How can agricultural subsidy funds truly benefit farmers?

According to the latest data from the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, from 2008 to 2014, the central government allocated a cumulative total of more than 119.1 billion yuan to support the renovation of dilapidated rural houses. This year's government work report pointed out that efforts to renovate dilapidated houses in urban and rural areas will be intensified, with 3.66 million rural dilapidated houses to be renovated. An investigation by "Xinhua Viewpoint" reporters found that in some places, funds for renovating dilapidated houses were illegally embezzled by grassroots officials. The state's agricultural subsidy funds have been "plucked feather by feather as the wild goose flies past," and a livelihood project has been reduced to a "money-grabbing project."

In recent years, out of concern for rural people, the state has issued funds for renovating dilapidated houses to some impoverished areas, and this money must be allocated level by level through the province, city, county, town and village. Logically speaking, after this money reaches the town and village levels, leading officials at the town and village levels should immediately distribute it to the people and help them renovate their dilapidated houses, so that the people can move out of dangerous housing as soon as possible. Only that would count as worrying about what the people worry about and thinking about what the people think about. But some grassroots officials instead regarded this "life-saving money" as "Tang monk's flesh" and forcibly "took a bite." The report also disclosed this: Hou Junren, former director of the village committee of Xinmin Village, Shanhu Town, Zhongshan County, Guangxi, illegally accepted 38,000 yuan in kickbacks from households undergoing dilapidated-house renovation and falsely reported claims to defraud 16,500 yuan; in Daihua Town, Changshun County, Guizhou, after funds for renovating dilapidated houses were allocated, a town official surnamed Lai instructed 5 village officials to demand nearly 220,000 yuan in "hard-work fees" from 92 farming households, averaging 2,400 yuan per household; 19 village officials in Daxin County, Guangxi, embezzled 270,000 yuan in funds for villagers' dilapidated-house renovation, and some farming households whose applications were approved for a 10,000 yuan renovation subsidy received only 5,000 yuan.

Leading officials at the town and village levels bear the trust of higher-level governments at the central, provincial, city and county levels. Whether they can promptly and fully deliver the central government's agricultural subsidy funds into the hands of farming friends directly affects the people's basic livelihood, health and even survival, yet these officials intercepted the agricultural subsidy funds in this "last kilometer" or even the "last hundred meters." Corruption cases like this involving funds for renovating dilapidated houses have low-ranking violators and relatively small amounts involved, but they occur right beside ordinary people, not only directly infringing on farmers' lawful rights and interests, but also harming rural stability and seriously affecting the prosperity and development of the rural economy. Investigating and severely cracking down on such corruption cases so that the central government's agricultural subsidy funds truly benefit farmers is not only a requirement of the Party and the government, but also the expectation of the broad masses of farming friends.

Of course, to make agricultural subsidy funds truly benefit farmers, in addition to strictly cracking down on agriculture-related corruption cases, localities and relevant departments must improve regulatory policies for all kinds of agricultural subsidy funds, including funds for renovating dilapidated houses, and ensure that centrally allocated funds are allocated promptly, used for designated purposes, managed specially, and deposited in dedicated accounts. Relevant departments should, through measures such as making village affairs public and through channels such as newspapers and television, clearly publicize the state's policies benefiting the people, subsidy standards, funded projects, application procedures, and what problems will be solved for ordinary people, so that the masses are fully informed. At the same time, applicants should be strictly reviewed and publicly announced to the masses, so that problems of fraudulent claims, excessive claims, excessive embezzlement and excessive occupation can be discovered and corrected in a timely manner. For people who pass review, relevant agricultural subsidy funds can be transferred directly by bank to farmers' personal accounts, without needing town and village officials to "hand them over," so as to eliminate the occurrence of "interception" by grassroots officials. In addition, supervision and auditing must be maintained throughout the entire process of project approval, implementation and distribution of agricultural subsidy funds to prevent all kinds of disciplinary and rule-violating problems.

In short, for centrally allocated agricultural subsidy funds, only by achieving refined project approval, transparent implementation and transparent distribution, and by firmly locking the powers of town and village officials into the "cage of institutions," can it be ensured that agricultural subsidy funds truly benefit the people.