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) 2013/12/29 7:38:35 Professor：Can add municipality directly under the central government in order to promote administrative straight pipe county
Beijing reporter Liu Yuhai 18 national Congress described the third plenary session of the magnificent blueprint for reform, "promote the modernization of national governance systems and governance capacity" is particularly striking. While government reforms are key to modernization of systems of governance and governance capacity.
But looking at the 7 government reforms over the past 35 years, without exception, will reform the Government agency focused on horizontal adjustment vertical streamlining government hierarchy has not been put on the agenda of reform-not only fails to streamline, but consists of four levels of Government evolved into a more complex system of five levels of Government.
As plenary resolutions, further "optimize the organizational structure of the Government" to promote China's five levels of Government in system transition to an international three-tier government system reform is imminent. Told the 21st century business Herald interview with national school of administration, the Executive Vice President of the research society for restructuring of China Mr. Wang yukai, a Professor believes that should go through the new municipalities will be China's provincial-level administrative units increased to 40, creating the conditions for advancing administrative provinces directly lead the counties and deficiency of township-level Government, translating them into County Government agencies, creating a three-tier system of Government.
Reform of the regime of city dominating County depart from intended
Of the 21st century: since reform and opening up, China conducted 7 rounds of government reform, without exception, be horizontal reform of Government, without reforms to streamline Government in the vertical, what is the cause?
Mr. Wang yukai: it's been more than 30 years, China conducted 7 greater reform of Government, accomplishment worthy of recognition. Along with China's market-oriented reform process after 7 rounds of government reform, from an overall structure to the run mode is largely by a planned Government turned to a market economy.
But on the whole, the 30-year reform from the horizontal branches of Government set scientific, a superior to an inferior delegate considered above, without considering issues from the vertical. Also, longitudinal administrative design, not only no flattening, rather complicated--before reform and opening up, and China are the four levels of government management structure, reform and opening up, it turned into a five-tier system of Government.
Before reform and opening up, China's urbanization rate is very low, although there are also some prefecture-level city, but prefecture-level city in the County; the vast majority of the County was by the prefectural administrative office administration-administrative office is of the provincial party Committee and provincial government agencies, lack of NPC and the CPPCC and police bodies, not the level of Government. After 1982, the exploration of urban radiation plays a central role, playing the lead in the process of regional economic development, began, County, municipal mergers, reform--which amounts to added an Executive above the county level. City dominating County initially in "Yangtze River Delta" soon sweep the country, in addition to Hainan, and a few places to retain outside ethnic autonomous prefectures, prefectural Administrative Office, much of this changed regime of city dominating County, China has turned into a five-tier structure consists of four levels of Government.
Of the 21st century: City merged with reform, City County meets the original Center City-driven the reform goal of surrounding counties?
Mr. Wang yukai: urban counties originally conceived very well, in some places, is not no, especially for fast development played a very important role in central cities--cities, after all, mastered the resources, the people of the County, prefecture-level city of County resources to speed up development. It can be said that now more than 300 more rapid development of prefecture-level cities, largely associated with the regime of city dominating County. But also hinder the development of County of city dominating County: City County before, through the prefectural Administrative Office of the County, the Administrative Office was only a transitional body, not withheld resources; after the city dominating County, city policies, funding, targets resources--such as interception. Also, city merged surfaces reduces the prefectural Administrative Office, but supported by finance personnel has not diminished, but added a lot. Therefore, City County in the first place rather than to achieve, also departed from.
In addition, in the course of administrative reform in the vertical, in order to reconcile the interests of large cities and provincial capitals, established a number of sub-provincial cities and municipalities. This directly onto the city has added two models, the situation is more complex. Because cities with municipal administrative level than the prefecture-level city of Gao Bange, also makes the whole administrative levels rise.
Not thin level difficult to cure "run"
Of the 21st century: reform of Government for future horizontal space? From the timing point of view, government reform focus shifts to whether he ought to now be vertical streamlining government hierarchy?
