Mixed ownership reform, there is no intention to “accept”


A few days ago, sasAC related parties in the long term to maintain the “three reasons for three appropriate and three no” caliber at the same time, put forward “our wholly state-owned enterprises, wholly owned enterprises can also do well invigorated”.This has caused repercussions in the soE and theoretical circles. There is a misunderstanding that the reform of mixed ownership will not be carried out any more, and there is also a saying that the reform of mixed ownership will not be carried out.The overall direction, keynote and principles of the reform of mixed ownership are consistent without disagreement.In practice, the reform of mixed ownership of state-owned enterprises has three different emphases, or three ideas, which essentially reflect the emphasis of “whether to mix”, “how to mix”, and “how to change”.On the surface, the language is similar and there is no contradiction, but in fact the distinction is clear.At the end of the mixed-ownership reform, there was widespread concern.My view is to seek common ground while shelving differences, wrap things up well first, tie up the pockets, and leave deep problems for the next round of reform or the next stage of this round of reform.However, the misunderstanding in ideology still needs to be eliminated. The relevant parties have no intention of “closing”, but continue to deepen in order to achieve practical results.We need to be clear about this.Three tendencies on the operational level of the mixed ownership reform of state-owned enterprises at present, there are actually three emphases on the operational level of the mixed ownership reform of state-owned enterprises: One point of view focuses on thinking whether to “mix”.The reform should not be regarded as a panacea for the reform of state-owned enterprises. Not all enterprises should be mixed with reform.If you keep saying things like this, you may feel that your mind is stuck in the position of whether to “mix” or not. It is in the position of the principal contradiction and plays a decisive role in contradiction. It is in line with what was said ten years ago.Not always, but often, repeatedly, indicating that the consciousness of a long stay in the early stage of mixed-ownership reform, let’s call it the first stage.The main argument of the second view is the mixed reform that “emphasizes strategic investment”. The guiding ideology of the reform is “reform” and the action is still stuck in “mixed reform”.In the process of mixed ownership reform, we should choose the appropriate reform mode of mixed ownership, realize the optimal ownership structure, and focus on the innovation of operation system.Because financial investment generally does not participate in management, it is useless to “change the mechanism”.Appear on the market company for instance, the somebody else buys your stock and does not attend management, this is “mix” and did not change.Therefore, we put forward an idea to focus on strategic investment. It seems that only strategic investment can “reform” and create conditions for “reform”. The focus is still between “mixing” and “reform”.In the process of the entry of non-state-owned shareholders, it is of course important to introduce strategic investors with private capital background, relatively concentrated shareholding, and able to meet the above three conditions: “can play a role, can play a good role, will have a good role”.Leadership speech, the National Development and Reform Commission, the department emphasizes the national major strategic, in areas such as new energy, energy storage facilities to carry out incremental change, at the same time study deepen mix change implementation opinions, state-owned enterprises to develop new ideas change tendency is set up to mix of fuze-warhead docking mechanism, for the social capital to participate in the mixed ownership reform state-owned enterprises to build more platforms and channels.However, the long-discussed proposal on mixed-ownership reform has yet to be released, and everyone is waiting to see what prescription will come out of the gourd.The third view is to make an issue of “reform”, focusing on the mechanism reform of state-owned capital relative to holding enterprises.Mechanism reform should include corporate governance mechanism, supervision mechanism, market operation mechanism, distribution mechanism and management mechanism, focusing on the differential control of supervision mechanism, which is the first step, with a taste of “one-man control”.The key is whether we can adopt a regulatory mechanism different from the wholly state-owned one. If we still use the wholly state-owned regulatory mechanism, the market operation mechanism and other mechanisms will not be realized, and private enterprises will not be willing to enter the market.Three tendencies, one focus, is marketization or administration.The correct approach is that central enterprises should avoid excessive “administrative” and “institutionalized” management and control, appropriately streamline administration and delegate power, and accelerate the transformation from “control” to “allocation” by integrating with non-state-owned capital and taking diversification of ownership structure as the breakthrough point.We will participate in enterprise decision-making and operation management in accordance with market rules, guarantee the