Official website of the President of Russia

Transcripts   /

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev: Alexander Alexeyevich, a new year has arrived and, despite all of the financial difficulties that are present in our country and in other countries, I would like for us to talk about the current situation within the cultural sphere.

I am sure that we will be able to maintain all of the principal programs relating to the development of culture in our country and, in spite of certain problems with financing, we will nevertheless develop this very important part of our lives.

Accordingly, in addition to financing the main programs and maintaining the upkeep of museums, theatres, and other cultural institutions, it is also imperative to think about those who work in culture.

Some time ago, we made the decision to switch to a new system of labour compensation. I would like for you to tell me about what has been done so far, and when this switch will be complete.

Minister of Culture Alexander Avdeyev: Dmitry Anatolyevich, first of all, I would like to say that the past year was a sound one for Russian culture; some excellent works of art were produced, winning prizes at international festivals and competitions.

Of course, paying employees working in the field of culture was a major problem, especially in the provinces. You talked about this problem at our meeting four months ago and instructed me to resolve it.

(Next, the Minister of Culture told the President about the switch to a new system of branch labour compensation in cultural institutions, which took place on December 1 and increased average wages by 28–30 percent.)

Dmitry Medvedev: There is another topic that I would like to discuss with you. Some time ago, when I was still a government administrator, I headed the commission on inspecting the preservation of cultural patrimony in museums. The commission was working, and as far as I understand, it continues to work today. Are there any preliminary results from these inspections, and what conclusions have you made, as minister, regarding those results?

Alexander Avdeyev: The inspections continue. We inspect an inventory of 86 million items.

Dmitry Medvedev: Units of issue.

Alexander Avdeyev: Units of issue, that’s right. According to our estimated data, we have carried out about 62 percent of all the inspections. I must say that by the end of the year, the inspections had revealed that we were short 86 thousand units of issue.

Dmitry Medvedev: These are losses over the course of what period?

Alexander Avdeyev: These are losses since the 1920s. For now, we hesitate to call them losses; they are items that have not come up. And that figure is diminishing; in the middle of last year, it was at 104 thousand, whereas now it is 86 thousand.

Dmitry Medvedev: Why?

Alexander Avdeyev: We find them. During Soviet times, museums would open branches and share their collections; records were not well-kept. We check not only for possession of items, but also the fire extinguishing system, the security system, the identification system, the record-keeping system, system of storerooms, and their quality. I must say that I don’t think there has been an inspection like this any other time in the last century.

But I must tell you the most important part: 86 thousand items have not shown up, and of those, about nine thousand are under criminal investigation. That makes up ten percent of the absent items. Naturally, some of them may have decayed; after all, we are not only inspecting paintings and diamonds – we are also inspecting bast shoes.

I would also like to talk about museum workers. It is thanks to our museum workers that we have nevertheless preserved most of our patrimony; after all, we are missing only 0.1% of the whole. And now, this inspection is not a burden for museum workers; I wouldn’t say that it is fun, but most likely, it is professionally satisfying, because it is a matter regarding their work, that which is most important to them – preserving valuable items.

But do you know what we found, besides the absent objects? It became apparent that we lack a scientific system of record-keeping and identification. We need to switch to digital identification and a unified record-keeping standard.

Dmitry Medvedev: I understand. Here is what I’d like to say about this issue.

First of all, I fully agree that this inspection must be complete and we must carry it out fully, to the very last nail in each unit of issue, in even the farthest, smallest museums.

Second, it is very important to create an electronic record-keeping system (I also spoke about this some time ago) and to allocate money for it. If we don’t have normal record-keeping, we will ultimately fail to count some very important items. We have never had a system like this, you are right.

But now, we have the capability to do this, using the most modern methods of marking and identifying, including secret ones, which would allow us to track the displacement of items in many different places, such as particularly valuable items that have significant artistic value, which are insured, etc.

Third, it is necessary to work with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Emergency Situations to develop a special system of protection. I know that it is not currently uniform. A museum in the capital is one thing, while a small regional museum in the provinces is quite different; nevertheless, this kind of system must be developed. We should calculate to see how much it will cost and, ultimately, make a decision about financing it.

And the final issue that I would like to address: I agree with you, of course, that this inspection is mostly conducted by museum workers themselves, and the overwhelming majority of these people are true enthusiasts, people who give their whole lives to this difficult though very interesting work, in exchange for limited compensation. But this does not mean that we should be blind to various kinds of problems.

Therefore, it will be imperative to use the outcomes of this work – in some cases, perhaps, the interim outcomes, and at the end of the inspection – it will be imperative to consolidate the results and, in all probability, make some organizational decisions, if it becomes necessary.

I am not talking about criminal investigations – that is a separate topic. All such facts must provoke us to instigate a criminal investigation and make the decision to conduct investigative actions. However, this situation has had various phases.

You and I understand something that occurred in the 1920s and 30s – something that, unfortunately, essentially happened based on direct decisions by the authorities. Now, regardless of the decisions we make, we can talk only about recovering those items, either by buying them back from private collections or bringing them back to our motherland by other means.

Those were decisions made by the government; certainly, they were decisions that should be judged as ill-considered and, indeed, sometimes illegal. Nevertheless, we cannot do anything about this now, besides buying items back.

If we talk about more recent actions, in all probability, these are simple criminal acts whose perpetrators should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But this task is not up to the Ministry of Culture, of course; I just want you to be aware of it and address it in cooperation with the Prosecutor General’s Office and its Investigating Committee, and the investigating authorities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Because we must ultimately collect a final list of everything that we have, we must appraise our national patrimony and keep a strict record of it.

Alexander Avdeyev: I would like to talk about one other pleasant topic.

The Ministry of Culture and the general pension system were justly criticized for not doing enough to help our outstanding artists when they retire. Last year, we spent 30 million roubles [over $1 million] on helping impoverished artists. This year, we will provide targeted help to National Artists of the USSR – the ones who are over 70 years old (there are about 140 such individuals).

Dmitry Medvedev: That is good. It is indeed a very important mission. Please continue.