Targeted poverty alleviation must root out the causes of poverty in governance

As the second National "Poverty Relief Day" approaches, "inaccurate" poverty alleviation has become a hot topic of recent discussion. A notice from the National Audit Office shows that in Mashan County, Guangxi, 3,119 people did not meet the criteria for poverty registration, of whom 343 were financially supported by the government, and 2,454 had also purchased 2,645 vehicles. In response, the State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and Development said that no matter who it is, anyone who harms the life-saving money of the poorest people "will never be let off."

There are always some individuals who treat the state's poverty alleviation policies and funds as "Tang Monk's flesh" to be seized at will. It is not only Mashan; problems such as poverty alleviation funds being withheld and misappropriated level by level, and poverty alleviation targets being falsified, exist in many places. Whether caused by lack of attention to poverty alleviation and omissions in work, or by deliberate violations of rules and discipline and abuse of public office for private gain, it all turns life-saving money into ill-gotten wealth, creating the strange phenomenon of localities "competing to be poor" and people "pretending to be poor." Once such a "community of interests" is formed, not only does poverty elimination become even harder, but it also overturns the original intent of poverty alleviation.

In the past, poor people were large in number and concentrated in distribution; building a zipline or a section of road could open a door for people to escape poverty and become prosperous. Now 600 million people have been lifted out of poverty one after another, and more than 70 million poor people remain. Carrying out poverty alleviation in a scattergun way will only be like "using a grenade to blow up fleas," consuming effort without pleasing anyone. In determining poverty alleviation targets, if screening is unfair, review is not detailed, and checks are not strict, it is inevitable that problems such as inaccurate assistance and fraudulent receipt of benefits will arise, causing policy resources to "leak away."

Poverty alleviation and development work has entered the sprint period of "gnawing on hard bones and storming fortified positions." What matters most is precision, the focus is precision, and success or failure also depends on precision. To ensure that not a single poor person is left behind in precise poverty elimination, it is necessary to shift from "flood irrigation" to "precise drip irrigation," and from "one-size-fits-all" to "personalized customization." Where the 70 million poor people are distributed, why they are poor, and how to help them indeed involve an enormous workload. Without rigor and care, fairness cannot be pursued; without seeking truth from facts, public credibility cannot be established. Whether the situation can truly be understood clearly and policies implemented exactly as they are bears on the overall strategic deployment of the state's targeted poverty alleviation.

Poverty alleviation work is not only about helping people in difficulty pull out the roots of poverty; it also requires pulling out the "roots of poverty" in grassroots governance. For example, if breeding training is not carried out and sales channels are not properly built, and the "poverty alleviation sheep" are delivered to villagers' hands only for the deliverer to turn and leave, it will be hard to guarantee that the poor will not eat them the next day; another example is that when poverty alleviation funds are seen, every effort is made to "manufacture qualifications" to get a share, while when poverty alleviation difficulties arise, no one pays attention. How can a good policy produce good results? Targeted poverty alleviation is itself a highly complex task that requires creativity. Without improving the level of service for the people, how can one escape the dilemma of only transfusing blood without creating blood?

Poverty alleviation is also a project for modernizing grassroots governance. Whether Party members, cadres, and public officials have clear responsibilities, adequate understanding, solid work styles, and appropriate methods determines, to some extent, the effectiveness of poverty alleviation and affects the image of the government. Therefore, it is necessary not only to help cadres break free from "ideological poverty" and "work-style poverty," but also to help the grassroots break free from poverty in governance capacity and governance methods. At present, such "poverty alleviation" is equally urgent. Development raises the issues, and reform writes the article. To ensure that the central government's policy goals are not left unfulfilled and that all kinds of funds are used where they are most needed, bold institutional reform must be relied upon to provide a backstop for problems of obstruction such as poor implementation and unfair adjudication. The mechanism for managing fiscal transfer funds, the assessment mechanism for grassroots cadres, the mechanism for cadres stationed in villages to assist poverty alleviation, as well as mechanisms for government affairs openness and public participation, all need to enter the horizon of reform.

General Secretary Xi Jinping once pointed out when talking about poverty alleviation that poverty alleviation, "as an important livelihood project, should be placed there as a practical matter. Even if the amount improved at one time is a little less, doing one thing is one thing, and when people see it they will truly feel that the Party and the government have done well." The deep meaning in this deserves careful consideration. Since reform and opening up, China's achievements in poverty alleviation have attracted worldwide attention. Whether it can create another "Chinese model" in targeted poverty alleviation and grassroots governance touches the eyes of the world.