In recent years, the fault-tolerant mechanism has been repeatedly mentioned at the grassroots level. How is its operation status? Some cadres believe that the starting point of the fault-tolerant mechanism is very good, but most policies have become a pie on the wall.
1
Fault tolerance
The grassroots cadres told Banyuetan reporters that they had no idea about the fault tolerance mechanism. Because the "fault tolerance" is often determined by the will of a certain leader, it is not a collective decision. In addition to the need to investigate and talk, many cadres believe that "the prospects are not clear, it is better not to do it."
Some grassroots officials said that the fault-tolerant mechanism looks like a pie on the wall. For example, some fault-tolerant policies were introduced by a certain department itself, but after a problem, the Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision did not recognize these “fault-tolerant” policies, and the accountability and punishment would ultimately fall on the cadres who did the work.
A grassroots cadre in a central province said that for the emerging things and jobs in grassroots governance, “we asked for instructions before we did it, and the leaders didn’t speak. After we finished, we blamed us for not doing well, which really makes our grassroots cadres in a dilemma.” .
Especially when encountering some difficult problems, some leaders did not know or figured out what to do, so they "played deaf and dumb" and did not make a statement. The following cadres solve the problem, and the credit is on themselves; in case the problem is not handled properly, the responsibility is transferred to the person who handles the matter. The so-called "fault tolerance" is empty talk.
Some fault tolerance requirements are also "unattainable." For example, the "Implementation Measures for the Implementation of a Fault-tolerant and Correction Mechanism (Trial)" formulated by a certain place clearly: the fault-tolerant and corrective work should strengthen process traces, make the process controllable, process traceable, and accountable, and the results of identification and handling Persuasive, can stand the test of history and the masses.
A cadre said that it was precisely because there was a "fault" that the "tolerance" was moved. Will the organization's discipline inspection department issue correct evidence? It can only be enumerated by the parties themselves. The process of cross-examination is not good for the parties themselves. If such a high fault tolerance requirement is put forward, this is not fault tolerance, but tells you that you must not be wrong.
2
"Whoever is stupid will try, don't take it seriously"
The fault-tolerant mechanism is difficult to implement, making some grassroots cadres full of doubts about the fault-tolerant mechanism.
Mindset 1: "Count on fault tolerance? Naive!"
Some cadres think that "whoever is stupid will try, don't take it seriously" and "expect fault tolerance, you are too naive."
A grassroots cadre in a northern province said that evidence needs to be cited when fault tolerance. "Can the evidence submitted by the Commission for Discipline Inspection pass the inspection? It is generally overturned. As of now, no cadre here has applied the fault-tolerant mechanism, that is, it is empty on the document." A disciplinary inspection cadre said that he was the main leader in charge of disciplinary inspection. This matter is occasionally mentioned, and with the change of leadership, the incumbent does not mention it anymore.
Mentality 2: "Placebo" for superiors to promote work.
A township cadre in a province in the east said that "fault tolerance" is what the leaders said at the meeting. If something goes wrong, "fault tolerance" will evolve into "correction" or even accountability.
For example, a township cadre in a province in the central region said that a township secretary met with Taiwanese businessmen in the process of attracting investment. Out of his passion for entrepreneurship, he “quickly handled land use procedures and preferential policies”. As a result, due to lack of experience, Disputes occurred in the project land, and Taiwanese businessmen withdrew their capital, which caused legacy problems for the local area. The secretary found the leader to hope for fault tolerance, but due to the lack of specific fault tolerance provisions and operating rules, he was still held accountable in the end.
"At the meeting, in order to encourage grassroots cadres,'fault tolerance' was spoken loudly, but when something really went wrong, the leadership would have no voice." A grassroots cadre told Banyuetan reporters.
Mentality 3: The original intention is to inspire responsibility, but is afraid of becoming a "small stove."
Some cadres said that fault tolerance might become a "small stove" for individual leaders. “Tolerant” and “not tolerant” are often decided by the standing committee, especially the top leader has a great say. For leaders who pay attention to care, they can get away through “fault tolerance” without delaying personal development and promotion. For those who work hard and stupidly, no one above speaks for themselves, often "a mistake becomes a lifelong hatred."
Some cadres believe that the more policy openings, the more "operational space" there is for leading cadres. It seems that "fault tolerance" is to protect front-line staff, but it has actually become another weapon for a few leading cadres to manipulate personnel arrangements.
3
Don't look at the rearview mirror and drive forward
The grass-roots cadres said that some accountability is to use the "magnifying glass of the present" to find the previous problems, which is like "looking at the rearview mirror and driving forward", to look at the problem dialectically from history.
A grassroots cadre in the eastern provinces said that taking poverty alleviation work as an example, there is a question of who does more and who faces a high risk of accountability. Especially at the beginning of the tackling, many details are crossing the river by feeling the stones. There is no fixed model and idea, and there is no mature experience to learn from. After a period of time, everyone can form consensus and standards on how to effectively and standardize this work. However, if we use this consensus and standards formed later to check and review our previous work, biases and even errors will easily appear.
A grass-roots cadre said that the front-line cadres have the desire to do things without problems. It is very important to let cadres who want to do things dare to do things and enable cadres who can do things. It is very important to distinguish between non-subjective errors and knowingly committed errors. The former can be tolerated. In order to correct deviations, the latter must be held accountable, held accountable, and given party and political sanctions or be held criminally responsible. At present, the fault-tolerant mechanism is generally unable to do this. (Reporter: Bai Mingshan, Yangjian Yan Xiangling)