亚洲精品久久久久久一区二区_99re热久久这里只有精品34_久久免费高清视频_一区二区三区不卡在线视频

Some 30,000 officials will be sent to the Republic of Korea (ROK) to study its experiences in developing rural areas, according to China Business Post. It is reported that the ROK side has designed "seven-day training, three-day sight-seeing" fact-finding trips. The report soon attracted much public attention. The following are some comments on this issue.

China Youth Daily: Such fact-finding trips are just overseas tours paid for by public funds. There are many reasons to veto such trips.

First, there is not necessarily the need to go abroad to learn from foreign experiences. The Internet and other media offer plenty of opportunities to obtain this information. Second, the New Village Movement, which used to play an active role in the ROK, is now regarded by many as a defunct movement.

Third, experiences can be shared among officials, there is no need to send so many abroad.

Last but not least, if there is a need to send people abroad to learn, experts should be sent instead of officials.

The cost of such study tours will be included in the country's investment in building a "new countryside." Some of these funds will be spent on sending officials abroad before rural people enjoy any real benefits from this campaign.

It is not rare for so much public money to be spent before it reaches its intended destination. The more links there are, the longer the food chain is in the bureaucratic system, and the more that public funds will be wasted.

Such waste normally takes three forms private use of government cars, overseas trips, and wining and dining on public funds. Auditor-General Li Jinhua described such consumption as being akin to water leaking from a canal. He said that the "canals" taking money from the central government to villages are long and suffer from a great many leakages.

These planned fact-finding trips to the ROK are just another example of such "leakage."

Such institutional consumption reminds us that government money will not always reach its intended destination. The most important issue is not to further increase spending, but to prevent further "leakage."

China Economic Times: The planned fact-finding trips have aroused much criticism on the Internet and in the media. Legislators should say "no" to such expenditure.

The estimated cost of these "training plus sightseeing" trips is anything from US$35 million to US$52.5 million all of which will be paid from the public purse.

Deputies to people's congresses at various levels have long been criticizing such use of public funds.

Even if the ROK's experience fits China's situation well, there are many other ways to learn about it besides going on such expensive trips. Modern information technology enables us to learn in a way that is more effective and less expensive.

We should learn from the rural construction experiences of some developed countries. But we should not have to spend millions sending tens of thousands of officials there. Legislators should reject such profligate plans.

Nanguo Morning Post: Although reports about sending 30,000 officials to the ROK have to be confirmed by the Chinese side, the news has already attracted a great deal of public attention. Many people think that thousands of officials will take advantage of the effort to build a "new countryside" to enjoy a free holiday.

The reason so many people feel like this is because so many officials seem to go abroad at the drop of a hat and there is no regulation on such trips.

Such fact-finding trips should strictly follow the procedures and rules of public administration. After all, every aspect of government behavior should follow the principle of transparency. All spending should be accounted for, the necessity of such trips should be considered, and the final results should be examined.

But the selection process for sending officials on overseas fact-finding trips is rather opaque.

And there is no mechanism to assess the results of such trips. Many local officials' fact-finding trips frequently turn out to be holidays at the public's expense.

Moreover, the New Village Movement was carried out more than three decades ago. The ROK's political system and social conditions at the time differed greatly from China today.

These types of trips require far greater regulation. Meanwhile, their necessity and impact should be taken into account.

The regulation will help prevent such a massive waste of public funds and ensure that fact-finding trips actually find facts, rather than find officials a nice holiday destination.

(China Daily June 15, 2006)