Mine №5655. What scenario of post-war recovery did the law lobbyists create for the president to sign?

For eight months, the president was persistently led to sign Law № 5655 (hereinafter - № 5655). The pool of support, scrupulously built by the authors of the law, is constantly working to dispel any doubts about the purity of the "urban planning reform". To promote the ideas of Law No. 5655, the entire Ministry of Community Development of Ukraine, Territories and Infrastructure (Ministry of Infrastructure) was involved, headed by Oleksandr Kubrakov, the popular digital minister Mykhailo Fedorov, and the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) Semen Krivonos (who "comes" from the reformed State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning) as well as international partners. An army of speakers on duty, armed with colorful slides, almost every week at various fashionable panels tells the country about the benefits of the law, which will finally "make the urban planning sphere digital and transparent, forcing corrupt mayors to bring order to communities and adopt master plans." Hallelujah!

The topic was so expertly discussed, posted in social networks and praised with good reviews that one already wants to brush away the law №5655 like a pestering fly: "Do whatever you want with it!". This is what they count on. The last optimistic and friendly photos of the author of №.5655, Olena Shulyak, with the head of the National Agency of Ukraine for the Prevention of Corruption, Oleksandr Novikov (and Novikov did brilliantly play the role assigned to him by the scriptwriters of Law № 5655), seem to be designed to impress the biggest skeptic. After all, anyone can go through three hundred pages of the law and three thousand - a comparative table of the final version if they wish, but only people who are either in the topic or in collusion with them can find the corruption schemes laid in it by lobbyists. And this is well understood by all the participants in the protracted positional war. Does the state know what is really happening or are political figures just in a conspiracy?

"Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Oleksandr Kubrakov does not doubt for a moment the rightness of the head of the specialized committee Olena Shulyak, with whom he has been together since the time of working in the Office of Effective Regulation of BRDO," the ministry says, clarifying quite seriously that all opponents of Law № 5655 have been bribed. –  But Kubrakov, as one of the key managers of the government, is burdened with so many tasks of the united ministry that it was common sense for him to delegate responsibility for Law № 5655 Shulyak." And this is not a joke. "This is complete trust within the team, which assumes political responsibility for this draft law. And a loss in the fight for Law № 5655 will be a loss for the entire team of the ministry," say the deputy prime minister's associates on recovery.

That is to say, People's Deputy Olena Shulyak –  a key public author, expert and lobbyist № 5655 – was entrusted by the ministry, through which all the donors' money will go, to single-handedly lay the foundation for the future restoration of Ukraine? Without any hint of control over the quality of concrete and its own state expertise? are you serious

Do you seriously not see that for the second year in a row team member Olena Shulyak is deliberately presenting to the public a law that exists only in her imagination and has nothing to do with the one adopted by the parliament on December 13?

After all, even if we hypothetically assume that after signing Law № 5655 everything will be as it is now, we will have to deal with the consequences of our decisions, Shulyak promises: "There is no urban planning documentation in the communities - no construction!", then it will not be possible to start recovery at all until cities will not develop master plans and zoning. And it will take years. And complete delusion in the context of how we hunt for donors and what tasks we set before them.

If everything goes as the developers themselves interpret Law № 5655, then they will say: "If there is no master plan, then leave us alone, we will build without you." And this is already the total dictate of the construction lobby throughout the country. And a jackpot for the main beneficiaries of the law. First of all, thanks to the inner pocket of private control, where the global cartel in the market of urban planning experts is placed. It is cemented by a scheme with self-regulatory organizations (SRO). They are all controlled by a pool of developers who stand behind Shulyak and have their high-ranking deputies in the ministry. We write the rules ourselves, we build it ourselves, we control it ourselves, we earn it ourselves. So, the circle is closed.

And it seems that only a minister who cannot cope with his direct responsibilities – and Kubrakov is personally responsible for the results of the future restoration of not only bridges and roads (which he is OK with) – may lack time to figure it out in the scheme that the lobbyists of Law № 5655 so insistently impose on the state. Unless, of course, the heads of state are already accomplices.

