completion of the corridor from 20 March, or after the holding of early presidential elections on 3 April (interview taken before the election - "F."). But with the current volume of commodity exports from the country and rising prices for metals, oil and grains such talk no rational explanation can not be. In this case the first two and a half months of the year we bought a $ 6 billion, to prevent too rapid appreciation of the tenge. Under these conditions, you as the chairman of the National Bank, probably more worried about a similar problem of Russia's inflation? How are you going to deal with it? - It is slightly lower than in Russia, but also high - 3.7% in the first quarter (in Russia - 3.9% as of April 4 - "F."). Generally more expensive food. In addition, rising prices for oil and petroleum products. This is the same theme with which we faced in 2008. Of course, on the one hand, exporters are happy. But these prices because we live in an open economy, will inevitably lead to the fact that increasing food prices, utility tariffs, and the chain it affects other sectors. Peak annual inflation in Kazakhstan took place in 2008, when it was about 20%. Moreover, almost 70% of this increase was a result of rising prices on world markets for food and energy costs. For what percentage inflation rates are responsible for the global market? - More than a half. We'll wait, of course, the outcome of the first quarter, and then make a more detailed analysis. But it is obvious that those prices that are established for wheat and oil, the situation is more or less predictable. But if prices rise by 20%, then it may be harder to keep inflation in a planned corridor of 6-8%. If this trend will grow, then the forecast will need to be reconsidered. How does the situation with the prices that you are exporting the grain? - We have exported relatively small amounts - 5-6 million tons of grain. Even at $ 300 per ton is $ 1.5 billion, of total exports is less than 3%. The attempt to keep the prices of grain, flour and bread, though we have seven thousand kilometers of border with Russia and we are members of the Customs Union is doomed to failure, because we all bought up. Therefore, we should take or any joint action with Russia, or try to get prices on some items did not greatly differ from the Russian price level. I myself have lived in Germany at the border with Austria and saw how people traveled to the neighboring country to buy boots. That is, it's all over the world so. Therefore, from the fact that sooner or later the world price would come to Russia and Kazakhstan, can not escape it. The only question is the lag. Sometimes the lag of 3 months, and sometimes - 6 times - a year. But sooner or later it will happen. You mentioned the joint actions that will need to take. Do you have any specific proposals to Russia? - In accordance with the signed documents on a single economic space, we determined that central banks should enter into an order of six agreements. Of these agreements in the field of exchange control, repatriation of foreign exchange earnings and monetary policy coordination is very important. We can again because of those circumstances or to enter the path of rising raw material prices, which may take several years.

But if there is a sharp drop, it will happen again in Russia devalued and we too shall have to carry it out. Note that for internal reasons in the past 16 years, Kazakhstan has never devaluation was not performed. Each time we were helped from the outside. Therefore, the coordination of monetary policy, if we really are building a common economic space - is an important task for the future to us from these situations to leave. Because as it turns out: Russia has begun to devalue, then we did compensation, and then there were big problems in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, because they are our neighbors and for them it was also quite big shock. Therefore, those countries with which we are building a common economic space should be some mechanism of coordination and harmonization. What exactly - it is a question for discussion. Now, there are no drafts that could be discussed. There is still only an understanding of what it should be done with the Russian Central Bank and National Bank of Belarus. And what this document might look like - this is a subject for negotiation. But the move in this direction is necessary. After all, if we understand that we have the circuit operates when the rate a few years strengthened, it may be, should not need much to strengthen, so you do not make a sharp devaluation? Clearly, this is more manageable model will be more intervention, but in terms of the overall economy, I really do not think that the devaluation of once in 10 years to 56% - that's good. How can we fight inflation and simultaneously buy the currency? - If the main objective - inflation targeting, while the amount of intervention should be minimal, it is. <<>> Although there are exceptions. The classic example - the Bank of Israel, which for decades and watched for inflation, and for the course. We, by virtue of the fact that we have a good demand for our tools, all tengovuyu liquidity, which is releasing to the market, carrying out foreign exchange intervention, sterilize by issuing notes. We are still currently able to afford it, because profitability is very low - on three-month notes about 1% per annum, for six-month notes - 1.45% (at CBR yields on two-year bonds maturing in 2013 is about 6.5% - "F .. ") With inflation at 7-8% in real terms we can afford it for very long. That is, we take away from the market more liquidity than to return in real terms. But if the free liquidity of banks will go on lending to the real sector, which we all hope and have to raise rates, for us it would be very expensive. Then have to go to greater appreciation of a need to in order to have someone shared the costs. It turns out that for the benefit of the financial market customs union has not yet begun to work? - This is a long-term project, so the impact should wait for a long time. De facto, he began to work only from July 1 - that is not even passed the year. Customs officers will leave July 