After the two-level local government model was put into operation, what is expected is not only a more streamlined apparatus, closer to the people, but also a faster speed of work resolution.
To do so, whichever level is assigned authority must proactively handle the work, avoiding the situation of shirking, avoiding or not fully exercising the assigned authority.
Meanwhile, the reality over the years shows that in many places there is still a fairly common habit of asking for the opinion of superiors for everything. There are issues that the law has clearly stipulated, the process is not complicated, but the dossier still has to go around through many levels just because the competent person does not want to make a decision on their own.
Behind those opinion requests, in addition to caution, many cases stem from the psychology of fear of being wrong, fear of being checked, fear of being held accountable. And asking for opinions from superiors becomes a way to share risks.
That mentality will pull back the commune-level administration. If everything has to ask for unnecessary opinions, the apparatus will operate slowly, people and businesses will have to wait longer, while provincial leaders will be caught up in matters that could have been resolved right from the grassroots level.
This becomes even more important when the workload of the commune-level government is now much larger after the process of arranging administrative units.
If each dossier has to go through an additional round of seeking opinions, the goal of being closer to the people, more effective and efficient of the commune-level administrative apparatus will be very difficult to transform into practical efficiency.
Of course, requiring commune-level officials to dare to decide does not mean letting them fend for themselves in all situations. For issues beyond their authority or unclear legal regulations, it is necessary to ask for opinions from superiors to ensure unity in state management.
So the important thing is to correctly define the boundaries between reporting and self-determination. If cadres want to boldly exercise their powers, along with delegating power, it is necessary to create sufficient conditions for them to exercise that power.
By stipulating that the law must be clearer and more synchronized; professional guidance activities need to be timely. Especially, there must be a mechanism to protect those who implement regulations correctly, procedures correctly and act for the common good.
Because if only demanding responsibility without creating legal security, the psychology of hesitation will be very difficult to disappear.
The direction of the Chairman of Ca Mau Provincial People's Committee is not only aimed at rectifying the situation of avoiding responsibility at the grassroots level. More importantly, it is a reminder that administrative reform will only be truly successful when the assigned powers are fully implemented, in accordance with authority and associated with the responsibility of the head.
Only when those entrusted with power dare to decide and dare to take responsibility for things under their authority, will the apparatus operate smoothly and people truly feel the effectiveness of reform.