But let's try once again to put rose-colored glasses on our noses and, on the eve of public consultations of the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine scheduled for tomorrow on the preparation of by-laws for the not yet signed (!) Law № 5655, to remind government officials why everything is the way it is, and not otherwise. And what can eventually turn out to be the long-term confrontation between the construction lobby and the local authorities, which the state, within the framework of the massive promotion of urban planning "reform", threw to the sidelines of the future recovery. Along with boring regional politics and a key condition for joining the EU. In its resolution, the European Parliament strongly recommended the President not to sign Law № 5655.

Compulsion of the self-regulatory organization (SRO) for peace

At the start, we will immediately reject the submission of those who know everything about how the local government gets rich at the expense of developers. Because it's true.

"The whole essence of the urban planning department has long been reduced to a set of elements for extracting money from developers," says an influential developer who agreed to explain the philosophy of Law № 5655 without reference to this law.  –  There is no mention of territorial planning and the interests of community residents in most cities. The rally became the only tool for solving the problem, when, according to the revolutionary tradition, the owner of the "bread shop" is always the most extreme. Let me remind you that in 2011, after the adoption of the law on urban planning activities, the then Deputy Prime Minister Serhiy Tihipko intended to copy the Georgian experience and bring order to urban planning documentation. Of course, during Yanukovych's time, there was always a conditional Stolar with a share of 30%, but the games without rules, which existed under Chernovetskyi, disappeared just then.

However, all the state's attempts to somehow systematize the sphere (even during the time of Yanukovych, who knew how to knock on the table) met with strong resistance from the local elites, who were used to managing and negotiating with everyone in manual mode. The deadlines for the submission of master plans approved by the government were repeatedly postponed, and in the end the topic became completely silent. And now Law № 5655 introduces an important rule: I no longer have to ask the city for a project permit. I submitted an application, there is no answer - therefore, I agree, I received urban planning conditions and restrictions (UPCR) - and go ahead! "But that's not fair," you say. After all, local authorities lose the opportunity to influence what happens in communities. But then the question is: how should it influence? Apparently, after all, approving the master plan and zoning.

And when you have approved the zoning and published it on the Internet, should the developer call you to clarify the opinion regarding the project? If I can see in the system what can be built in the city and what cannot? That's right, I don't need to call anyone. And the mayor also does not need to run to the developer in the name of the community and stop the construction, expecting a bribe. It is better to urgently adopt a new zoning!

You can also dig deeper: is there a need for a town planning council made up of retrograde architects under such a schedule? Well, in historical places, yes, but in the rest, no. Why waste time there, if the architects together with the mayor and deputies did not do zoning? Stop! So who does this law deprive of the possibility of manual control?

Gentlemen, be smart when zoning is developed, when public hearings are held, when urban planning documents are adopted. Consider all interests and write documentation. And publish it! After all, the rest of the elements of the construction sector in the state have already been digitized: cadastres, land acquisitions, etc. There is only one moment left, namely the initial data, which is the result of urban planning. And the state has nothing to do with it. The whole point of this law is to support the local community and say: only you are left! Previously, you decided: to give permission or not, to start the crane and the excavator or not. Now go and do your homework!

In fact, despite what the end of Law № 5655 will be, this law has already played its role as a provocation. No one will let go of local self-government now, no matter what the European Commission says. Because Europe does not have a digital tool, but we do! Europe still relies on public discussions, it does not yet live in the digital society paradigm. And we live! "Diia App" is already implemented. Therefore, the absence or presence of Law № 5655 is no longer important. The system should already have data from urban planning documentation. This is the most important. The whole point of the problem is not how to enforce rules that don't exist. And in the fact that the one who is supposed to create the rules shouts that he is being deprived of his powers."

And this is only a small part of our albeit emotional, but rather intellectual conversation on the topic of how to balance the interests of communities, developers and the state. During which I learned not only that our property tax is distributed incorrectly, killing the natural function of residents to help, and not hinder, developers to make their living environment comfortable, but also what gentrification is. Google it. And all of them are supposedly correct. But, it should be taken into account that there are nuances here.

Is the time for which builders send local government agencies to do their homework determined?

