Abstract
The overwhelming majority of social infrastructure facilities remain in state ownership, requiring special formats for attracting private investment without possibility of disposition and loss of their destination. Mechanism of public-private partnership doesn't leave any other option for such projects, and the "private concession initiative", which has become widespread in recent years, is best suited for projects focused on commercial activities, although this limits its application to social facilities. Non-competitive basis of this format relies on the market offer of the investor, whose rationality does not imply social behavior and whose activity is obviously not intended for budgetary participation. Recently, there has been an increase in cases of government authorities taking commitments on budgetary co-financing of agreements concluded as a result of such initiatives, which is often fraught with systemic violations of budgetary legislation. Connivance of the control-supervisory and judicial authorities results in formation of skewed law enforcement practice, in 36.2% of projects investors receive additional rental income from the budget, objectively not justified. This not only results in budget overpayments, but also devalues competitive formats that were previously quite successful — at present only 1/5 of social projects are concluded through a competitive process.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.