16 February 2011, 11:51
The primary purpose of the parliamentary hearings on February 16, 2011 is development of high-standard recommendations on the formation of a fair, socially-oriented, efficient and modern pension fund scheme in Ukraine.
This statement is made in the article "Comprehensive Pension Reform Progressive Country" by Volodymyr Lytvyn, Chairman of The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, published in the Holos Ukrainy newspaper on February 16.
V.Lytvyn calls for introducing a comprehensive model of the pension scheme, and underscores the importance of transparency and responsibility of the authorities in this sphere.
The Head of the Parliament stresses that absolute state monopoly in the pension fund scheme falls short: "The present solidary pension fund scheme in Ukraine fails to meet the current socio-economic situation, and contradicts the fundamentals of a socially oriented state." "Individual responsibility for one´s fortune becomes a pressing need. Non-governmental pension scheme should become a part and parcel of the pension scheme. It should be considered as a supplement of a solidary system, not its alternative," V.Lytvyn declares.
"Pension reform requires thorough preparation, consistent legislative support, coordination of different aspects of a new pension scheme, and launch of several financial-economic tools to assess its efficiency. Therefore, introduction of a modern pension fund scheme should be preceded with a substantial elucidative work by the scholars, experts of the Pension Fund, and law-makers," the Chairman of The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine emphasizes.
V.Lytvyn considers it inadmissible that the pension issues should turn into "a matter of political speculations, a slogan that conceals the need of a competent work of The Verkhovna Rada, every deputy, and the Government."
Before launching the drastic reform of the pension fund scheme, the Head of the Parliament deems necessary to balance the unpopular decisions with the provisions of the applicable laws and respective resolutions of the Constitutional Court.