Neither my interlocutor nor in the substance of Law №. 5655 found any clarifications in this regard. It is for this reason that the noble compulsion of mayors to order, like a carriage to a pumpkin, turns into a banal scheme to push local people out of the game during the influx of big money. At the same time, Law № 5655 deprives local self-government bodies and the public in general of the functions of control over construction on their territory, which the mayors shout about at every intersection. It will be simply impossible to stop illegal construction. The possibility of the self-regulatory organizations (SROs) and citizens going to court here is rather nominal. We also wrote about this.

"In settlements where there is no urban planning documentation, urban planning conditions and restrictions (UPCR) will be issued, in which there is nothing. Which is a conditional "formality" without restrictions. A formal document that simply opens the way to technical actions for the developer. It is issued on the basis of material currently available in the state cadastre. Which is also not there yet. And then everything is possible," one of the mayors of a large regional center, where all documents are in order, shares his understanding of the law.

It is a pity to state this after such correct words of the developer. But this is not our biased assumptions and not the slander of local corrupt officials, this is part 13 of Article 29 of Law № 5655.

"As you can see, there is not a single word here about the refusal to provide urban planning conditions and restrictions, if there is no urban planning documentation," commented the new interview of Olena Shulyak, urban planning expert and author of ZN.UA Georgy Mohylnyi wrote on his Facebook page back in the spring. "There is not even a reason for refusal here, if the intentions of the developer do not correspond to the urban planning documentation."

Moreover, part 17 of the same article states that "it is possible to build in accordance with the purpose of the land plot, not the provisions of the urban planning documentation."

Wow! Feel the difference? Don't feel it? I will explain.

"The purpose of the land plot does not necessarily correspond to the functional purpose of the territory," the expert clarifies. –  Functional purpose, according to urban planning documentation, is the prospect of using the territory for development. The intended purpose of the plot is the current use of the plot, which is needed not so much for determining the possibility of development as for taxation or calculating rent.

Currently, in Ukraine, as in the entire civilized world, construction takes place in accordance with the functional purpose of the territory established by urban planning documentation. And Law № 5655 actually destroys territory planning and prospects for sustainable development of settlements.

Moreover, this approach creates a new wave of corruption in local councils, but does not kill it. "Since the public can influence the development and approval of urban planning documentation, but is in no way involved in individual land acquisitions, it becomes profitable for developers to buy illegal land acquisition, because then they are guaranteed to automatically receive a building permit for development," Mohylnyi explains. In addition, in this way, Law № 5655 revives all old illegal land acquisitions.

And that's not all. The scope of the ideologues of urban planning reform turned out to be much wider. As, however, and the team of her supporters. Do you remember draft laws № 8225 and 8178-1, which were actively promoted in the spring by the newest contender for the prime minister's seat, the deputy head of the president's office, Rostislav Shurma? Therefore, the simplification of the change in the purpose of agricultural land (№ 8178-1) and the forced removal of private plots (№ 8225) are a single scheme with the scandalous Law № 5655.

The trick is that during the recovery process, the state really needs operational levers for maneuver – the ability to buy up land where it is needed and change its intended purpose. But since there is no global recovery plan, the regional policy in the ministry has been replaced by the urban planning scheme – the developer (in the case of the adoption of a package of these laws) on the basis of Law № 5655 can be interested not only in community land, but also in agricultural land. And without any obligations to communities. Because in the event of a change in the intended purpose of the land for residential development –  and here a declaration submitted by the developer in a single electronic system is sufficient – it will be possible to build whatever and wherever without control. What such digitalization and liberalization can lead to during the recovery is the subject of a separate big conversation. But some key details of the case were described by ZN.UA half a year ago.

Here it is important to note that just last week, Shurma, who can actively join the presidency, once again lit up the Law № 8225 in the parliament. Therefore, it seems that informed people in the president's circle are not going to pass Law № 5655, without which all manipulations with the alienation of agricultural land lose their meaning. Maybe this is where the bottomless source of energy for the promotion of Basic Law № 5655 lies? Shurma's laws, in addition to unlimited opportunities for developers, include an enrichment mechanism for those who have state insider information. Like a well-known scheme, when I know where the construction of the plant will be laid according to the plan, and prudently buy the plot for next to nothing. And then the state pays me very well to build this plant there. On the scale of the country, this is incredible luck. But let's go further.

