Zhu Changjun: Hongtouwenjian "mandatory" charity donation is misinterpreted – Sohu comments on financial income after slowing to a variety of names will hand to the enterprise, not just charity to distort, the day before the local development ideas more exposed to the short-sighted, Hongtouwenjian Guo villages of Jiangdu District of Jiangsu province Yangzhou city town government informed the company exposed donations. In this emphasis on mandatory donations based documents, lists the person in charge of the schedule for the donation to the town leaders, including government agencies, police station, village, town enterprises, more than 50 units, the donation program in 1000 yuan to 20 thousand yuan, a total of 278 thousand yuan. The enterprise in the town said it was hard to survive, unwilling to donate money, but dared not to donate it. Guo Village side statement said, will never find the donor’s trouble. (February 2nd Southern Metropolis Daily) lists the units that need donations. They specify specific donation standards, as well as the corresponding town leaders…… It seems that the public does not seem to be unfamiliar with such a donation initiative. Different from the previous charitable fund-raising proposals after major disaster events, the red donation document issued by Guo town government is the name of "carrying forward the fine tradition of helping the poor and helping the disadvantaged vulnerable groups to get through the cold winter". However, this seemingly generous donation proposal has many problems, and it is very possible to do a good job without careful deliberation. First of all, in order to help the vulnerable groups to winter, then, before the "love for all" in the community, the local government departments should be fulfilled for the vulnerable groups of public assistance is in place? If only to outside donations in lieu of the public finance should pay for public assistance, is undoubtedly a shirking and dislocation; secondly, both for "love", you must fully respect the will of the parties, issued a donation "instructions" Hongtouwenjian, more like a "showdown", rather than administrative charity. Whether for cadres or social enterprises, may have soured; third, the local government in the eyes of "vulnerable groups" in the winter, whether including those inherent management problems of enterprise? Whom should they ask for help? In fact, the local entrepreneurs complain: in the global economy shrinking environment, the vast number of small and medium enterprises survival has been difficult, it is difficult, "the new year, the town not only support sympathy, but also openly issued the amount of contributions assessed."". In the face of doubt, the local government responsible person responded by saying, "will not find the trouble of donors."". We are also willing to believe that the local government can deliver on this promise. But it sounds will make people "suspicious", or even read a "litotes" means. You know, a government Hongtouwenjian way to mobilize donations, and also stressed that the "mandatory" name, the provisions of each enterprise contributions, even after the "no trouble", also have to "plan" donors, resulting in a real pressure. Under the background of economic slowdown and the burden of enterprises trying to reduce the burden on enterprises, this kind of "mandatory donation" initiative is rather suspicious. In Guo village, it is said that the similar "mandatory donation" is not the first time, and after every donation, the whereabouts is not announced". Such as.

朱昌俊:红头文件“指令性”捐款是曲解慈善-搜狐评论  在财政增收放缓后,以各种名目将手伸向企业,不只是对于慈善的扭曲,更暴露了地方发展思路的短视  日前,江苏省扬州市江都区郭村镇有企业曝出镇政府通知捐款的红头文件。在这份强调以指令性捐款为主的文件中,列出了以镇领导为负责人的捐款计划表,其中涉及政府机关、派出所、村委会、镇企业在内的50余家单位,捐款计划在1000元到2万元不等,总额27.8万元。位于该镇的企业称生存艰难,不愿捐款但又不敢不捐。郭村镇方面表态称,绝不会找不捐款者的麻烦。(2月2日《南方都市报》)  列明了需要捐款的单位,标注了具体的捐款标准,还有对应的镇领导负责……如此以红头文件开路的捐款“倡议”,公众似乎并不陌生。与以往一般出现在重大灾难事件后的慈善募捐倡议不同,郭村镇政府所下达的指令性捐款红头文件,是以“弘扬扶贫济困优良传统,帮助弱势困难群体度过寒冷的冬天”之名。然而,这一看似“善意满满”的捐款倡议,却问题重重,经不起推敲,极可能好心办了坏事。  首先,既为“帮助弱势群体过冬”,那么在社会各界“献爱心”之前,当地政府部门对于弱势群体理应兑现的公共救助是否到位?若只是以外界捐款来代替本应由公共财政买单的公共救助,无疑是一种卸责和错位;其次,既为“献爱心”,那就得充分尊重各方意愿,以红头文件下达捐款“指令”,更像是一种行政“摊派”,而非慈善。不管是面向机关干部还是社会企业,恐怕都已经变味;其三,当地政府眼中“寒冬里的弱势群体”,是否包括那些本身就存在经营问题的企业?它们又该向谁求助?事实上,当地就不乏企业家抱怨:在全球经济萎缩的大环境下,广大的中小企业生存已经举步维艰、殊为不易,“过年了镇里不但不支持慰问,还公然发文摊派捐款额”。  面对质疑,当地政府相关负责人回应称,“不会找不捐款者的麻烦”。我们也愿意相信当地政府能够兑现这一承诺。但这话听起来难免让人“多疑”,甚至会读出几分“正话反说”的意味。要知道,一地政府以红头文件的方式来发动捐款,并且还强调是“指令性为主”,指名道姓的规定各企业的捐款额度,即便事后“不找麻烦”,也已经对“被计划”捐款者,造成了一种实实在在的压力。  而置于经济增速放缓、国家千方百计为企业减负的大背景下,这样一种“指令性捐款”倡议颇为面目可疑。就在郭村镇,据说类似的“指令性捐款”已经不是第一次,“并且每次捐款后不公布去向”。如今,此事终得引发舆论关注,有必要追问,此前那些“去向不明”的捐款到底流向了何方?而在郭村镇之外,还有多少这类以红头文件面目出现的捐款“倡议”?  愈是经济形势复杂,地方政府愈是需要与各类企业共度时艰。若不顾企业的实际生存状态,在财政增收放缓后,以各种名目将手伸向企业,就不只是对于慈善的扭曲,更暴露了地方发展思路的短视。在这个意义上,郭村镇的红头文件“倡议”捐款引发的争议,也是对各地政府的一种提醒。相关的主题文章: