The resignation of Yuriy Vitrenko is connected with the fact that Ukraine is not prepared for the winter period from the point of view of energy - these are the opinions expressed by experts regarding the resignation of the head of Naftogaz of Ukraine.
«Vitrenko should have been released much earlier", said the People's Deputy and former Minister of Housing and Communal Affairs Oleksiy Kucherenko, the politician believes that something happened that should have happened a long time ago - "Vitrenko should have been fired much earlier - rather, not to do stupid things, and not to allow an adventurer to a position in a strategic energy company. I really do not envy Vitrenko's successor at Naftogaz. It is a very difficult task to dig out this garbage, created from the company of Kobolev and Vitrenko, especially in the conditions of war. But there is no other way and this task is uphill. Our team is constructive and ready to cooperate in such conditions!"
According to a political expert Mykhailo Chaplyga, the very existence of "Naftogaz" is irrational from the point of view of the State: "Vitrenko's escape was fully predicted already in the middle of summer. When all EU countries had already been preparing for winter for at least two months and were buying up all the coal, oil and gas in the world, and our "managers" were only thinking about the need to convene a winter commission. The fact that the country does not enter the winter period ready in terms of energy was said by many experts and deputies. At that time, the management of Naftogaz was engaged in attempts to pump out almost 300 billion hryvnias from the budget, schemes for gas export, talked about firewood, tents, windmills, and was preparing to leave for the winter in warmer countries."
In addition, shortly before Vitrenka's resignation, the management of Naftogaz awarded itself billions in bonuses. And when the country was on the edge of the abyss, he proudly resigned. In adequate countries, the expert notes, such managers do not resign, but go to court. But in Ukraine, such an option is unrealistic.
"It is obvious that after Russia's shelling of our critical infrastructure, it was not Putin who turned off the gas supply to Centerenergo, but Naftogaz. Motivating with financial aspects, Mykhailo Chaplyga emphasizes. - It is quite obvious that the very existence of Naftogaz is irrational from the point of view of the State - and is simply an atavism of the Kuchma period. The only argument in favor of the very existence of Naftogaz was the participation of this legal entity in the Stockholm arbitration. But that matter has long passed. And the premiums have been paid, as well as the payment of the work of external lawyers. Personally, I'm not surprised. Neither resignation, nor the future. I hope that the hard winter will allow us to realize the predominance of state interest over private interest and will finally force us to rethink the essence of the so-called corporatization reform. After all, now the same processes are taking place in EnergoAtom."
Vitrenko's resignation is not just an individual personnel event, it is the finish of the "reforms" started in 2014 by Poroshenko, the financial analyst believes Oleksiy Kush.
"Reformers" created Naftogaz as a "state within a state", firmly separated from its owner - the people represented by the Cabinet of Ministers by a partition in the form of a supervisory board. Wilhelm Ripke, an ideologue of "neoliberalism" and, at the same time, a fan of South African apartheid, wrote about a similar practice: it is necessary to cut off state enterprises from the population with the help of puppet management bodies and redirect the flow of profits into private hands," says Oleksiy Kush.
According to him, the most obvious essence of the reforms was that the article on the company's social function was removed from the Naftogaz Charter, leaving only profit. "This maximum focus on profiting from the mass consumer is the core of the reform efforts. The company was not supposed to provide social good, and the profit was distributed through bonuses and the budget "for the roads".
The reform itself, initiated in 2014 by Yatsenyuk, took place under the slogan of fighting two prices for gas — for commercial and household consumers. Everything ended with the law on the recapitalization of Naftogaz at the expense of the state for more than UAH 200 billion.
The result of the reforms: We started with two prices for gas - we reached five prices: household consumers, TKE, state employees, preferential industries, entrepreneurs; the 20/20 program failed: the volumes of commercial gas produced did not increase to 20 billion cubic meters, but even decreased; the fate of UAH 40 billion spent on deep drilling remained a mystery.
"The problem is that, as the current energy crisis in the EU has shown, that's not how civilized countries behave. The new head of Naftogaz can change the situation for the better only if a new development strategy is formed. Otherwise, we will get the same. The situation in our country will begin to change for the better when they stop shuffling a dirty deck of cards in the form of specific neurotic characters who are unable to achieve the goals necessary for the development of the country, and not for personal enrichment," the expert added.