Mr. Wang yukai: while horizontal Office consolidation is getting closer to a reasonable, but not to the end. After this round of institutional restructuring of the Central Government this year, also consists of 25 ministries under the State Council – while developed countries are generally not more than 17. The future, consideration could be given to further consolidate the formation of agricultural, cultural, social security departments. In addition, market regulators such as quality control, food and Drug Administration for industry and commerce, Government rent, the IRS, could also consider merging.
Longitudinal administrative level adjusted in terms of pushing for government reform, has been very tight. Reason:
First, if a longitudinal five-consolidating Government, it is difficult to establish standardized fiscal transfer payment system. Currently, China is five level Government, and five level financial, all ministries master has more than 290 more items special transfer paid, from County to city again to province, are "ran Department money into", only into three level Government, and three level financial--central financial, and province financial, and County city financial (Township not set financial), is may established relative specification of financial transfer paid system. As reliance on local government finance has declined considerably, fostering local tax source in the future, in the process, standardized fiscal transfer payments are very urgent and very important.
Secondly, the five levels of Government, particularly the vertical not flat, higher levels of Government was highly bound to his subordinates. So the regime of city dominating County must be got rid of.
Thirdly, from the perspective of objective conditions, may also speed up the streamlining of government hierarchy. Traffic now very well developed, in many parts of the County the day of meetings at the provincial government, no problem. And increasing information, e-Government makes historic changes in the means of information transmission.
In addition, urbanization is high speed, if vertical government structure does not adjust, management will come to a dead end. For example, in addition to municipalities, provincial capitals and sub-provincial cities, municipalities, prefecture-level cities, county-level cities, some places also exploring the town-level municipal and village-level city! Some towns have hundreds of thousands of people, if not exceed those on the governance structure, town-level management? Therefore, must break the public governance structure, breaking entirely according to the level of a city.
Additional municipalities in order to promote administrative provinces directly lead the counties
Of the 21st century: reforms to streamline Government, there are two different points of view: one is the "imaginary real House", another is "real virtual cities", which one do you?
Mr. Wang yukai: but now highly developed economic, transport, communications, you do not need so many local institutions. But, whether foreign or domestic, and provincial level are necessary. Historically, provinces in China, should not now go back to the past, "State counties" structure, but should continue the provinces directly lead the counties.
Taking into account the regional differences in China, provinces directly lead the counties first provinces directly lead the counties financially later after the conditions are ripe to achieve administrative provinces directly lead the counties. See it now provinces directly lead the counties financially to advance more quickly, administratively advance very slowly. Because there are many problems in this process, fiscal provincial biruxian tubes, tubes is a prefecture-level city in its administrative, cities lack enthusiasm. But the major sticking points are: first, relatively few provincial units, if the jurisdiction of a province does not make the adjustment must be hundreds of counties and county-level cities, too many, to the province under a lot of pressure. Second, the provincial government now is too much, after the Central Government many policies, decentralization to the local, the province is the main processing unit, provinces directly lead the counties is difficult.
Address the first problem, how to adjust administrative divisions becomes a big problem. Relatively easy approach is to first increase municipalities. Administrative center of a province had two, two cities, take out one of the municipalities. Such as Dalian, Qingdao, Ningbo, Xiamen, Shenzhen, could be changed to municipalities. Population like Liaoning, Shandong, and Guangdong Province has greatly reduced. As long as the 31 provincial-level administrative units is now expanded to nearly 40, conditions of provinces directly lead the counties will get.
Solve the second problem, begin trimming the provincial government too much power, the entire administrative center of gravity down to the prefecture-level cities, County or town. For example, no city dominating County, Hainan Province, care was okay. Decentralization at the provincial level, and the reform has a lot to do, to have a reform drive.
Only adjustment, to do some research to streamline decentralization of power at the provincial level, adjust the five levels of Government to advance.
Implement the clerk magistrate shall act as system
Of the 21st century: fiscal reform of the provinces directly lead the counties, 2009 began to push a large area, some places explored earlier, how to evaluate their effectiveness? If provinces directly lead the counties by the financial administration, and what would be the resistance?