Why do cities persistently do not want to do urban planning documentation?

Some statistics. According to information from the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine, as of April 2023, all 100% of urban-type cities and towns have master plans developed after 1991, and 42% have master plans developed after 2012. The situation is worse among rural settlements, where only 35% have master plans developed after 1991. That is, it is obvious that almost half of the country's cities have organized after all. Despite the fact that it was: a) very expensive, b) without a cadastre and general framework, which the state itself has not been able to do over the years.

Another issue is that even where general plans and zoning were approved, there were always corruption risks. It is about the manipulation of state building regulations in favor of developers; formal coordination of documentation with state bodies and the same discussions with the public; falsification of urban planning expertise and conflict of interests of those who make decisions and are often themselves developers or connected with them. That is, corruption in this case often does not disappear anywhere, but simply becomes more systemic. It is a pity that at the same time, our law enforcement officers and prosecutors do not systematically become courageous, and the hands of the anti-corruption bloc do not always reach the local level.

You can read an analysis of the situation with urban planning documentation in the country on the website of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), where in 2021 a detailed report was published with figures, reasons, and most importantly, government recommendations on how to eliminate local arbitrariness.

And, you know, this document, like Law №. 5655, also has its own philosophy. Literally, the paragraph: "Despite the fact that a large part of the settlements of Ukraine does not have an actual master plan, the mechanism of bringing responsibility for its absence is not regulated by law. Such a legal gap carries the danger of unsystematic construction and the lack of sustainable development of settlements."

That is, dear political figures, if you really want to bring order, and not imitate stormy activity, turn on the mechanism of responsibility. Do your homework.

Stop, I remembered. So, it seems, you have already used everything. In September 2021, the government liquidated the corrupt State Architectural and Building Inspection, the principles of which was formed by a father and son named Rybak during Yanukovych's time, and created a super duper, the State Architectural and Urban Planning Inspection.

Now read very carefully so as not to get confused by abbreviations. "Among the issues whose regulation is significantly changed by Law №. 5655, the powers of local self-government bodies include the issuance of urban planning conditions and restrictions, as well as permitting and control functions in 99 communities that have assumed the relevant powers (about 40% of construction)," writes the same Mohylnyi. – Most often, control was taken over by large cities, because it is not cheap to keep additional officials for this at the expense of the local budget.

Observance of legality in the performance of these functions of the local government is controlled by the state architectural and construction supervision body, in which, according to the state leadership, "there is no corruption", the State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning of Ukraine was created more than a year ago.

The procedure for state architectural and construction supervision in the presence of the Unified State Electronic System in the Field of Construction (USESFC) makes it possible to easily ensure high-quality supervision, because it provides for scheduled and unscheduled on-site inspections, as well as documentary and camera inspections of the actions of the objects of supervision based on data bases and registers.

Rhetorical question: how can the self-regulatory organizations (SROs) openly engage in crazy corruption through the public Unified State Electronic System in the Field of Construction (USESFC) so that all high-ranking officials know about it, and the State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning of Ukraine demonstratively did not fulfill its duties, thereby contributing to corruption?

Arguments of lobbyists №. 5655 as the only way to overcome corruption in the construction industry do not stand up to any criticism - according to them, there is no corruption in the State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning of Ukraine, and corruption in local government organizations could have been eliminated by the State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning of Ukraine a long time ago under the current legislation. Therefore, the fight against corruption is a convenient slogan, not the purpose of adopting this law."

Perhaps the ex-chairman of the State Inspection of Architecture and Urban Planning of Ukraine and the current director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) Semyon Krivonos could clarify the situation in more detail here. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you ask him this question at the next panel, where he and Olena Shulyak will talk about the benefits of Law №. 5655.

