 |
| Đinh Duy Hòa, a public administration expert and former director of the Department of Administrative Reform under the Ministry of Home Affairs. — Photo vov.vn |
Đinh Duy Hòa, a public administration expert and former director of the Department of Administrative Reform under the Ministry of Home Affairs, talked to the Voice of Việt Nam (VOV) online newspaper about the process of restructuring and streamlining the administrative apparatus in accordance with Resolution 18-NQ/TW of the 12th Party Central Committee.
Việt Nam has undergone several rounds of administrative restructuring and splitting and merging agencies. What, in your opinion, is different about the current reform and how does it differ from previous efforts?
The reform initiative, even by its title ‘Reforming and streamlining the administrative structure for greater effectiveness and efficiency’ clearly reflects the essence of the current process. There are several new aspects this time. Firstly, the principle of actions aligning with words is clearly evident. Party General Secretary Tô Lâm mentioned the initiative just recently and within a short period, the plans have already started to be implemented. Various agencies, particularly the steering committees at all levels, ministries, sectors and localities, have been instructed to conduct self-assessments and reviews.
Secondly, there is a sense of determination, particularly visible in the simultaneous reform of all three key parts of the political system. In previous reforms, I recall that the focus was mainly on the administrative block, especially local administration. However, this time, as instructed by the Party Central Committee and the Party General Secretary Tô Lâm, the restructuring involves all three pillars, consisting of the Party organisation, the State organisation, the Fatherland Front organisations and political-social groups. This integrated approach reflects a much more coordinated and decisive effort compared to earlier initiatives.
Another new feature, which has been repeatedly emphasised, is that the central Government leads by example. Our political system is somewhat unique. For instance, the organisational structure of the Party central committees at the central level is designed to be replicated at provincial and district levels. Similarly, at the Government level, ministries such as the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development have corresponding agencies at the provincial level. Thus, any organisational changes at the central level are immediately reflected at the local levels. The leading role from the central Government serves not only as a model but also provides a new structure that localities can follow. I anticipate that the results of the reform will become clear and its objectives of streamlining – effectiveness and efficiency – will undoubtedly be achieved.
What lessons can we draw from previous mergers to ensure that the reform is truly scientific, thorough and long-lasting, avoiding repeated reforms in the future so that we can focus more on economic development and advancing the country?
There are several lessons to be learned and the first is that the restructuring must align with practical realities. For example, in 1995, the multi-disciplinary Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development was created by merging the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Forestry and the Ministry of Food Industry. At that time, the management scope of a ministry, especially a minister overseeing the sectors was reasonable. If we were to add more sectors, it might not be as effective. Until a decade later, we added the fisheries sector to the ministry.
Now, after several decades, we are to incorporate more sectors into the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. I believe the minister, deputy ministers and the ministry’s departments now have enough capacity to manage them effectively.
Additionally, it is essential to adhere to principles, especially those concerning multi-disciplinary ministries. We must pay particular attention to structuring the organisation based on scientific principles. Organisational science must be a priority in the reform, ensuring that practical realities are balanced with scientific organisational theory.
Following restructuring and mergers, there will inevitably be an excess of staff and facilities. Addressing the issues post-merger is not a simple task, is it?
This is undoubtedly an issue we will face. For example, if two or three ministries merge into one, or if this happens at the provincial level, there will naturally be surplus staff, including officials, civil servants and other employees. Therefore, we must plan carefully. In cases of organisational restructuring, those who are made redundant are not necessarily lacking in capability. They may be highly skilled, but the reorganisation creates surplus personnel.
As a result, policies and regulations must be fair and reasonable, providing opportunities for the individuals to continue contributing through training, development and redeployment. Only as a last resort, should they be removed from the system. Special attention must be given to policies and conditions in this cases.
Regarding facilities, recent administrative restructuring at the local level has led to the redundancy of office buildings and other assets, resulting in waste. I believe the responsibility of local administration and Party committees has been somewhat neglected here.
For example, after two communes merge into one, there may be surplus office buildings. However, the facilities are often neglected, with no follow-up use or attention given. I think the responsibility of the head of the locality, as well as supervision from higher authorities, must be emphasised. In terms of the legal framework, it should be clarified whether such assets belong to the commune-level people’s committees or the district-level administration, as current regulations seem somewhat unclear. The issue deserves more focus.
Party General Secretary Tô Lâm has called on the Party Central Committee members and heads of various agencies to demonstrate a strong sense of responsibility and lead by example in the administrative streamlining revolution. In your opinion, how should the heads in the organisations demonstrate their responsibility in the restructuring process?
Party General Secretary Tô Lâm has made it very clear that the restructuring directly affects leadership positions and heads, especially members of the Party Central Committee, must lead by example. This means that if the restructuring touches their positions, they must be ready to accept the changes and make sacrifices. The sacrifices could involve relinquishing certain privileges or benefits that they used to have. The role of leading by example is vital, as it sets a precedent for subordinates and society, catalysing the success of the reform.
At the same time, heads of all departments and agencies must perform well in managing their teams, reviewing whether their organisations are fit for continuation. The key question they must ask is whether their organisation still deserves to exist, whether its functions and responsibilities remain fit, or whether adjustments are necessary. The process requires courage, self-reflection and the ability to propose necessary changes. — VNS
This article was first posted on Vietnam News