In 2016, the subprogram "Development of the domestic machine-tool building and tool industry" of the Federal Target Program, which began its work in 2011, completed its operation. The subprogram (PP) was designed for a significant increase in the volume of the machine tool industry.
The curator of the implementation of these plans was the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation.
By the beginning of the implementation of PP in Russia, there were about a hundred machine-tool companies, whose volume of output barely covered a tenth (these are official indicators, and therefore could well have been embellished as well) of the needs of the Russian economy in machine tools and other tools for creating industrial products with high added value … For obvious reasons, such indicators clearly did not meet the demands that existed in relation to Russian industrial production. It was necessary to do something to give the machine tool industry in the country at least some impetus for development after two decades of constant decline.
The implementation of the subprogram meant not only an increase in the number of domestic manufactured machine tools, but also the development of the entire complex of mechanical engineering, including R&D for the development of the latest models in the field of machine tool building and the creation of new jobs at the industrial facilities of the machine tool industry. The total amount of financing for the implementation of this segment of the subprogram was assumed to be at the level of 50 billion rubles (by the time of the start of the implementation of the PP - about 1.7 billion US dollars). Of these, about 52% are funds from the federal budget.
The beginning of the implementation of the subprogram at the "civilian" level actually coincided with the start of the implementation of plans for the rearmament of the Russian army. Initially, about 3 trillion rubles were allocated for the development of machine tool building within the framework of the modernization program through the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation until 2020. The amount is more than serious, and it instilled significant optimism that the machine tool industry in Russia will still go up, and very confidently.
Let's try to figure out what results the PP "Development of the domestic machine-tool building and tool industry", which actually acted as part of the project for military-technical modernization, came.
And it is not at all easy to do this, if only for the reason that 2016 ended more than 3.5 months ago, and the data on the implementation of this part of the Federal Target Program for the aforementioned 2016 has not yet been compiled and officially presented. In this regard, it would seem, why run ahead - well, wait quite a bit, a week or two - you see, responsible “comrades” will present a report on the implementation of the PP both for 2016 in particular, and for the period 2011-2016 in general. Then it would have been possible to analyze what happened to the machine tool building program. But here's the catch - it would have been possible to wait, if not for one remarkable nuance. On the site that publishes reports on the implementation of various kinds of federal targeted programs, there is no final data not only for the past, but even for the year before last (2015)! The question arises: but how can this be? - How long to wait for the reporting on the implementation of the "machine tool" subprogram of the federal target program?
The answer to this question is presented in a somewhat veiled form by the people who published the reports on the FTP. It turns out that the sub-program under consideration, declared under the loud name "Development of the domestic machine-tool industry and the tool industry," actually ordered a long life back in 2014 (at least, there has been no reporting since then). It was in this year that the fervor of federal funding for the PP came to naught, and the subprogram itself, as a separate phenomenon of strategic importance, ordered a long life. Here is the schedule and table of budgetary financing and the so-called cash execution, currently "hanging" on the site. As you can see, the last 32 million rubles (which, according to the program, should have been by no means the last) were allocated three years ago.
And this is data on what specific plans for machine tool building in the Russian Federation were hatched by the persons who created the paper version of the software, and what results the industry came to.
The expectation of the compilers of the PP in terms of the volume of products produced at the created production sites is 4.5 thousand by 2016. But reporting on the results for 2011-2016 is zero point zero. That is, either the Ministry of Industry and Trade has no data on this matter, or there is data, but either good or nothing about them … So far, nothing …
The expectation of the compilers of the PP on the introduced capacity at the created production sites for the production of the developed technological means of machine-building production is 672 per year. This is a plan, and in this case there is no data about the fact for any of the years of the subprogram implementation.
For the period from 2011 to 2016, it was planned to create 17 new systems of high-tech components, ensuring the production of dual-use equipment. Executed of them - 9 (2012 and 2013).
Plans for the creation of computer-aided design, calculation, modeling, technological preparation of production, life cycle support - 45. Completed 26.
Plans for the creation of dual-use equipment systems for the manufacture of parts without machining - 22. Completed 19.
Plans for the creation of instrumental systems - 14. Created - 11.
There are, in fairness, and fulfilled, and even partially overfulfilled plans. For example, the plans for the implementation of the project for the creation of CNC forging machines related to dual-use technological equipment have been overfulfilled (plan - 8, fact - 12).
For the time being, the reports were published by the Department of State Target Programs and Capital Investments of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia.
The study of the implementation of the subgram leads to another interesting fact. The federal register of government contracts says that there were contract plans for all years of the program's implementation, but no real contracting took place for more than two years.
In 2014, which is the last "trail" of reporting on the FTP, the Minister of Industry and Trade said that state investment in the industry will continue and will reach 5 billion rubles for the period 2014-2016, while the level of private investment will increase to 10 billion rubles …
Denis Manturov:
Due to this, by 2020 the share of numerically controlled machine tools produced in Russia in the domestic market will more than triple, which will contribute to the modernization of the industry and the development of a competitive Russian machine tool industry.
This is all great, but why wait for 2020 to announce the results that for some reason are missing in the reporting table on the implementation of a subroutine that has already completed its action? Perhaps because in the rating table of the main machine-tool countries of the world, our country (in the presence of state programs and the relevant ministries overseeing their implementation) is still in the third ten. And when it claimed first place in the world …
Against this background, there are individual enterprises that report on steadily growing profits from the production of machine tool equipment.
In particular, the largest Russian machine tool builder STAN, which has seven industrial sites from Moscow and Kolomna to Azov and Sterlitamak, reports on the growth in revenue. Among the customers of machine tools are such companies as Russian Railways, Roskosmos, Rosatom, companies of the Rostec holding, and others. The stable growth of profits suggests that the demand for high-quality machine tools in the country is really great, and this demand is clearly not satisfied today by domestic offers. And in order for the proposals in terms of their quality and quantity to be satisfactory, is it worth waiting for exactly 2020, in order to then again be puzzled about the "lost" reporting? Or is it still worth dealing with the real effectiveness of the FTP now?
