In fact, the 2021-2025 period shows that all three programs have achieved many results, but also revealed common limitations. While people and beneficiaries sometimes suffer because the policy is slow, integrated or lacks connectivity. Therefore, the Government's proposal to integrate 3 into 1 is a policy restructuring, to overcome bottlenecks.
As Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Environment Nguyen Hoang Hiep affirmed, the merger does not reduce policies, but helps focus more investment on ethnic minority and mountainous areas - where the largest and strongest support is needed. When resources are not divided into three, investment will increase in depth, instead of "a little in each place" leading to a spread.
This is also the spirit that General Secretary To Lam emphasized when talking about avoiding the situation of "putting everything into national goals", but in the end, the responsibility and effectiveness are unclear.
It can be seen that the most positive point of the consolidation plan is the transparency of management and cash flow. Instead of 3 sets of procedures, 3 disbursement mechanisms, 3 sets of evaluation criteria, now task groups are placed in a common structure.
This creates favorable conditions for auditing and supervision; helps to clearly identify who does, who is responsible, who is evaluated. Increased transparency also means reducing the risk of loss, avoiding the repeat of overlapping investment.
Another positive point of the 3rd part of the merger is that people who are beneficiaries will not have to go through three rounds of documents to ask for three different supports. A commune or ward in a remote area is no longer confused between the lists of merged areas.
In particular, the merger also opens up an approach based on actual needs. Where there is a need for livelihoods, priority will be given to livelihoods; where there is a lack of infrastructure, priority will be given to infrastructure; where there is a medical - educational gap, there will be space to adjust resources appropriately.
Of course, concerns at the parliament regarding the merger, such as the figure of VND400,000 billion in local capital or the lack of consistency in assessment criteria, are completely reasonable and need attention. That debate shows the necessary caution so that the program is not only good on paper but also good in implementation. A large program, integrating many goals, is only really effective when the design is flexible enough for the locality to apply, and strict enough to avoid spreading.
Unifying 3 National Target Programs, if done correctly, will create a resonance force that each individual program is unlikely to have.People, especially in disadvantaged areas, also benefit more fully, well and fairly from the State's policies.
