Rural revitalization requires the selection of leaders. Is it better for the village party secretary and the village director to work together or separately?

Replying to friends, this is my opinion. First of all, rural revitalization requires a cooperative team. The ability of one person is limited, and the village party secretary and village director must shoulder the same responsibility. The so-called Leaders must be selfless and considerate of the interests of the village. They must have market analysis, concepts and management capabilities. According to the specific conditions of the village, they must develop more favorable factors and lead rural colleagues to relocate according to location. develop.

The village party secretary and village director shoulder the responsibility. Although it reflects the unified leadership of the party, I think it does not meet the needs of socialist modernization and construction and development of rural areas. A village party branch secretary and director of the village committee, with the situation It is contrary to both the principles and the organizational law. The village party secretary has a female clerk (accountant) director, a security director, and a militia company commander. These village committees are all subordinate to the party secretary. Anyone who doesn’t listen to the party secretary can report it to the party secretary. The superiors (commentaries) responded that such a part-time job is very easy for the village secretary to say. If the village secretary is corrupt, they will not dare to object. If the village party secretary is incompetent, it will also cause losses to the villagers. Therefore, the party secretary and the village chief should listen. The voting of the villagers' assembly is reasonable and legal...

The author is working in the township and has been stationed in the village many times. Some local villages have already implemented the idea of ??shouldering the responsibility of the party secretary and director. I would like to talk about the relevant situation. First, from the perspective of implementation choice, it is better to implement it in each village when it is mature.

The party spirit principles, work ability, public support, and corresponding prevention and guarantee mechanisms for selecting candidates.

As far as the author's local situation is concerned, when implementing it first, the first priority is to choose villages with smaller populations. For villages with overpopulation, considering the much larger workload and the number of petitions, There are also many more problems. The reality is that village cadres are very busy now, so it is not possible to carry out one-shoulder tasks for the time being (many things, many will require the party secretary or director to be in place, and they can barely get people). The second is that there are more mature candidates to choose from. If someone has a domineering and undemocratic style of work, cannot handle matters at work, does not have a strong sense of party spirit and integrity, and does not have high recognition from the masses, if they are easily shouldered, there may be big problems in future work, so there are no more mature candidates. Yes, it will not be implemented for the time being. Second, judging from the current implementation situation, there are worries as well as joys.

First, as a large amount of work has been pushed to the grassroots level, the village branch and director behind the heavy workload are often shouldered by one person, and the work is often too busy to be divided (the superiors require the top leader to be present or in place) may not be guaranteed) and may affect the implementation or advancement of some work to a certain extent.

The second reason is that the workload will inevitably increase after shouldering the responsibility, and the work pressure will also increase accordingly. Some people who have only held the position of shouldering the responsibility for a few months have made it clear many times that they do not want to continue. Some people have said that they will only work until the election next year.

Third, as the pilot work progresses, the importance of selecting candidates has once again emerged. Those who are not very motivated and capable will be more passive in their work. A gap has begun to emerge between implementation and advancement.

The fourth is the supervision mechanism after shouldering the burden. It is still relatively weak at present. How can we put an end to "one word" and how can we avoid problems in the arrangement of projects, funds, etc.? More feasible institutional measures are needed. . Third, some personal opinions on one-shoulder picks.

First, we must adhere to the principle of implementation one by one when it is mature, and we cannot do one-size-fits-all for the sake of one-sidedness. For areas with a large population and where it is difficult to find suitable candidates at the moment, it may be appropriate to wait for a while.

Second, after shouldering the burden, it is best not to reduce the number of actual village cadres. At present, there are really many things in the village and the workload is too heavy.

Third, the treatment of those who shoulder the responsibility should also be improved.

The supervision mechanism after the one-shoulder responsibility must be completed as soon as possible to prevent the "one-shoulder responsibility" from becoming "one person has the final say", "one person has the final say" and "one person corrupts".

Village cadres have been seriously separated from the masses, and power cannot be over-concentrated. Separation is somewhat restrictive. At the same time, the term is limited to three years and cannot be re-elected. The opening of the positions of village party secretary and village director can prevent corruption. Answer:

This is really a problem. It doesn't matter if one person is responsible for the important task or two people are responsible for it. The key is to be a good person, someone who can do human affairs and sincerely serve the people. If you replace Sun Wukong with another monkey, this is bullshit.

Really, the conference will directly face the masses for nomination and selection. Can’t you find a good candidate for a basket of wood? Get rid of those fake representatives. Every household will select people, and good people will be selected. Come.

But there is nothing you can do otherwise. The thunder is loud and the raindrops are small, so it is useless to shout.

If there are too many truths, just talk.

Which village cadre wants to lead the masses to get rich? They all want to make some money through some national projects and get some retirement salary when they get old.

Is it better to have the village secretary and village director shoulder one another or to have separate offices? I think there are pros and cons to each. In fact, in our country's political system, the generally adopted method is a dual-track system. For example, in the army, there are regimental commanders and political commissars, and in counties, there are county chiefs and county party committee secretaries. The purpose is to maintain a relative balance of power. At the same time, it can also act as a mutual check and supervision to prevent excessive concentration of power and abuse of power. From this point of view, it may not be a good thing for the village secretary and village director to shoulder the burden.

However, "one shoulder to shoulder" is not without its benefits, that is, it can reduce the number of village cadres and reduce management costs, because the salaries of these village cadres are paid by provincial fiscal transfers. It can also reduce mutual disputes and strengthen team unity, because the village directors are elected by the villagers, and their appointment and removal power does not lie with the township. Therefore, there is a phenomenon that some village directors are disobedient and difficult to manage. The work of the village committee is relatively independent, and some village directors with strong abilities often sideline the village secretary.