1 this year. A number of agreements that were signed in the framework of the Customs Union will take effect from 1 January 2012, and another part - from 1 January 2013th. So no need to wait for returns right now - it does not happen. I as an economist with the experience of other regional associations, I believe that the Customs Union - it is still good. <<>> More than 7 thousand kilometers of the border, which runs on a flat area, it is impossible to administer. You will need to put it on 10% of the population of Kazakhstan. And then we also know, at your and our customs are not Vereshchagin, and about the fact that "I do not take bribes" and "I hurt for power" - this is a very nice phrase, but not all employees of customs authorities of our countries guided by these principles in their daily activities. The introduction of the Customs Union is already affecting the economy of Kazakhstan? - We have a very interesting statistics, which sharply reduced imports of official cars. According to our records, people with cash left for the Russian Federation and buys a car there. In Russia, cheaper? - Cheaper, because the market anymore. I think that in many other positions too, it will happen. It is normal for many years we were at the customs division, and now markets more and more will be integrated. If someone figured out how to use this situation to his advantage, he will work on it and as it was in Europe. In some countries, entire industries declined sharply or disappeared. But in general, consumers and citizens benefited greatly. Because the general price level declined due to increased competition, and I think that we have the same thing will happen gradually. Is it possible that something in Kazakhstan to buy cheaper than in Russia, following the example of cars? - Theoretically, a very big concern in Russia, should cause the possibility of unregulated imports from China through Kazakhstan. <<>> That is when Chinese companies will open assembly plants in our territory and the results of this assembly will be imported to Russia. I think that the interest would cause the food industry and its products - not only in the grain sector and by-products of grain, and meat production. Russia, especially Moscow, a huge amount of meat imported from abroad. If we can solve problems that relate to processing, storage and sanitation, will benefit all. You will have good quality meat, which do not have to be imported from Australia or Argentina. The same applies to fruits and vegetables, although there is a more southern countries - Uzbekistan and Tajikistan - have a competitive advantage. I always give an example with flowers. Here you'll excuse me, but we all know that a substantial proportion of flowers that we buy in Moscow and Alma-Ata, or made in Colombia, or Kenya. And in Azerbaijan, of course. They carry aircraft. And despite the fact that tulips actually come from the North of Uzbekistan and southern Kazakhstan. So it makes sense to restore historical justice and restore the Kazakh tulips in the Moscow market. We have people who, for example, crossed the Dutch tulips with those that are called autochthonous tulips, which grow only in Kazakhstan. This allows, on the one hand, to obtain resistant varieties, on the other hand, they are beautiful not inferior to the Dutch. National Bank of Kazakhstan today is not the supervisor for the banking system - its functions moved to the Agency for Financial Supervision Authority (FSA). <<>> However, you as the chairman of the National Bank is a board member and chairman of the FSA Board on financial stability. 2 years ago Bank "BTA" unable to pay its obligations, and the government effectively nationalized it. Now the bank feels like? - Normal. The main thing is that by September 1 of last year solved the problem of external debt restructuring. The judgments of the UK, U.S. and Russia supported the restructuring and the bank is now working normally. The main question that everyone keeps asking - what will happen to the plans of the Savings Bank, but we have no part of these negotiations, they are carried out between the Fund, "SK" and Sberbank. The last thing we heard - that for the year, when you are audited, the negotiations will be resumed. But the parts we do not know: it's just a negotiation between the owners of a controlling stake and potential strategic investor. If the bank feels fine, is there any sense in selling it? - There are statements by the government and the leadership of the fund, "SK", that they would like one of those banks, which entered the crisis period, to leave within 2 years. If I understand correctly, just as from 1 September 2010, after the end of the restructuring, we can assume that these 2 years. That is, to September 1, 2012, they have to go from there. We also had a lot of talk about why one of the largest banks need to sell to Russian investors. I am on this subject too many times spoken. But the $ 6 billion in assets of BTA are in Russia - mainly in Moscow and Moscow region. <<>> Controversy over him with the former majority owner has not yet been completed. Therefore, if the buyer will not Sberbank, then it should be "Gazprom" and VTB - that there are organizations that can conduct detailed work on the return of Russian assets to the bank. This work is in any case, you need to do: to restructure the terms of 50% of the recovered assets should belong to the creditors. But in order to avoid losing these assets, needs a strong Russian partner. That's it. That is, if the assets were in China, would need a good Chinese partner. And so on. It's just an objective situation. But when I say this, some accuse me that I was an agent of Moscow. Just Mr. Ablyazov (former beneficiary of the BTA - "F.") at the time purchased from the bank's assets is in Moscow and Moscow region, and therefore I say that the bank needed a Russian partner. A collaboration with Sberbank profitable by the fact that some assets were given loans and BTA, and Sberbank. But I repeat: the negotiations leading fund "SK", we are in it will not interfere. If they agree - well, if you do not agree, you will need to negotiate with some other non-Russian or Russian counterparts. After a