Merging departments: Should there be a test to recruit directors?

Regarding the proposal to possibly merge 17 departments in the draft Decree of the Government regulating the organization of specialized agencies under the People's Committees of provinces and centrally run cities, standing member of the National Assembly's Finance and Budget Committee Le Thanh Van said that it seems that the Ministry of Home Affairs is only able to accumulate units according to mechanical principles.

“In a developed society like ours today, the general trend is a large society with a small state. The root of this problem has not been thoroughly resolved by the Ministry of Home Affairs,” emphasized Deputy Le Thanh Van.

Opportunity to eradicate corruption

As you commented, the proposal of the Ministry of Home Affairs is only cumulative and mechanical, so will there be a situation where after the merger, the external focal points are only narrowed but the internal ones are expanded?

The problem is to take this opportunity to review the implementation of the functions of state agencies, to expand or narrow them.

Some public service functions belong to state administrative agencies, but if society can do it, then it should be given to society. Public service units, which can be socialized and self-balance revenue and expenditure, can be liberated...

From there, it is determined how many tasks there are to perform that function and how many groups of tasks of the same nature are formed by that task, from which the corresponding state institutions are determined.

The second is to reorganize the cadre team. This is an opportunity for us to re-identify the quality of the cadre team. The General Secretary's furnace is hot, this is an opportunity to both eradicate corruption in both economic and power aspects, and to remove from the apparatus cadre team that does not meet the requirements of the task, violates standards and is willing to be corrupt.

To do the first and second things, there must be a policy of utilizing talented people.

Doing these three things well will create a lean, elite, and efficient apparatus that not only meets the requirements of innovation and is consistent with the current roadmap, but also cuts down on the budget, restructures spending sources, and helps reduce pressure on the budget and public debt...

Other ways

Some people think that the merger should not be decided by the locality but should have "rigid" regulations on which department to merge with which department, to avoid the locality hesitating to do it or choosing the least controversial option?

In principle, I agree with the Ministry of Interior but the way of doing it is different.

The direction given by the Ministry of Home Affairs is correct because 63 provinces and cities are 63 administrative entities with different advantages in terms of location, population, industry, development potential... Thus, the organizational model of the apparatus may be different.

The problem is that we provide a principled format for localities to choose their own model, but without conditions attached, it will be arbitrary in setting up the apparatus and will not overcome abuse in establishing the apparatus.

Most importantly, there are three conditions. The first is the responsibility of the leader, if he chooses wrong, he must take specific responsibility.

Second, to support that mechanism is financial allocation. For example, how much money does that amount of state management work cost? If you increase the payroll, you will not have money to pay salaries. At that time, you will be forced to adjust and select talented people.

Third is supervision by superiors, periodically evaluating commitments before taking up a position, and if through supervision you cannot change anything, you will be removed from office... If done strictly, the system will immediately operate smoothly.

The reorganization of departments will certainly touch on human resources issues. When merging and consolidating departments, the number of redundant deputy leaders is not small. In your opinion, how should the personnel plan be implemented to ensure fairness without causing disruption?

Actually, this is due to the psychology and awareness of the officials. Basically, officials of state agencies, political and social organizations are all party members.

When joining the Party, you swore before the Party flag to be ready to obey the Party's Resolution, carry out orders from superiors, and carry out the organization's assignments. Now that the organization has changed and reassigned, you must comply.

The most important thing is to have a clear mindset. It doesn't matter what job you do, or what position you hold, as long as you contribute well and complete the assigned tasks. If you don't follow through with a task, you will be disciplined.

In my opinion, the arrangement of personnel when merging must be based on specific regulations to ensure fairness - that is, through a competitive recruitment mechanism. If a department merges, there will be a surplus of 10 department directors, for example, when only 1 is needed, then a public and transparent recruitment exam must be organized to re-appoint them.

There should also be a cross-examination board to avoid submission and ensure objectivity. In other words, a double examination system, with supervision above and all those who participate in marking must sign to confirm responsibility if that person is wrong.