Well, for now, we all thought together that in fact it was not profitable for anyone in this state to put things in order in the field of urban planning. Now, bringing the situation to the point of absurdity (and what else to call it, if this entire garden is being planted at the moment of building a recovery strategy?), the government, as if punishing local government, gives a lot of freedom to developers. Which, if you believe our visa, should first of all be interested in transparent rules of interaction both with communities and with the state. But no.

Private control and monopoly

Here I will allow myself one more short remark from a large construction business: "For the sake of the philosophy of Law №. 5655 (we have already decided on it. - I.V.) its authors can be forgiven for some negatives that they attached to it due to their stupidity. No matter how skeptical I am about the National Union of Architects of Ukraine, Law №. 5655 deprives them of their copyright and, in fact, their right to a profession." Golden words. According to which, however, it is not stupidity at all, but a sober calculation. And only the court will be able to determine the future measure of forgiveness here, in case the president signs Law №. 5655 and multiplies the scheme throughout the country.

In fact, the war of lobbyists №. 5655 with architects vividly highlighted what comrades are really fighting for. But in order for it to become clear to you as well as to us, let's zoom out a little. That is, let's increase the scale of the image of the problem.

How does the market work? Large developers themselves never enter into legal relations with local councils. Current legislation allows land acquisition to companies that, receiving land, enter into an agreement with a developer to support the construction of a residential facility. Such a division of labor, and at the same time, risks. Because the company that received the land can easily dissolve in the business space after completing the assigned task.

In order to start construction, in addition to obtaining urban planning conditions and restrictions, the nuances of which we have already discussed, after the adoption of the law on urban planning activities in 2011, the object is accompanied at the entire construction stage by experts, designers, architects, etc., hired by the customer. All of them are certified specialists who received their certificates in so-called self-regulated organizations. This is a European practice, which in our Ukrainian performance has assumed exclusive forms.

First, all design engineers, technical supervision engineers, costing engineers, lighting engineers, structural engineers, fire safety engineers, etc., who are currently working in the market, unite in guilds and unions, which at one time were created from above (and not from below, as in the West) by the forces of specific people who were in power at that time. All regulations on the self-regulatory organization (SRO) were drawn up in 2015 in the Ministry of the Region of Ukraine, when the current vice-president of the Confederation of Builders of Ukraine (KBU) Dmytro Isaenko (he is associated with the Perfect Group of companies) was the deputy minister there. Yuriy Nikolov wrote in detail about the creation and activity of these SROs.

Secondly, when fighting against supporters of Law № 5655, the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) always appeals to its ancient history. And this is indeed the oldest self-regulatory organization (SRO) in the construction field, which, until a certain moment, was not taken into the hands of its "controlling representatives". And the thing is not in the capacity of the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) (certified architects also sell their signatures), but in principle. After the appearance of the Law № 5655, it became obvious that the booklet with all the experts and designers is stitched together by the architect. He is also the key responsible person on the construction site. And only the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) certifies architects. This is not correct at all.

In the spring of 2022, the Ministry of Communities and Territories Development tacitly and without warning deprives the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) of the right to certify architects. And the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) subsequently opened a case against the head of the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) Oleksandr Chyzhevsky for the fact that the union did not react to the ministry's decision and its specialists, as before, entered the electronic database. At the same time, the Ministry of Regions is breaking the monopoly of the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU), which would be quite normal, if it did not immediately create another - a global one, giving the right to certify engineers to the Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture (KNUCA). Where Dmytro Isaenko went the day before (attention!) the chairman of the supervisory board. No comments. Is it just a clarification that during all this time construction in the ministry (both under Chernyshov and under Kubrakov) was handled by Isaenko's person - Nataliya Kozlovska.

Law № 5655 will only consolidate the history of related persons. The regulation on private control establishes a barrier to entering the market, which is three to five million (due to the requirement to have insurance). And this means that only the largest developers will be able to create companies of private controllers. And who else has that kind of money?

