Decentralization and delegation are essential requirements for the apparatus to operate quickly, closely to reality, and serve the people better. But decentralization is not just about transferring tasks from higher to lower levels.
True decentralization must grant substantive power, accompanied by clear responsibilities, proportionate resources, adequate implementation tools, and transparent inspection and supervision mechanisms.
The remarks by the General Secretary and President at a meeting reviewing one year of the three-tier government system convey a very important message.
That is, if tasks are assigned without providing sufficient conditions, lower levels will find it very difficult to work, and officials will find it very hard to implement. But if decentralization is strong without proper oversight, it can easily lead to risks, even violations, or a mindset of not daring to act or implement.
This is the key point of current administrative reform. We need stronger decentralization to localities, because those closest to the people usually understand the people’s needs best, the practical bottlenecks, and the development requirements of each area.
However, granting power cannot be separated from granting resources. Lower levels cannot be required to handle more tasks when they lack sufficient personnel, disproportionate budgets, unintegrated data, limited digital infrastructure, or unclear professional guidance.
Therefore, decentralization must start with clearly defining which tasks the central government retains, which tasks localities handle, and which tasks require inter-level coordination.
The central government needs to focus on strategy, institutions, standards, regulations, major coordination, and controlling issues with broad impact.
Localities need to be granted stronger authority over matters directly related to people’s lives, public services, development management, investment, land, environment, and daily issues arising in their areas.
Along with that, decentralization must be based on implementation capacity. Each locality has different conditions, so a rigid, uniform approach cannot be applied.
The most important condition is resources. Assigning tasks without allocating budgets, granting authority without providing data, or assigning responsibility without having specialized personnel will leave grassroots officials confused and even afraid of making mistakes.
In the context of digital transformation, data is also a resource. Local governments aiming to handle procedures quickly, accurately, and transparently must have connectivity to data on residents, land, businesses, taxes, insurance, planning, and shared platforms.
Decentralization must go hand in hand with clear responsibility. Which level decides, that level takes responsibility. The head of that level must be accountable for the results of the assigned tasks.
But responsibility must be fair; lower levels cannot be held accountable for tasks over which they lack sufficient authority, resources, or must wait for too many layers of approval. Clear responsibility encourages action, while vague responsibility leads to shirking and avoidance.
The stronger the decentralization, the better the inspection and supervision must be. Inspection is not meant to make officials more afraid, but to prevent violations, support implementation, identify bottlenecks, and make timely adjustments.
Supervision must be based on data, clear criteria, specific results, and transparency. At the same time, there must be mechanisms to protect officials who dare to think, dare to act, dare to take responsibility for the common good, with pure motives and transparent processes.
In the new era of development, the country needs a leaner but stronger apparatus. To achieve that, decentralization and delegation must be designed as a whole: enough power to act, enough resources to act, enough responsibility to act correctly, and enough trust to dare to act.
Only then can decentralization truly become a driving force for renewing national governance and creating more momentum for the country to rise.
After one year of operation, the two-tier local government model in Quang Ninh province has initially affirmed its correctness and suitability to the requirements of organizational reform, improving the effectiveness and efficiency of state management and the quality of serving the people.
