Encourage officials to resign if they have more than 50% low confidence votes.

On the afternoon of May 30, after listening to the presentation and examination in the hall, the National Assembly discussed in the Draft Resolution group on taking a vote of confidence and voting for people holding positions elected or approved by the National Assembly or People's Council.

This resolution is expected to replace Resolution 85 of 2014, preparing for a mid-term vote of confidence for positions elected or approved by the National Assembly and People's Councils at the end of this year.

According to the inspection report of the Law Committee, the addition of the regulation of not taking a vote of confidence for people who are on medical leave for serious illness with confirmation from a medical facility and have not been in charge of work for 6 months or more has a practical basis.

This demonstrates humanity and is consistent with the requirements of the vote of confidence at the National Assembly and People's Councils. In addition, there are opinions suggesting that it is necessary to clearly state that the period of non-executive work is 6 consecutive months or more to ensure strictness.

Ensuring humanity

Expressing his opinion, delegate Huynh Thanh Chung (Binh Phuoc delegation) supported the proposal not to take a vote of confidence for people who are on leave to treat serious illnesses, have confirmation from a medical facility and have not been in charge of work for 6 months or more.

According to Mr. Chung, such a regulation is humane. However, the delegate said that the 'rigid' regulation of 6 months should be studied further. Because there are serious diseases that are only discovered after 1-2 months, it should also be considered if there is confirmation from the authorities. This is to avoid anxiety for officials.

Chairman of Ho Chi Minh City People's Committee Phan Van Mai agreed with not taking a vote of confidence for people who are on leave due to serious illness.

Therefore, the Binh Phuoc delegation proposed not to take a vote of confidence for those who take medical leave under normal conditions (from 6 months or more); those with special illnesses who take leave for 2-3 months should also be considered.

On the same issue, delegate Ha Hong Hanh (Khanh Hoa delegation) agreed with the regulation of not taking a vote of confidence in cases of serious illness treatment with medical confirmation.

However, the Khanh Hoa delegation proposed adding a regulation of 6 consecutive months of leave to avoid the situation of taking 2-3 months off, then going back to work, then taking another leave, but adding up to 6 months.

Speaking at the meeting, Chairman of the Ho Chi Minh City People's Committee Phan Van Mai agreed with not taking a vote of confidence for the Chairman of the District People's Committee - where the People's Council is not organized. He also agreed with not taking a vote of confidence for those who have retired due to serious illness or those who have retired for a long time.

Proposal to hold a vote of confidence twice per term

Article 8 of the draft resolution stipulates prohibited acts. It prohibits “using or promising to donate, give, or support money, property, or material benefits to lobby, entice, or bribe National Assembly deputies or People’s Council deputies in obtaining or casting a vote of confidence.”

Delegate Hoang Duc Thang (Quang Tri delegation) said that this regulation is not enough. “There are promises that are not material, such as promises to be appointed, assigned, arranged to a certain position, given promotion opportunities so that the person can do it for an impure purpose,” Mr. Thang analyzed.

From there, the Quang Tri delegation proposed to stipulate "material benefits and other benefits" to make the law more complete.

Commenting on the vote of confidence as a "channel" to review planning and eliminate untrusted officials, delegate Nguyen Quoc Han (Ca Mau delegation) was concerned that the vote of confidence has 3 levels: "high confidence", "trust", "low confidence".

“We have set 3 levels, which is a bit hesitant to say. I wish there were only 2 levels: high trust and low trust. If low trust is above 50%, then a vote of confidence should be considered,” according to the proposal of delegate Nguyen Quoc Han.

In addition, the delegate of Ca Mau delegation also said that instead of only taking a vote of confidence once as in the draft, the first vote should be taken two years after the official is elected or appointed to serve as a basis for considering capacity. The second vote should be taken in the fourth year of the term for a final review and to prepare personnel for the new term. The delegate said that this is also a channel to review and supplement the planning, and eliminate untrusted officials.

Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh, Head of the Delegation Affairs Committee. (Photo: QH)

Also speaking at the group, Ms. Nguyen Thi Thanh, Head of the Delegation Affairs Committee (under the National Assembly Standing Committee) said that taking a vote of confidence and a vote of no confidence are two different "steps".

Ms. Thanh explained that a vote of confidence is a consequence of a vote of confidence when the person being voted on has from 50% to less than 2/3 of the delegates rating him/her as “low confidence”. “A vote of confidence is essentially a dismissal”, the Head of the Delegation Affairs Committee emphasized.

As for the vote of confidence, if 50% to less than 2/3 of the delegates rate the candidate as having “low confidence”, then they are encouraged to resign. If they do not resign, then only then will they move to a vote of confidence, according to Ms. Thanh.

In response to concerns that there may be a case where the result of the vote of confidence is low, but when the vote of confidence is high, Ms. Thanh affirmed that in practice, summarizing the last three terms from the People's Council of the commune to the National Assembly "has never happened".

Referring to cases where a vote of confidence is not taken, the Head of the Delegation Work Committee said that the only case different from Regulation 96 of the Politburo is a person "on leave for treatment of a serious illness with confirmation from a medical facility and not in charge of work for 6 months or more according to the decision of a competent agency or individual up to the time of the opening of the session to take a vote of confidence".

According to Ms. Thanh, during the drafting and consultation process, localities raised the situation of "if sick and have to take a long leave, will there be a vote of confidence?"

“Initially, the drafting committee proposed a time of 3 months. After many comments from National Assembly delegations, provincial People's Councils, and experts, the majority said it should be 6 months. 3 months in a year and half a term is too short,” explained the Head of the Delegation Affairs Committee.

Source