Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)delvpublished in(发表于) 2013/10/31 9:31:30 Guangzhou Nansha farmland pilot the truth： there is no substantive breakthrough
The Nansha district of Guangzhou City Ordinance (draft) (hereinafter "the draft"), recently adopted by the Standing Committee of the Municipal Government of Guangzhou, was brought to the national people's Congress of Guangzhou City, entered the legislative stage.
Industry widely expected to be November 9--18 third plenary session to be held in Beijing will be deployed in the areas of reform, land reform will be an important part of the system. Attempt on farmland in the draft statement, thus also a cause for concern.
Earlier news reports, Nansha, Hangzhou, Suzhou, jiashan promises to be a new round of discovery pilot the reform of collective land, thereby promoting the "land-for-shares", land trusts, such as the pilot advance.
However, just above the Bill expressly: major science and technology achievements industrialization projects through leasing, development and stakes and joint ventures in the construction, including the use of collective-owned construction land. Several experts interviewed commented Nansha district on land reform has not yet had a substantive breakthrough.
Respondents comment on South sand changed my ideas deviate from collective agrarian reform ", the same rights, the same electricity price" key at the city's pilot "vote" reform proposals ultimately were not included.
Nansha mode is not a breakthrough
Who have been invited to take part in comprehensive reform of land system reform project in Nansha of Guangdong Province Peng Peng, Deputy Director Development Research Institute believes that collective construction land use right straight through leasing, stakes and joint ventures in the construction of circulation can allow farmers in case of not lost ground, sharing the fruits of industrialization and urbanization, is one of the ideas for future land reform.
However, this flow cannot be considered a fresh claim to make a breakthrough.
In fact, China's existing land management Act have made it clear, the rural collective economic organizations can use the township (town) land use plan identified land for construction enterprises, or other entity or individual right as your contribution, joint ventures and other forms of organized enterprise.
At the beginning of the reform and opening up, Shenzhen, on attracting foreign capital was established in this way a large number of "processing". Research Center of Shenzhen urban planning and land development land reforms Zhao Xinping, head of the study group believes that while this pattern is somewhat at the beginning of disorder, but also to enliven the rural collective land, combined with contributed to the economic development of Shenzhen. In recent years, Huizhou, Guangdong, Hainan, Beijing and other places to implement this pattern.
Under this model, collective construction land still cannot be collectively what they say goes.
The land management Act requires, in accordance with the provisions of entrepreneurial construction land shall be approved by the local government departments at and above the county level, and must be strictly controlled.
Reporters found that although the Guangzhou Nansha district Ordinance (draft) does not explicitly make the land must be strictly controlled, but also did not show signs of relaxation.
First of all, the Bill will be used to run businesses of this kind qualified as "significant development and industrialization of scientific and technological achievements", which means that in Nansha to bypass land compensation, collective land for construction projects to facilitate the use of relatively high threshold.
In addition, proposed in the draft, Nansha district management should ensure that the land use industry-led, land for construction should be given priority for Nansha new focus on the development of the industry.
In contrast, Guangdong 2005 starts the execution of the measures for Administration of collective construction land use right transfer in Guangdong province for collective construction land use more open sets.
Trainers, but was unable to develop real estate projects, "all kinds of industrial and commercial enterprises, including State-owned, collective, private enterprises, individual businesses, foreign-invested enterprises (including Sino-foreign joint ventures, Sino-foreign cooperative and wholly foreign-owned enterprises," processing "), joint-stock company, joint venture" collective land for construction purposes can be used this way.
Department of land management, school of public administration, Zhejiang University lecturer Yang Linjie believes that Nansha in the draft provisions on collective-owned construction land transfer, cannot be used as "highlights" to enlarge. "Not only superfluous, and qualified project to use of collective-owned construction land, self empowerment is the Government while ignoring the landowners over land ownership. "Yang Linjie believes that the draft show deviated from the collective agrarian reform", the same rights, the same electricity price "key.
Slow progress in land reform in Guangzhou
In fact, the Guangzhou land reform attempts did not have a substantive breakthrough.
The end of 2012, agreed in principle to the Department of land and resources pilot programme of institutional innovation on Guangzhou urban and rural land management, land reform in Guangzhou are prized. However, "in General, the area of land reform, Guangzhou does not go ahead. "Peng Peng said, commissioned by the Guangzhou Bureau of land and resources, and his Homestead, small housing and collective land property right reform wrote three reports.
Pilot announced in the first half of this year, Guangzhou, Chongqing, "system", that is, rural construction land reclaimed form the Bill targets in exchanges at a public auction. However, the attempts at reform have not yet see progress.
Peng Peng told reporters that implemented in Nansha last year, he had proposed that "vote", exploring the intensive use of land, Nansha, the aforementioned draft, did not adopt this recommendation of the Nansha Islands.
Guangzhou City, Guangzhou City was issued at the end of last year, the urban and rural land management system innovation of pilot implementation, requires to be completed in June this year transferences of collective-owned construction land management practices and supporting policy development.
