Syarhey Sidorski's new old cabinet on June 2 presented its 2006-2010 action plan to the House of Representatives of the National Assembly. Full of statistical and verbal mysticism, the plan has something in common with Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code.

It is a common knowledge that Belarus' economy is dependent on the manufacturing sector. This is the largest sector, the largest debtor, the largest contributor to GDP and a generator of structural problems. The government channeled its assistance into large state enterprises, while other companies received nothing but output targets they were required to meet. The manufacturing sector's performance in the first quarter proved that the government was wasting its time. Instead of restructuring the industry, it keeps on redistributing funds through the budget.

The 15th anniversary of the Belarusian national currency is a good occasion to summarize the National Bank's performance. The rubel is a litmus test for monetary policy and for the country's financial system in general.

The new composition of the Belarusian cabinet does not have a single person who could be called a convinced market advocate. If the financial situation of the country's enterprises gets worse and if it gets harder to fill public coffers, ministers and heads of key state production groups will immediately complain about private businesses and accuse them of taking bread from state enterprises.

The first quarter of 2006 was entirely in the shadow of the presidential campaign. The Belarusian economy entered a dangerous phase of post-modernist statistics under the influence of propagandistic considerations. Judging by statistical reports, Belarus is almost a Hong Cong. But while talking to company directors, one can see their concern about growing problems and expectation of change.

 Belarusian households set a record of consumption in 2005. Consumer spending per the average Belarusian family amounted to 573,000 rubels a month, which 34.5 percent more than in 2004. Monetary incomes rose to 678,000 per family per month, 34.2-percent rise compared with the level of 2004. As many as 3.72 million households spent more than $14 billion last year. This is $3.5 billion more than in 2004.<br />

The stability of the income structure of Belarusian households looks like stagnation. More than 70 percent of families get nearly two thirds of their monetary incomes as salaries and wages. The situation has been the same for the past 10 years. The share of income from entrepreneurial activities does not exceed 3.5 percent.

The Minsk Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers celebrates its 20th anniversary these days. Back in 1986 the Soviet authorities faced an economic crisis and decided to allow individuals to set up cooperatives. The Communist Party obviously underestimated the potential of the first entrepreneurs. Not only did they make a lot of money but also seriously weakened the totalitarian empire.

Changes are ahead for Belarus. But exactly what will change depends on whom you consider. Changes are awaited despite the fetish of stability that dominates the social and economic behavior of the Belarusians. The condition of the business cycle in 2006 and insistent Russian declarations about European prices for gas and world prices for oil exported to Belarus suggest that the Belarusian authorities would have to go much farther than simply changing name plates on office doors of officials responsible for economic policy. They are likely to make attempts to withdraw from the tough paradigm of national socialism.

If the quality of Belarusian-Russian relations were to be judged solely by the dull figures of Belarusian trade balance, one would have the impression that the two countries are at war in trade. In particular, Belarus has lost 49.7 percent of trade with the Russian capital, the most dynamically developing and richest market in Russia.