rather unpleasant situation that has evolved around BTA and in particular its Russian assets, is it profitable to produce its investors to Kazakhstan to the Russian market? There is a desire to limit their activity? - My position is rather the opposite - I am for the purchase of foreign assets in the Customs Union. <<>> After all, under normal circumstances, in 2020 we will have a single financial market. That is, we believe that the restrictions on withdrawals, which were introduced during the crisis have been removed: in terms of Kazakh investors, there should be no difference in principle the purchase of Kazakh or Russian assets. We need to move it, because 2020 is not far away and have to start now. For what is a single financial market? Kazakh banks, insurance companies, Russia's Pension Fund of Belarus will be able to operate in the territory of our common economic space based on their national licenses. That is, we will have a single market for goods, labor and services, including financial ones. And if we begin to move in this direction, some additional restrictions that here in any case not necessary, and act now to gradually get out on the basis of reciprocity. Can someone from the private Kazakh investors to return to the Russian market in the near future? - Before the crisis, the bulk of Russian acquisitions made two large banks - BTA and Kazkommertsbank. Until August 2007 it was the twins, who were very aggressive, gave a lot of loans and invested in real estate in Russia and Kazakhstan. But when, in August 2007 began the first phase of the crisis (in Kazakhstan earlier than for Russia, because our banks are more tied to external financing), shareholders and managers of Kazkommertsbank sell or refinance for more than 20 facilities in Moscow, including the "Ritz Carlton" and in Kazakhstan and the money paid on external debt. <<>> A BTA represented Ablyazov continued to bet on real estate sector because it sincerely believed that he was going to "bounce", and continued to invest in real estate and in 2007, and in early 2008. That is Ablyazov, a physicist by training, was very bad banker, using the bank as a tool to finance their projects in real estate. With perseverance worthy a better cause, he believed that property prices will rise all the time. When they crashed in the Alma-Ata, and he said, and I'm including what to sell and close a Russian real estate debt, he did not, but rather how he could pull out money. And when, in November 2008, I realized that in Russia the real estate market began to fall, then he began to pull money from the bank and withdraw through offshore companies. Meanwhile, Kazkommertsbank repaid all its foreign debts, and on July 1, 2007 in "TuranAlema 'share of external debt was about 64%, while the" Kazkom "- about 62%. That is, whether Ablyazov responsible and honest man, he would still remain chairman of the board of directors and no defaults and restructuring was not. These two banks of 3 years from the Russian market is almost gone. To what extent and at what pace they will come back - it's a great question, because so far nothing in the external markets are not attracted. The only bank in Kazakhstan, which has recently placed Eurobonds - a People's Bank. He was able to attract $ 500 million in London Why London? <<>> A couple of years ago you said that it is cheaper to go to Middle Eastern markets - the Middle East and Far East, yes. But since I have this bank does not have a relationship (Grigory Marchenko, before returning to the National Bank was the chairman of the People's Bank - "F."), they can decide how and what to do. In general, they have there fair amount of liquidity. That is, it was, in my view, just a show of force or the flag. And they showed that even with the complex history can go out and take the money on good terms - 7.5%. Moscow is trying to become one of the international financial centers. Can she rely on issuers from Kazakhstan? - Why not? We are about it, in fact, talking a long time. Luzhkov has been such ideas as early as 1996, the year. But if we move towards a single economic space and in the future - integrated financial market, should be Kazakh issuers in the Russian markets and Russian issuers may be in the Kazakh market. Because we still have one big difference - it is pension funds that have accumulated more than 11% of GDP. As in Russia, they are only voluntary, they are less than 1.5%. The money, at least in part, in fact, could go to the Russian market. But again, it should be a process in both directions. In addition, there is another point that distinguishes Kazakhstan from Russia - we have, the only country in the region, adopted a law on Islamic finance. <<>> This is a quite interesting alternative to classical financial products - bonds "sukuk". An Arab Bank has opened a subsidiary bank - "Al-Hilal." I think at the end of this year there will be a second and possibly third Islamic banks. That is a good alternative for those same Russian companies, which went on Middle Eastern markets with similar instruments. Reform of the financial system of Kazakhstan, that you have had, often staged in the CIS sample. So I wonder how do you assess the proposals for reform of banking supervision, which were made during the crisis and partly decorated in the recommendations of the Basel Committee? - As for the big banks, I think the problem too big to faie not solved in principle. Here the most important thing - what to do with the big banks that operate in dozens of countries. There must be an international approach, which is not, as a national approach does not solve the problem. "Basel-3 ', in my view, has been severely weakened by lobbying. In June, when I was in Basel, they were more rigid and, from my point of view, more appropriate approaches. But later, they were weakened. We in Kazakhstan are planning to switch completely to the demands of "Basel-3" - by 1 January 2013. And that is a compromise, because it could do before. Why the West are going to stretch this process until 2018 - is unclear. In addition, there is still no common definition of capital (in many countries they are a bit different), as a single set of accounting standards.