Mr. Wang yukai: counties and county-level cities are implementing administrative provinces directly lead the counties, determined by its interests. Most of the counties and county-level cities, provinces directly lead the counties – can reduce this level of resources in the interception. Provincial County of resistance main from: a is prefecture-level city--from 1982 to now, County has been by prefecture-level city tube, split process in the prefecture-level city certainly is a resistance; II is provincial Government of concerns--provincial government tube of too more, and County too more, not change management mode, and power no fewer than moved, provincial Government of management pressure very big; three is some place objective Shang does not has provincial County of conditions--as Xinjiang, and Tibet these geographical scale is big, and population is dilute of place. Therefore, accelerating the pace of provinces directly lead the counties, mainly refers to economically developed eastern areas.
Of the 21st century: the 21st century business Herald has been on Tianmen, qianjiang, Hubei provinces directly lead the counties reform earlier this place did some investigating and found that county officials for this reform is a paradox: they welcome the provinces directly lead the counties financially, but worried that the provinces directly lead the counties to make their channel narrower, fewer opportunities for promotion.
Mr. Wang yukai: sure it is. To solve this problem, you can after the provinces directly lead the counties, a number of key County in population, large scale commissions of prefectures or equivalents. In this way, officials had upside, willing to work in one place for long, may contribute to this place.
Of the 21st century: in the case of China, because "Heaven tall Emperor far" oversight of the County has been highly problematic, if powers continued to sink to the County, and also promoted to be the Deputy to the county-level, County Party Secretary whether the power would grow worse, greater risk of corruption?
Mr. Wang yukai: enhance County level, the shift in power sinking down into the County, the County's governance structure is critical, must be followed by political governance, official selection system of supporting the democratic process, to address heads of oversight issues. First of all, to change the management pattern of County magistrate, Secretary of the two men, to give people greater choice. After the provinces directly lead the counties