Here the developer says again: "I'll tell you honestly, there are many different things in this law. But I am not interested in these things. Nowadays, everything works quite professionally and expertly. When I have a problem with geology, I know which expert organization I turn to. I don't care how and from whom this specialist received the certificate, if the quality of his work is satisfactory. The problem, which is being discussed so loudly by experts, simply does not exist on the market. It is competitive. Moreover, when did your state or local control come to me to check something? But never! Maybe at the beginning of construction and during delivery. Everything is controlled by my internal quality department because it is in my best interest. So I don't see a problem with the introduction of the institution of private control. Everything is logical."

And now the chief architect of the regional center takes the floor: "the State Architectural and Building Inspection of Ukraine has always had a dual subordination – functional (control of the center) and linear the self-regulatory organization (SRO). Law № 5655 introduces private control without any safeguards. The controller may be a person related to the developer. But even this is not the main thing, but the fact that the relationship between the developer and the private controller will be regulated by the Economic Code. And with the controller from the local government – the Administrative Code. This is some kind of institutional abracadabra.

That is, the authors of the law created two entities with the same functions, whose activities are regulated by different codes. And now let's remember that the economic activity of a legal entity is the making of a profit. Is the controller profiting or controlling? A conflict of interests is included in the law, which provokes corruption. You can think as much as you want about the reputation of large developers who will create private controlling companies, but, to put it mildly, not all developers in Ukraine are too concerned about their reputation.

Do not forget about the tragic example of Turkey, where due to the earthquake, the houses were stacked like cards. There were many victims. This was preceded by a complete liberalization of urban planning norms. This did not happen with houses in Greece. Moreover, fines for controllers cannot be compared with income and risks. We are told: "If you enter the competitive field and offer better conditions, the developer will come to you." But in Law №. 5655, it is written that the developer can change the controller. At the final stage of construction, in particular."

And now the venerable designer says: "In Ukraine for 32 years, there have been practically no significant accidents with buildings and structures, except for those caused by their improper operation by balance-keepers. That is, with regard to the main requirements for buildings and structures (so that they do not fall), the industry remained resistant to the market influence on the Soviet construction school. The regulatory, permitting, control system initiated by the same authors, both in 2011 and in 2021, essentially finalizes the private industry monopoly of a very limited circle of individuals through the privatization of corruption and total control over the right to a profession."

So draw your own conclusions.

But there is another interesting nuance that inextricably connects the sketchy draft law with the future restoration. This is an institute of consulting engineers, which, according to Law №. 5655, must be in a private controlling company. It is in the wording that is in the certificates (attention!) of the guild of consulting engineers controlled by Isaenko. And not, for example, project managers who are certified in Ukraine by the international organization of civil engineers FIDIC. And there are only 37 (!) such domestic consulting engineers for the entire country. It is even difficult to imagine the degree of their demand and, accordingly, payment. Law № 5655 has not yet been signed, but the position of the consulting engineer of the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine has already been incorporated into the methodological recommendations for the preparation of tenders for the selection of executors. That is, the project company has the right to participate in the tender only if it has a consulting engineer on staff. This is a condition for winning the tender. Well, how are you going to stop organizing support forums for Law № 5655?

Here is a scan of the relevant section of the document.

It is interesting that bridge and road builders organized their own association of consulting engineers, with the system of which Deputy Prime Minister Kubrakov is well acquainted. By the forces of the ministry (that is, also from above), but under the roof of the same international organization of civil engineers, FIDIC. With which Isaenko was unable to come to an agreement at one time. But the fact that Isaenko did not agree with Kubrakov is not a fact at all. According to people in the know, among the consulting engineers of the self-regulatory organization (SRO) Kubrakov, the names of 37 consulting engineers of the guild are found.

"Therefore, the market has developed a situation of total dependence of all parties engaged in construction on the customer/land plot owner," explains the same designer. – Since all the so-called responsible certified specialists – engineers, architects, experts, technical supervision engineers, private urban planning control – are hired and paid by the customer. Or the person who concluded an agreement with him about it. And certificates to all of them from 2022 (after attacking the Union of Architects) are issued by a group of essentially fictitious SROs, which are totally controlled by one person.