But the reporter learned from real estate research center of Guangzhou City, which are still lags a lot. "Current public comment has ended, but we are also making changes. "The staff of the Centre said.
Respondents indicated that attempts to estimate the land reform in some places until after the third plenary session on agrarian reform policy thinking and clear will really start.
21st century economic report(广州南沙农地流转试点真相：尚无实质突破|南沙|试点|农地_新闻资讯2013年10月30日02:47（编辑：SN091）
《广州市南沙新区条例(草案)》(下简称“草案”) 近日获广州市政府常委会议通过，被提请广州市人大审议，进入立法最后阶段。
业界广泛猜测，即将于11月9日-12日在北京召开的十八届三中全会将部署的各领域的改革中，土地制度的改革将是重要一环。上述草案中关于农地流转尝试的表述，也因而引起关注。
此前也有消息称，南沙、杭州、宿州、嘉善有望成为新一轮探索集体用地流转改革的试点，从而带动“土地换股权”、土地流转信托等试点的推进。
然而上述《草案》中仅仅明确：重大科技成果研发和产业化项目可以通过租赁、入股和联营联建等方式使用集体建设用地。数位受访专家评述，南沙新区在土改上尚未有实质性突破。
有受访人士评述南沙土改思路背离了集体土地改革“同地、同权、同价”的关键，而已在重庆试点的“地票制”的改革建议最终也未被纳入。
南沙模式未有突破
曾受邀参与南沙土地制度改革课题的广东省综合改革发展研究院副院长彭澎认为，集体建设用地使用权直接通过租赁、入股和联营联建的方式流转可以使农民在不至于失地的情况下，分享工业化和城镇化成果，将是今后土地改革的思路之一。
然而，这种流转的方式却算不上新鲜也称不上有所突破。
实际上，中国现行《土地管理法》中已明确，农村集体经济组织可以使用乡(镇)土地利用总体规划确定的建设用地兴办企业，或者与其他单位、个人以土地使用权入股、联营等形式共同举办企业。
深圳在改革开放之初，就通过这种方式大量吸引外资成立大量“三来一补”企业。深圳市规划国土发展研究中心土地改革研究组组长赵新平认为，虽然这种模式之初有些无序，但也为盘活农村集体土地，配合深圳经济腾飞做出了贡献。近年来，广东惠州、海南、北京等地都推行了这一模式。
但这一模式下，集体建设用地流转依然不能是农村集体自己说了算。
《土地管理法》要求，按照上述规定兴办企业的建设用地，须经县级以上地方政府部门批准，且必须严格控制。
记者发现，虽然《广州市南沙新区条例(草案)》中没有明确提出这类用地必须严格控制，但也并未显示出放松迹象。
首先，《草案》将这类用地上兴办的企业限定为“重大科技成果研发和产业化项目”，这意味着在南沙能够绕过征地补偿、相对便利使用集体建设用地的项目门槛相对较高。
此外，《草案》中提出，南沙新区管理机构应当确保土地利用以产业用地为主导，建设用地应当优先用于南沙新区重点发展的产业。
相对而言，广东在2005年就开始施行的《广东省集体建设用地使用权流转管理办法》对于集体建设用地的使用主体设置更为开放。
该办法规定，除了不能开发房地产项目外，“各类工商企业，包括国有、集体、私营企业，个体工商户，外资投资企业(包括中外合资、中外合作、外商独资企业、”三来一补“企业)，股份制企业，联营企业等”，都可以上述方式使用集体建设用地。
浙江大学公共管理学院土地管理系讲师杨遴杰认为，南沙《草案》中关于集体建设用地流转的条款，不能被当做“亮点”放大。“规定不仅显得多此一举，且限定重点项目才能这样使用集体建设用地，就是政府在自我赋权，而无视土地所有者对土地的支配权。”杨遴杰认为，《草案》展现的思路背离了集体土地改革“同地、同权、同价”的关键。
广州土改进展缓慢
事实上，广州的土地改革尝试也未有实质性突破。
2012年底，国土资源部原则上同意《广州市城乡统筹土地管理制度创新试点方案》，广州土改被寄予厚望。然而，“总的来说，在土地改革方面，广州没有走在前面。”彭澎说，受广州市国土局委托，他在宅基地、小产权房和集体用地改革方面写了三篇报告。
广州在今年上半年宣布试点重庆的“地票制”，即农村建设用地复垦形成票据指标在交易所公开拍卖。然而，这项改革尝试目前还未见进展。
彭澎告诉记者，去年他曾提议在南沙推行“地票制”，探索土地集约化使用，但南沙的前述草案看，南沙没有采纳这一建议。
广州市曾在去年年底印发《广州市城乡统筹土地管理制度创新试点的实施意见》，要求在今年6月完成集体建设用地使用权流转管理办法和配套政策制定工作。
但记者从广州市房地产研究中心了解到，这项工作目前还滞后很多。“目前公众征询意见已经结束，但我们还在进行修改。”该中心工作人员说。
有受访人士表示，一些地方土改的尝试估计要待三中全会关于土地改革的政策思路明晰之后才会真正启动。
赞