should introduce a system of County party Committee, County magistrate, acting as: Secretary of elections within the party, the Chief elected County Commissioner, elected two lines alone. Parent recommend 4 candidates, Secretary of the Party Committee, three party members, the three men running for Mayor on the NPC, who's running for mayor who is party Secretary. So, Party Secretary of inner-party discipline Inspection Committee and the national people's Congress supervision two lines.
Towns should be sent into County-level government bodies
Of the 21st century: reform in streamlining government hierarchy, on the communal level, what do you think? Mr. Wang yukai: deficiency of township-level Government. Conditions, where the economy is more developed, should try to abolish Township, turn the township into County Government agencies, will shift in power down. County economy can really develop. To explore merging townships, now there are more than 19,000 more towns, 15,000 villages, with the rapid development of urbanization, the Township also have the possibility of further consolidation. Do not have the luxury of the place, can't cancel the Township for the time being, cannot be "one size fits all".
本报记者 刘玉海 北京报道 在中共十八届三中全会描绘的气势恢宏的改革蓝图中，“推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化”尤为引人瞩目。而政府改革则是国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的关键。
但综观改革开放35年来的7次政府改革，无一例外地将改革重心放在横向的政府机构调整，纵向精简政府层级的改革则始终未能摆上议事日程——不仅未能精简，反而由四级政府架构演变为更复杂的五级政府体系。
随着三中全会决议提出，进一步“优化政府组织结构”，推进中国五级政府体系向国际通行的三级政府体系转变的改革已迫在眉睫。接受《21世纪经济报道》采访的国家行政学院教授、中国行政体制改革研究会副会长汪玉凯认为，应该通过新增直辖市将中国的省级行政单位增加至40个，为行政上推进省直管县创造条件；并虚化乡镇这级政府，将其变为县级政府的派出机构，从而形成三级政府体系。
市管县体制背离改革初衷
《21世纪》：自改革开放以来，中国共进行了7轮政府改革，但无一例外都是横向的政府机构改革，而没有在纵向上进行精简政府层级的改革，原因是什么？
汪玉凯：这30多年来，中国进行了7次大的政府机构改革，成绩值得肯定。伴随着中国市场化的改革进程，经过7次政府改革，从整体结构到运行模式，已基本由计划经济政府转向市场经济。
但总体上看，这30年政府改革都是从横向的部门设置的科学性、上级对下级放权上面考虑，而没有从纵向上来考虑问题。并且，纵向的行政设计不仅没有扁平化，相反还复杂化了——改革开放前，中国是四级政府管理架构，改革开放后却变成了五级政府体系。
因为改革开放前，中国城市化率非常低，虽然也存在一些地级市，但地级市不管县；绝大多数县是由地委行署管理——而行署是省委、省政府的派出机构，没有人大、政协和相应的公检法机构，不是一级政府。1982年后，在探索发挥中心城市辐射作用、带动区域经济发展的过程中，开始地市合并、市管县改革——这等于在县之上增加了一个行政层级。市管县最初在“长三角”进行，很快风靡全国，除了海南和少数地方保留民族自治州、地委行署外，大部分地方都改成市管县体制，中国也就由四级政府变成五级架构了。
《21世纪》：地市合并、市管县改革是否达到了当初以中心城市带动周边县市这一改革目标？
汪玉凯：市管县当初的设想很好，在一些地方也不是一点作用没起，尤其是对中心城市的快速发展起了很大作用——地级市毕竟掌握了县的资源、管人，就把县域资源调度上来加快地级市的发展。可以说，现在300多个地级市的快速发展，很大程度上与市直管县体制有关。但市管县也阻碍了县域发展：市管县之前，省是通过地委行署管县，行署只是一个过渡性机构，不会截留资源；市管县之后，市就可能把一些资源——政策、资金、指标等截留。并且，地市合并表面上减少了地委行署，但财政供养人员并没有减少，反而增加了很多。所以，市管县的初衷不但没有实现，反而还背离了。
