How Can Agricultural Insurance Be Allowed to Become a "Tang Monk's Flesh" Everyone Feasts On?
The long-awaited agricultural insurance policy fails to deliver when agriculture is hit by disaster. The "experience" of 240,000 mu of "insured" corn in Sheqi County after being hit by disaster is truly puzzling, and it also exposes some deep-seated problems in the implementation of the agricultural insurance policy that urgently need to be solved.
Henan Province began implementing the agricultural insurance policy in 2007, and has consistently followed the central government's policy, adopting the approach of "government guidance, market operation, voluntary participation, coordinated advancement" and "low protection, broad coverage." Among these, "government guidance" means using fiscal funds to provide fiscal subsidies for farmers' agricultural insurance premiums. According to statistics from relevant departments, from 2007 to 2012, finance departments at all levels in Henan provided a total of 2.479 billion yuan in subsidy funds for agricultural insurance.
However, in actual operation, this policy benefiting farmers has, on the one hand, led to situations where agricultural insurance is difficult to "insure" for various reasons; on the other hand, it has even been regarded by some people as "Tang Monk's flesh," using methods such as forging figures, compiling false statements, and fabricating false claims to fraudulently obtain agricultural insurance subsidy funds.
In 2012, during an audit of the implementation of planting insurance policies in 14 counties directly administered by the provincial finance department, the Henan Provincial Audit Office found that some townships colluded with insurance companies to fraudulently obtain and misappropriate fiscal subsidy funds for planting insurance in farmers' names. Among them, in 12 counties, township governments, village committees, insurance company staff, or other personnel fraudulently obtained 31.57 million yuan in fiscal subsidy funds for planting insurance and 5.89 million yuan in planting insurance claims.
According to verification by the Henan Provincial Insurance Regulatory Bureau, between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2012, when China United Insurance Co., Ltd. Nanyang City Central Sub-branch underwrote winter wheat insurance for Yugang Village, Yingzhuang Town, Wolong District, Nanyang City, it fabricated insured farmers and inflated the underwriting area. The company's handling staff actually used their own bank cards to pay 14,600 yuan in premiums, and their purpose was all too obvious.
In 2013, the Yicheng District Procuratorate in Zhumadian handled a case involving 12 village officials from Humiao Village in the district and insurance company personnel. Their methods were likewise to fraudulently obtain insurance subsidy funds through means such as paying premiums in farmers' names, fabricating participation information, and concocting false insurance claims.
Although these cases are only a minority, the problems they expose are thought-provoking: what exactly makes these institutions so "bold" as to treat agricultural insurance as "Tang Monk's flesh"?
The core issue still lies in the lack of supervision. Commercial insurance companies bearing agricultural risks is indeed a step closer to market-oriented operation, but inadequate supervision will likewise plant hidden dangers. According to the provisions of the "Agricultural Insurance Regulations," "the insurance regulatory authority of the State Council supervises and manages agricultural insurance business." However, because there are no dispatched offices of the insurance regulatory bureau below the provincial level, supervision of commercial insurance companies is difficult to carry out effectively.
On the other hand, grassroots governments also face difficulties in supervision. According to the provisions of the "Agricultural Insurance Regulations," "relevant departments such as finance, agriculture, forestry, development and reform, taxation, and civil affairs shall, in accordance with their respective duties, be responsible for work related to the advancement and management of agricultural insurance." Logically speaking, with so many units "responsible," promoting agricultural insurance work should not be difficult. However, a cadre from the Sheqi County Finance Bureau said that grassroots finance departments have no way to supervise insurance companies' business activities and often merely play the role of statement reviewers and fundraisers. Grassroots agricultural departments are even less able to supervise; because there is no relevant legal authorization, they can only "stare helplessly" at insurance companies' violations.
In recent years, due to increased auditing and inspection supervision of agricultural insurance, illegal acts such as colluding to fraudulently obtain insurance subsidy funds have been initially curbed, but there is still a long way to go before "completely eliminating" them. It is necessary to further straighten out the mechanisms and systems, improve the supervision and regulatory system, further strengthen policy research, and ensure that this policy benefiting farmers, agricultural insurance, can truly relieve farmers' worries.