In real life, the village secretary and the village director are often in opposition, which is not conducive to their work. Theoretically, although the village branch and the village committee are on equal footing, in reality it is the village branch secretary who has the final say and is the first person responsible for village work. When the township party committee arranges work, it basically holds a meeting of the village secretary, and then the village secretary returns to the village to convey the arrangements. This is called "the village committee works under the leadership of the village branch." This clearly shows that the village secretary Who has more power? In this case, the village director no longer has the qualifications to confront the village secretary (except for individual villages).

It can be seen that the "shoulder shoulder" of the village secretary and village director has its theoretical basis and has long become a fact in many places. It is basically impossible to rely on the village director to supervise the village secretary and thereby eliminate village-level corruption. Village supervision should be handed over to all villagers because they are the victims of corruption.

Regarding whether the village party secretary and village director are better shouldered together or set up separately? This is no longer an issue that needs to be discussed, and the policy has clearly stated that it should be shouldered.

The "Rural Work Regulations" have clarified that the party branch secretary should serve as the person in charge of the village committee and the person in charge of the village collective economic organization through legal procedures. "One shoulder to shoulder" has been determined from the policy level and handed down to the grassroots as a task. Why choose "One Shoulder"?

To put it simply, it is because the advantages of "one-shoulder carrying" outweigh the disadvantages, and it is determined after comprehensive consideration. The benefits are as follows:

1. Streamline the number of cadres and reduce internal friction among cadres;

2. Facilitate unified command and improve management efficiency;

3 , Strengthen the leadership of the party and establish the authority of the branch.

Of course, many people also consider whether excessive concentration of power will lead to the formation of monologues and the breeding of corruption. There is no need to worry about this. It can be completely avoided by improving the system and strengthening supervision and assessment.

1. Strengthen candidate selection during elections. Eliminate candidates with bad reputations and bad conduct directly.

2. Improve the village affairs supervision mechanism. Strengthen the supervision and inspection of the village affairs supervision committee and the superior discipline inspection committee, and make good use of economic audits, account management, regular inspections, and mass reporting.

3. Strengthen performance assessment and dynamic adjustments. Strengthen the work assessment of village party secretaries, and promptly remove and adjust those who do not act, are incompetent, or act indiscriminately.

Those with power must have responsibilities, and the use of power is subject to supervision. As long as the supervision policy can keep up and the management is strict, the side effects of shouldering the burden can be blocked, the role can be maximized, and cadres can be provided for rural revitalization. Assure.

The subject asked: Rural revitalization requires the selection of leaders. Should the village party secretary and village director be chosen on one shoulder or separately?

I am very happy to answer your questions, thank you for your invitation!

① Village cadres are the leaders of a village and can be said to be the "parents of farmers". Only when village cadres play their leading role can they better lead farmers to get rich and help farmers get out of poverty.

②What is a one-shoulder package? That is, the village party secretary and village director alone will serve. In the past, it was held by two people. After one person takes over, the responsibility, task, and power are greater. There are advantages and disadvantages, but the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

To sum up: the key to rural revitalization lies in the leader! If you choose the right people and make good use of power, one party will prosper and the people will benefit. Support the village party secretary and village director to shoulder the responsibility. Rural revitalization requires the selection of leaders. Is it better for the village party secretary and the village director to work together or separately?

In the past, most village (community) branch secretaries and village committee (community neighborhood committee) directors were established separately. Now, the central government advocates that branch secretaries serve as village committee directors (directors of community neighborhood committees) and chairman of village collective economic organizations through legal procedures. In layman's terms, it is "three shoulders to bear". This is done in many places. The village branch secretary, village director and chairman of the village collective economic organization work alone.

In the past, the village branch secretary and the village director were separated, with the branch secretary taking the lead. The advantage was that the branch secretary focused on party affairs, while the village director focused on government affairs, and the division of labor and cooperation between the two restricted each other. The disadvantage is that when the secretary and director have different opinions, internal friction will inevitably occur.

The advantage of the village branch secretary's "three shoulders" is that "the party, government, military, and civilians in the southeast, northwest, and central, and the party leads everything" can be implemented at the grassroots level, which can reduce internal friction at work and improve decision-making efficiency. The disadvantage is that the "three shoulders to shoulder" puts forward higher requirements for branch secretaries. They must understand not only party affairs, village affairs, but also the collective economy. Such all-round talents are difficult to find; at the same time, the "three shoulders to shoulder" can easily lead to monotonous speech. It is an indisputable fact that micro-corruption breeds and supervision is difficult to implement.

In any case, the "three shoulder tasks" for village branch secretaries is a central policy requirement, an important part of deepening rural reform, and is supported by rural party members. We firmly support and implement it. First, the procedure is legal. The branch secretary must be elected as the village director and the chairman of the economic federation through a village meeting or a member meeting of a rural collective economic organization. The second is to select the best people. The branch secretary must choose those cadres who have the support of the masses, high policy level, and strong professional ability. The speed of the train depends entirely on the headband. Whether a village develops quickly depends on the secretary. The third is to strictly assess and strengthen the annual assessment of branch secretaries. Those who are capable will be rewarded, and those who are weak will be punished until they are dismissed from get out of class according to procedures. The fourth is to give full play to the role of the "three meetings". Major matters at the village level are discussed and voted on by the party members' meeting, villagers' meeting, and members' meeting to ensure scientific decision-making based on public opinion.