此外，在纵向上的行政改革探索过程中，为了协调解决大城市和省会城市的利益，成立了一些副省级城市和计划单列市。这就直接在城市类型上又增加了两种模式，使情况更复杂。因为计划单列市的行政级别要比地级市高半格，也使得整个行政层次上升。
不精简层级难以根治“跑部钱进”
《21世纪》：未来横向的政府机构改革还有空间吗？从时机上看，现在是否到了应该将政府改革重点转向纵向精简政府层级？
汪玉凯：虽然横向机构整合越来越接近于合理，但并没到尽头。经过今年这一轮中央政府机构调整后，国务院还有25个组成部委——而发达国家一般不超过17个。未来，可以考虑进一步整合组建大农业、大文化、大社保部门。此外，市场监管机构如工商质检、食药监管总局、地税、国税，也可以考虑合并。
政府改革往纵向行政层级调整方面推进，已经非常紧迫。原因是：
第一，如果纵向五级政府不进行整合，很难建立起规范的财政转移支付制度。目前，中国是五级政府、五级财政，各个部委掌握了290多项专项转移支付，从县到市再到省，都“跑部钱进”，只有变成三级政府、三级财政——中央财政、省财政、县市财政(乡镇不设财政)，才有可能建立相对规范的财政转移支付制度。随着地方政府土地财政依赖度大大下降，将来要培植地方税源，在这个过程中，规范的财政转移支付也非常紧迫、非常重要。
第二，五级政府，特别是纵向不扁平化，上级政府对下级约束性很强。所以，市管县体制必须改掉。
第三，从客观条件看，也具备了加快精简政府层级的可能。现在交通非常发达，很多地方的县委书记当天到省政府开会没问题。并且信息化程度加深，电子政务使信息传递手段发生历史性变化。
此外，城镇化正在高速前进，如果纵向政府结构不调整，管理会走到死胡同。比如，现在除了直辖市、省会城市、副省级城市、计划单列市、地级市、县级市，一些地方还在探索镇级市、村级市！一些镇有几十万人口，如果治理结构上不突破，镇级市怎么管理？所以，必须突破公共治理结构、打破完全按照行政级别设市。
增设直辖市以推进行政省直管县
《21世纪》：对于精简政府层级的改革，有两种不同的观点：一种是“虚省实府”，另一种是“实省虚市”，你倾向哪一种？
汪玉凯：但现在经济、交通、通讯高度发达，不需要那么多地方机构。而且，不管在国外还是国内，省这一级都很必要。中国历史上就是行省制，现在不应回到过去那种“州府管县”的结构，而应继续推进省直管县。
考虑到中国地区差异性大，省直管县第一步是财政上省直管县，待将来条件成熟后，要实现行政上省直管县。现在看，财政上省直管县推进较快，但行政上推进得非常慢。因为这个过程中有很多问题，比如县的财政省级管，行政上还是地级市管，地级市缺乏积极性。但最主要的难点是：第一，全国省级单位相对较少，如果一个省的管辖范围不做调整，要管上百个县和县级市，数量太多，对省的压力很大。第二，现在省级政府管的事情太多，中央很多政策、权力下放到地方以后，省是最主要的处理单位，省直管县难度大。
解决第一个难点，如何调整行政区划就成为一个大问题。相对容易操作的办法是，首先增加直辖市。一个省有两个行政中心、两个大城市的，拿出其中一个做直辖市。比如大连、青岛、宁波、厦门、深圳，都可以改为直辖市。这样像辽宁、山东、广东这样的人口大省就大大减少了。只要把现在31个省级行政单位增加到将近40个，省直管县的条件就越来越具备。
解决第二个难点，就要削减省级政府管理过多的权力，将整个管理重心下移到地级市、县，甚至镇。比如，海南没有进行市管县，管得也挺好。省级权力下放，与改革有很大关系，要有改革的魄力。
只有在行政区划调整、省级权力精简下放方面做一些探索，调整五级政府架构才能推进。
推行书记县长一人兼任制
《21世纪》：财政上的省直管县改革，2009年就开始大面积推开，有些地方探索就更早，如何评价其效果？如果省直管县由财政向行政上推进，会有哪些阻力？
汪玉凯：县和县级市是否实行行政上的省直管县，由其利益决定。多数县和县级市，愿意省直管县——可以减少市这一级对资源的截留。省直管县的阻力主要来自：一是地级市——从1982年到现在，县一直由地级市管，剥离过程中地级市肯定是个阻力；二是省级政府的顾虑——省级政府管的太多、县太多，不改变管理模式、权力不下移，省级政府的管理压力非常大；三是有些地方客观上确实不具备省直管县的条件——如新疆、西藏这些地域规模很大、人口很稀的地方。所以，加快省直管县的步伐，主要还是指东部经济比较发达的地方。
《21世纪》：《21世纪经济报道》曾经对湖北天门、潜江这几个较早进行省直管县改革的地方做过调查，发现县里的官员对这项改革很矛盾：他们欢迎财政上省直管县，但担心行政上省直管县会使他们的晋升渠道变窄、机会变少。
汪玉凯：确实是这样。解决这个问题，可以在省直管县后，将一些人口、规模比较大的重点县提成副地级。这样，官员有上升空间，就愿意在一个地方长期工作，可能对这个地方做出贡献。
《21世纪》：在中国目前的情况下，由于“天高皇帝远”，对县委书记的监督本就已很成问题，如果权力继续下沉到县，并且有的县还提升为副地级的话，县委书记的权力是否会膨胀得更厉害、腐败风险更大？
汪玉凯：在提高县的级别、权力重心下沉到县的情况下，县的治理结构就非常关键，必须跟政治治理的民主进程、官员选拔制度相配套，以解决一把手的监督问题。首先，要改变县长、书记两个人的管理格局，要让老百姓有更大的选择权。省直管县以后，应该实行县委书记、县长兼任制：党内选书记，行政选县长，两条线选出一个人。即上级党委推荐4个党委书记候选人，让党员选三个，这三人再到人代会上竞选县长，谁竞选上县长谁就是党委书记。这样，县委书记受到党内纪委和人大两条线监督。
乡镇应变成县级政府派出机构
《21世纪》：在精简政府层级的改革中，关于乡镇一级，你怎么看？ 汪玉凯：应该虚化乡镇这一级政府。有条件、经济比较发达的地方，应尽量废除乡镇，把乡镇变成县级政府的派出机构，将权力重心下移。这样县域经济才能真正发展起来。要探索合并乡镇，现在还有19000多个镇、15000个乡，随着城镇化的快速推进，乡镇还有进一步合并的可能。没条件的地方，暂时没办法取消乡镇，也不能“一刀切”。
赞