At the same time, members of both the Confederation of Builders of Ukraine (KBU), headed by Lev Partskhaladze, and the Construction Chamber of Ukraine (CCU), headed by Petro Shilyuk, would be naive to believe and expect that the signatures on the set of documents for the start of construction and commissioning will be available for free. As they were promised for supporting Law № 5655. It would be even more naive to count on this for future construction customers, who are currently sitting in government offices and plan to become profitable and successful developers after hard work for the benefit of the Motherland.

In general, the lack of understanding by the Confederation of Builders of Ukraine (KBU) and its managers, developers – industry leaders of the fact that even now international funds, for example, NEFCO, KfW, USAID, EIV and others, simply cannot choose general contractors for their projects due to non-compliance with international requirements, is very surprising. And the main factor in this state of affairs is the corruption-inducing regulatory industry field itself. And instead of finding a balanced model that takes into account the interests of all parties (from local government and communities to contractors and industry specialists), the support is skewed toward individual "bystanders," our interlocutor said.

We called Dmytro Isayenko, a member of the specialized parliamentary committee, with a request to comment on his role in the creation and activity of the self-regulatory organization (SRO) in the construction market, the destruction of the National Union of Architects of Ukraine, as well as the risks associated with the introduction of the private control institute by Law № 5655, taking into account the magical function of consulting engineers.

"First of all, I am not related to any self-regulatory organization (SRO), although I know the people who manage them," explained Dmytro Isaenko. – Because we really interacted earlier within the scope of work in the relevant ministry. But this is one of the topics that I am not interested in at all. I am a builder. I have not abandoned any construction during the war and I am not leaving the market, trying to do my best in this situation.

Secondly, I do not support what they are trying to do with the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU). It is wrong. This organization existed even before us and definitely does not deserve such treatment. But I have no idea what they didn't share with the Ministry of Infrastructure and why the National Union of Architects of Ukraine (NUAU) deprived them of the authority to certify architects. However, I would like to clarify that nowadays architects are educated not only by the Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture (KNUCA), where I am the chairman of the supervisory board, but also by three other higher educational institutions. And certificates to architects are actually issued by the ministry itself.

Thirdly, private control is a European practice, and as for the function of a consulting engineer, it is mostly related to the budget. And I don't work on a budget. No matter how many contracts I was offered. I'm building housing that doesn't require such an option at all."

And for that we are grateful. But we are also ready for a more detailed conversation within the interview.

Okay, but where is the state interest here?

It is obvious that during all these years we were witnesses of the corrupt conspiracy of the state and local authorities, which together deceived and profited from developers. Look at Kyiv at least. Have you heard of even one business conflict between Klytschko and the Office of the President of Ukraine? We didn't hear. Because there is parity and a common back office. But the war changed the situation. The central government did everything to ensure that donor money went through it. Hence the monster ministry, hence the bet on Law № 5655, and not on some regional policy, strategy and other nonsense. It is no longer necessary to share with the locals. Locals need to be kept under constant stress by providing both them and donors with the services of private controllers with the threat of future claims from law enforcement agencies. But it is necessary to share with those who will build. A new conspiracy has emerged between the state and the construction lobby.

Moreover, recently there have been active discussions about the fact that the beneficiaries of Law №. 5655 have changed. And the scheme drawn up by the developers' lobbyists will be used at the very top. Therefore, it is quite possible that the head of the "Servant of the People" party, Olena Shulyak, needs to win the war for Law № 5655 not only in order to remain in the political ring, but also due to certain obligations to ensure the fulfillment of the tasks of the office of the president.

It is clear that there is no state interest at all. The state in our case is people in power who pursue their own selfish goals. After all, in the classical sense, the state will always seek a balance between all stakeholders. Here it is between the interests of communities, developers and the state. When such a balance is found, everyone is left a little dissatisfied. Perhaps this will be the result of writing the Urban Planning Code, which is what the opponents of № 5655 are currently doing. In particular, people's deputies, local authorities, architects and experts.

If the president has enough common sense not to sign Law № 5655, but to think about the state interest. And his healthy entourage (and there are such people both in the government and on the Bankova Street) – to break the vow of silence regarding Law № 5655 and tell the head of state the truth. Having outlined all the risks of the mine laid under his signature.

Read this article in Ukrainian and russian.