The forum was chaired by Nguyen Xuan Thang (President of VASS), Nguyen Van Giau (Chairman of ECNA), Vu Tien Loc (President of VCCI), Nguyen Hong Linh (Chairman of Ba Ria-Vung Tau People’s Committee), and Nguyen Van Phuc (Deputy Chairman of ECNA).
The forum attracted participation of many leading economic experts, managers and researchers from different institutions such as ECNA, the Budget and Finance Committee of the National Assembly, the Science, Technology and Environment Committee of the National Assembly, Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee, the President Office, the National Assembly, the Ministry of Planning and Investment, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the State Bank of Vietnam, the National Financial Supervisory Committee, leaders of Ba Ria – Vung Tau Province, as well as economic specialists, management experts, and researchers from VASS, the Central Institute for Economic Management, the Institute of Development Strategy, The General Department of Statistics (the Ministry of Planning and Investment), the Institute of Rural and Agricultural Strategy and Development Policy (the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development), the Academy of Finance (the Ministry of Finance), the University of Economics (Hanoi National University), the National Economics University, Vietnam Economic Scientific Association and many other research institutes, universities. Participating in the forum there were also specialists, who used to be senior management officials of the Government, the National Assembly, the chief representative of IMF in Vietnam, the representative of UNDP in Vietnam, and representatives of commercial banks, economic corporations, the State-run general companies, Fulbright program, and mass media agencies.
21 papers and comments were presented, focusing on 2 main themes, including: (1) Broad overview of Vietnam Economy: Macro-policy management in 2012 and recommendations for 2013 with assessments and recognition of Vietnam economy in 2013 and prospects for 2013; Fiscal Year policy; Solutions to non-performing loans; Commercial policy and trade gap; Measures to enterprises’ difficulties; Outstanding issues of agricultural production etc; (2) Broad overview of institutional reform and decentralization, highlighting economic decentralization, planning decentralization, FDI management decentralization, the State budget management decentralization, the State-run enterprise management decentralization, the State empowerment in land management etc…
At the first session, Vietnam economy in 2012 and prospects for 2013 were discussed. According to Tran Dinh Thien, Director of the Vietnam Institute of Economics, if we make a short term evaluation of the economic situation, we can see that it is improved by quarter. If we make a general assessment, however, we have to admit that Vietnam economy in 2012 still remains unstable with a lot of challenges. He also showed management shortcomings and weaknesses that are viewed as the causes of difficulties and instabilities. Public investments are wasted and the national resources are allocated too excessively, resulting in uncontrolledness. The forum participants showed their concern about non-performing loans, cross-ownership, implicit business and ownership in the bank system, the high number of stagnant and bankrupt enterprises, and the unclear trading and production situation of enterprises in the State sector. Instability of the macro economy can be partly but not basically solved; it therefore may continue with a new period. Many participants stated that macro economy could not be stabilized, social safety could not be ensured, growth patterns could not be transformed, rapid and sustainable development could not be achieved, if the restructuring was not carried out strictly and obtained an important stage. At the forum, some participants revealed that the risk of instability and inflation would still remain for 2013; thus, the State should not set up a goal of high growth, but it should focus resources on economic restructuring.
At the second session, institutional reform and decentralization were discussed. According to Le Xuan Ba, Director of the Central Institute for Economic Management, decentralization enables local governments to take initiative in their management; yet, it also results in the fact that they will rule their region as a feud; they will compete and constrain each other; and local empowerment will be abused. Vu Thanh Tu Anh, lecturer of the Fulbright Program, stated that there were still a lot of shortcomings in decentralization in our country. It is carried out on a larger scale at the same time, but not synchronously. The supervisory and collaborative mechanism still remains ineffective. This results in institutional partitions and the fact that local governments have to conduct economic activities and spread investments excessively. Tran Du Lich, Sub-head of Ho Chi Minh City delegation in the National Assembly, said that it was necessary to identify clearly what is of the national power and what is of the local interest, before carrying out decentralization. This is the key for decentralization and empowerment. In the opinion of experts, decentralization must be based on the principle that tasks are assigned to institutions at the most suitable level and there must be clear mechanism and regulations, in order to avoid scrambles or evasion of tasks. At the same time, decentralization must be made specifically with different stages; responsibility must be also clearly define for each level.
At the forum, Nguyen Xuan Thang emphasized that it was necessary to focus discusses on identifying the major points of decentralization, as following: firstly, the State management decentralization aims at promoting the self-control, self-motivation and creativeness of management institutions in economic development; secondly, it is necessary to identify the levels of asset ownership and the levels of direct management; national assets must be under management at the Central level; when a local government is assigned to do it, it is a management mandate; thirdly, decentralization must be based on the interest relationship, because the nature of decentralization is to deal with the interest relationship between interest of the Central State that represents for the whole country and regional interest that represents for a partial area as well as local interest that represents as particular; fourthly, it is necessary to discuss thoroughly at what level decentralization and empowerment should be made and what should be decentralized and empowered. It is essential to pay attention to what represents for interest of the whole country; it is impossible to empower everything; local governments have to take self-control over what belongs to them. For example, for local issues that have pervasive effects beyond the local area such as environmental issues, we can divide them for local management empowerment.
The forum proceedings will be distributed to delegates at the Fourth Meeting of the 8th National Assembly.
Vu Hung Cuong
