It was proposed to part with “physically lost” cultural objects easily

However, the first item on the agenda of the meeting, according to her, is gone.

“Our bill on simplified repairs of WWII monuments included in the list of cultural heritage sites is going to the second reading. We decided not to discuss it again. There are no fundamental amendments,” this is how the deputy described the fate of the future federal law, which next week with almost 100% probability will be adopted.

This means that by the season of repairing monuments, local authorities will be able to put them in order for normal money and in a normal manner – and this is good for everyone, both for the “center” and for the regions.

Stating the parliamentary and government unanimity regarding the preservation of monuments to Soviet soldiers, Yampolskaya looked “radiant,” but at that moment strange loud sounds were heard in the State Duma (spoiler: nothing happened). “What is going on here?” Elena Alexandrovna asked alarmedly. So let’s not draw the conclusion from this trivial situation that some parliamentarians, even after a summer vacation, have their nerves “on edge.”

But let’s get back to the main thing. The committee ultimately spent most of its time on the draft amendments to the law “On objects of cultural heritage (historical and cultural monuments) of the peoples of the Russian Federation,” initiated by deputies of the Tver region. Tver deputy Alexander Klinovsky (deputy chairman of the local legislative assembly) explained via video link that “the development of historical Russian settlements and cities” is being actively discussed, and the topic of “improving the mechanism for excluding cultural heritage objects from the unified state register” is being touched upon. Klinovsky and his associates proposed to amend the legislation so that such an exception would cease to be a “lengthy procedure” – we will not burden the reader with regulatory details, the essence is clear without it. The initiative is designed to delimit the powers of federal authorities and the authorities of the constituent entities of the federation, and only the government can remove from the register this or that object that has been preserved but “lost its historical and cultural significance”, and locally this can be done “in the event of complete physical loss » of this or that object.

“I probably didn’t understand something, but physical loss entails criminal punishment, and not exclusion from the register,” Elena Yampolskaya shared her doubts about what Klinovsky said.

“There is a procedure, they propose to simplify it: the governor petitions the regional Duma and the regional Duma passes the law. The issues of preserving cultural heritage sites are always under the special control of our committee; we understand perfectly well that such objects are located in particularly prestigious places,” explained United Russia deputy Olga Germanova.

Germanova admitted that the proposed mechanism could “weaken federal control,” so it needs to be “examined in more detail to prevent abuse” (the quote is almost verbatim).

The parliamentarian, in a questioning form, voiced the figures mentioned, apparently, in the explanation to the bill: “150 thousand objects in the register, 24 thousand are physically lost or are in unsatisfactory condition? You need to understand this and understand the reasons. Elena Aleksandrovna said correctly: criminal cases can occur when they deliberately lead to loss.”

Deputy Minister of Culture Nadezhda Rev. was more categorical. “The Ministry of Culture does not support the bill… The set of measures that exists is balanced and sufficient. If you have facts where we spent a long time considering the documents on expulsion, we are ready to work up to the point of taking disciplinary measures against employees. But next to me is Nikolai Nikiforov, Deputy Director of the Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage Objects, we exchanged glances – well, we have no delays in consideration.”

The high-ranking official motivated the allegedly “drawn-out” process by the need to document the initiation of criminal cases (or refusal to do so), by conducting state historical and cultural examinations and everything else. Having agreed with the arguments of the examination, the ministry can indeed initiate the issuance of an act of the chairman of the government on a single exception.

But it would be a big mistake to put this precise and delicate work “on the conveyor belt” and trust the “places”.

“We cannot lower the level of making such decisions. And loss is not always the basis for exclusion from the register,” the Reverend assured, noting that she was not asserting this from the height of her current position (she took office a couple of weeks ago), but referring to her personal experience of working in regional security agencies.

Instead of the “exclude and forget” formula, Nadezhda Aleksandrovna suggests restoring objects from photographs and descriptions, especially if it was part of a single composition. And what she directly voiced at the meeting can be “carved in stone”:

– The owner (state, municipality or private individuals) bears the burden of maintaining and preserving the property. This is his constitutional duty…God forbid, they blew up something in the city center (something just burned down, added Yampolskaya). So, demolish all this, clear it out and build a high-rise building? Moreover, it often burns for a reason! I have great respect for the people who were voted for (local deputies – I.V.), but not all of them abandoned their entrepreneurial interests.”

And this is the case when the Ministry of Culture deserves support, because it is clear who, theoretically, might need a “rush” in deciding the fate of cultural objects.

At the same time, one cannot fail to mention the counter-arguments of Senator Lyudmila Skakovskaya – she is in favor of strong government structures controlling what is happening in the country, but there are problems:

– There are objects in the register today that simply do not exist. For example, there is a mention that in the Tver region, in a village where no one lives anymore, there was a cross 200 years ago. There is a drawing. Now we need to carry out gas, but we can’t – the monument is on the register.

“What’s the problem with excluding it according to the existing procedure,” Elena Yampolskaya reasonably objects.

“The issue needs to be resolved. If it can be quickly and clearly decided at the federal level, then (let’s decide),” the senator agrees.

“You need to part with things easily,” said the bandit from the film “Zhmurki”, paraphrasing the classic phrase from “The Golden Calf” by Ilf and Petrov. Fortunately, few people in Russia agree to part with cultural heritage just as “easy.” Please understand the material content of the register. Find out which monuments were included during the USSR for ideological anniversary reasons in the spirit of “Kirov lived here,” please. But nothing more.

Members of the Culture Committee, with rare exceptions, were not inspired by the Tveryakov’s proposals, however, this does not cancel the procedure: the bill will “go to the mailing list.”

But today’s meeting can be considered the first “gravestone” on its hypothetical adoption.