context: Holding more officials accountable—for their conduct and work—has been a hallmark of cadre management under Xi's leadership. This commentary is part of an ongoing debate over whether better personnel management lies in institutional adjustments or ideological work, and thus far, prioritises the latter.
A People’s Daily commentary states that having cadres sign letters of responsibility for important tasks and objectives may be seen as a way to put pressure on them and promote implementation. In reality, however, some sign them without hesitation and see the signing in itself as problem-solving, having little regard for actual grassroots difficulties. Layers of responsibility thus become layers of irresponsibility, resulting in formalism, it argues.
The commentary states that excessive 'signing' is neither responsible nor practical. It cites an example of higher-level units assigning two village committees responsibility for managing highway safety when they had no enforcement power. Some cadres adopt the attitude that as long as nothing goes wrong, that is enough. When responsibility loses its original meaning, however, it
- damages the credibility of local Party committees and governments
- leads to grassroots cadres being unable to grasp key issues and the correct direction as they have too many responsibilities
- exhausts cadres who must prepare materials to receive ensuing inspections
If research is not conducted in advance and those at the top only give orders and distribute responsibilities, how can work be effective, asks the commentary. Ending excess in letters of responsibility requires cadres at all levels to be realistic, change their ideas, correct their concepts of political achievements, take real responsibility, do practical work and see actual results. Authority and responsibility should be divided scientifically and rationally among different levels of government, the commentary adds.