Substantive change

Recently, a number of ministries, departments, and localities have happily announced that administrative procedures for businesses have been significantly streamlined. However, in reality, businesses assess that things remain "exactly the same." Which side is more trustworthy?

- Looking at the completed tasks, it's easy to understand why the assessments from both sides are so different. Ministries, departments, and localities count the number of regulations they've cut to report. However, very few have actually significantly reduced the number of sub-licenses, eliminated unnecessary business conditions, or removed cumbersome administrative procedures. This means that the time and cost for businesses to handle administrative procedures remain unchanged.

- One might think that by reducing intermediate steps, costs and time would be shortened?

- In reality, the main difference lies in the roles assigned to each party involved. For example, previously it was the minister who signed, now it will be the department head. Or at the local level, instead of the provincial chairman signing, it will now be the director of the department. The procedures themselves remain the same, so delays are inevitable.

So, what is the root cause of the delays and bureaucracy in administrative procedures for businesses?

- The more business conditions there are, the more sub-licenses there will be. Thus, the benefits accrue to those who control the circular regulations. Without their own interests, people will naturally find excuses not to comply. Only by eliminating this can there be real change.

TU QUEO

Source: https://www.sggp.org.vn/thay-doi-thuc-chat-post795976.html