The above opinion was expressed by Prime Minister Le Minh Hung at the group discussion session of the National Assembly on August 19, on the direction of building the draft Law on State Budget (integrated) and the integration of 4 national target programs into 1 national target program.
Prime Minister Le Minh Hung's opinion sets out a seemingly very simple but decisive requirement for the effectiveness of budget use, which is that money must be delivered to the right places where it is needed and for the right jobs that people need.
Each locality has different investment needs. A mountainous commune may need a road for people to conveniently bring agricultural products to the market. An area that is often water-deficient will wait for a clean water project.
While some localities still need to invest in more schools and health stations, in other places, these infrastructures have basically met the needs and resources that need to be prioritized for livelihoods, housing or digital infrastructure.
If resources are divided into too rigid "barriers", the paradox may arise that there is money for something that is not urgent but there is a lack of money for something that is more urgent.
At that time, the problem is not only the risk of budget waste, but also the legitimate and urgent needs of the people that are slow to be resolved.
Therefore, the Government's proposal to integrate national target programs is aimed at reducing dispersal in management, limiting policy overlap, and creating conditions for resources to be focused on more urgent goals.
Of course, local needs cannot be the sole basis; budget allocation must also be based on planning, development criteria, resource balancing capacity and investment efficiency.
If implemented well, integration will create a flexible mechanism for localities to proactively choose tasks that best suit their needs.
At that time, the Central Government will identify goals, criteria and major priorities. Localities, based on reality and within the framework of criteria and goals identified by the Central Government, will select the most appropriate priority tasks.
Of course, granting initiative also means greater responsibility.
If the locality has the right to choose, it must explain why this project needs to be done first, why this area needs to be prioritized, and most importantly, what changes the budget money spent brings to people's lives.
Giving initiative does not mean giving arbitrary power. If there are no criteria, publicity and supervision, flexibility can turn into arbitrariness in resource allocation.
Therefore, decentralization must go hand in hand with public disclosure, inspection, supervision and post-inspection. Efficiency should not only be assessed by disbursement rates or the number of completed projects, but must be measured by actual results.
In particular, integrating programs does not mean narrowing down goals or reducing resources for disadvantaged areas.
Conversely, the new mechanism must further ensure resources to be more effective for ethnic minority areas, mountainous areas, remote areas, border areas and islands.
Allocating resources according to needs and budget money only has real value when it turns into practical changes in people's lives.
