Editor's note: General Secretary To Lam and the Central Executive Committee have resolutely carried out a revolution to streamline the political apparatus. Vietnam Weekly publishes a series of articles discussing with experts suggesting solutions for this revolution.
What do you think about the word “revolution” that General Secretary To Lam and the Central Executive Committee have emphasized many times to express their determination to reform the political apparatus? Mr. Nguyen Si Dung - Former Deputy Head of the National Assembly Office: When leaders talk about revolution, they send a very strong and thorough message. Streamlining the political apparatus this time is not normal because revolution is different from reform. Revolution is thorough while reform is just correcting small errors. The General Secretary used the word “revolution” to send a call to the entire apparatus, the entire society and all classes of people to do great things. The Party, the State and the Fatherland Front all adhere to this spirit.

Dr. Nguyen Si Dung: When merged, the apparatus will be reduced and connected, not fragmented and isolated like it is now. Photo: VietNamNet

The General Secretary clearly stated that the Party does not make excuses or do things on behalf of others. Sir, what should we do to achieve this goal? Mr. Nguyen Si Dung: "The Party does not do things on behalf of others", in my opinion, does not mean that we change the model but rather that we legalize and technocratize the socialist model. That is the essence. When we make such a clear distinction, we will see that the Party decides on major development policies and guidelines. The National Assembly will turn those policies and guidelines into laws and policies; and the Government will implement them. Following such a model requires technocracy, although not very democratic, thanks to which China has developed remarkably. Thus, talented politicians with the capacity and knowledge to design correct development policies must focus on the Party. Therefore, when streamlining the apparatus, the first thing the Party will do is identify the problems that make the apparatus cumbersome. Then, it must look at the cause of the problem before proposing a solution and must prove that this solution will solve that problem. Next, we must assess the impact of the solution, including the socio-economic impact, costs and results of that solution. This is the first step in the policy process. What do you think about the policy of merging some ministries, for example the Ministry of Construction and the Ministry of Transport? Mr. Nguyen Si Dung: In terms of the conceptual framework, merging the two ministries is completely reasonable because the transport and construction sectors are both related to infrastructure development. When merged together, the apparatus will be reduced and connected, not fragmented and isolated as it is now. In developed countries, people build metros and roads easily because transport comes first, urban construction comes later. When infrastructure is completed, it will help increase the land rent difference very high, causing land prices to increase. The state sells houses to have enough money to build metros and roads. But our country is developing backwards and is very deadlocked because transport does not come first in construction. People build houses and urban areas first and then think about building a metro, but it can't be done anymore because land prices have gone up so much, where's the money to compensate for land, where's the money to build a metro! So what about the Ministry of Planning and Investment merging into the Ministry of Finance, sir? Mr. Nguyen Si Dung: This is also relatively reasonable, although it has two sides. For a long time, the planning and investment sector has decided on public investment projects but has not been proactive in capital, not knowing how much money there is. Meanwhile, the finance sector has both collected budget and had to find ways to pay because public investment is budget money. Only by proactively taking advantage of resources can we proactively invest. The current mechanism between the two ministries leads to the situation, why are many projects prolonged and unfinished? That's because the investment approval process is separated from the issue of whether there is money or not. If merged, the new agency will know how many resources are available for investment, avoiding the situation of having too many projects, lack of capital, unfinished projects... However, the issue I am concerned about is that the work of planning development strategies, forecasting, visioning,... of the country that the Ministry of Planning and Investment still does is very necessary but is not the function and task of the new ministry. The task now is to handle that work. I think that the capacity for forecasting, policy planning, economic development work of key industries, high-tech industries... should be transferred to the Central Economic Committee. I know that the Party wants to continue to strengthen the Central Economic Committee, not to abolish or merge this committee because in the current situation, the capacity for forecasting, planning, monitoring... needs to be on the Party's side. The problem is that where the power lies, the capacity must lie there. So, in your opinion, what should be done to attract talented people into the state apparatus? Mr. Nguyen Si Dung : For a long time, we have considered the Minister as the commander of the industry. That is, the person in that position must manage from planning to implementation, which everyone can see is that he or she does not have enough time to do all of those things. Moreover, management is a professional job and now the fields have become multi-disciplinary, expanding endlessly, so how can the commander of the industry cover everything? Thus, it is clear that there must be a separation between political executive and public administration. The person who is a minister is a political executive, different from the level of public administration. For example, when voting, that person has a very high vote of confidence of 100% but does not know how to manage the traffic system to prevent congestion. They have 100% support but cannot do that because it is a professional job, not a political job. Thus, if the Director in charge of traffic must be the Secretary, it will lead to this situation: Only those with political skills can get that position, but those who are technical experts and do not have political skills will have a very difficult time. How to get votes is political skill, and how to solve the traffic problem is technocratic skill. Those two things are different. Currently, our process is leaning towards choosing people with political skills rather than expertise. The state apparatus lacks technocrats and experts, so it is difficult to be effective and efficient. Not to mention, the work of the department head must be doubled. The following apparatus must also be doubled, at all levels from central to local. This is a very big deal in our country. In many countries, there is a position of state secretary at the ministerial level to manage professional work. This position does not necessarily have to appear in public because he is not a politician. When merging the ministries together here, I think we need to take into account this position and the institutions so that they can hold public power relatively independent of the political position.

Vietnamnet.vn

Source: https://vietnamnet.vn/cach-mang-bo-may-loi-hieu-trieu-cua-tong-bi-thu-2347905.html