independent right of management of mixed ownership enterprises in accordance with the law, improve the management system, and better promote enterprise innovation.Compared with the central enterprises, local state-owned enterprises in some aspects of the pressure is relatively small, therefore in the process of mixed ownership reform, to expand the scope and depth of mixed ownership reform, give full play to the functions of propellant for innovation, combined with the core business advantages of the resources endowment, the choice suits own mixed ownership reform methods and strategies,Encourage enterprises to actively carry out innovation activities and improve their innovation capacity.As a matter of fact, mixed-ownership reform of local soes will be somewhat liberating.What we are most expecting now is that central enterprises should not excessively “administratively” and “mechanically” control mixed ownership enterprises. This is where the focus, weakness and weakness lie.The state-owned assets supervision and Administration Commission emphasizes the mechanism innovation of state-owned relative holding enterprises, also wants to solve this problem.It did so in 2021, but there was no convincing evidence, which made it hard to see how the reform would work, unconvincing, and shifted the focus back to “change or not?”And who change?”The same old topic.If you can’t move forward, take a step back.There is no intention not to carry out mixed ownership reform from the national level, the mixed ownership economy is firm.The third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee clearly proposed that “the mixed ownership economy with cross-shareholding and mutual integration of state-owned capital, collective capital and non-public capital is an important realization form of the basic economic system, allowing more state-owned economy and other ownership economies to develop into mixed ownership economy.”Mixed ownership economy refers to the economic form of diversified investment, cross-shareholding and integrated development of property rights subjects of different ownership in the same economic organization, which is compared with the single public or non-public economy.Born out of the planned economy, state-owned enterprises have the inherent disadvantage of too much regulation and ineffective mechanism. The biggest benefit of mixed ownership is to invigorate state-owned enterprises and make them independent market subjects.The biggest disadvantage is easy to lead to the loss of state-owned assets.Balance the two, take the bigger, this is a basic choice.Another is that there are huge private enterprises outside the state-owned economy in China. There is a saying of “56789”. We cannot ignore the existence of private economy.The basic socialist economic system is for common development. “Public ownership plays the main role, economic sectors of diverse ownership develop together, distribution according to work plays the main role and various modes of distribution coexist, and the socialist market economy is one of the basic socialist economic systems.One purpose of actively developing mixed ownership economy is to help all kinds of ownership capital learn from each other, promote each other and develop together.”The problem is that the soE reform is based on the reform of mixed ownership. This breakthrough cannot be made for the time being.Just like attacking a city, the conditions are not mature, the troops are not enough, the firepower is not enough, then let it go, the next step to attack the city.However, this is not to say that the siege is wrong, still less mixed-ownership reform is wrong, that may be a misunderstanding.Although many enterprises can avoid mixed reform, if it gives the impression that it is ok not to engage in mixed ownership reform, then we are sorry to come in line with the opinions of the third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee, no. 22 document and three-year action plan.Let’s take a look at what the press conference said about mixed-ownership reform.Last year, central government enterprises carried out more than 890 mixed-ownership reform projects through market-oriented means, attracting more than 380 billion yuan of private capital.While introducing various types of private capital to carry out joint ventures and cooperation, central enterprises have also carried out market-based equity investment in private enterprises to strengthen industrial chain cooperation and foster new growth areas.At present, central government enterprises have more than 6,000 foreign equity companies. Of course, this was not done last year, but has been accumulated over many years.Mixed ownership reform is an important way to boost the vitality of soes. Enterprises engaged in mixed ownership reform have made positive progress in improving corporate governance, market-based selection and staffing, medium – and long-term incentives, and performance appraisal of all employees, with a focus on promoting mixed ownership reform and in-depth transformation of economic mechanisms.The positive development of mixed ownership economy is conducive to the expansion of state-owned capital functions, value preservation and increase, improve competitiveness of the target has been achieved.Obviously, this introduction fully affirms the significance of mixed ownership reform, there is no meaning of not carrying out mixed ownership reform.If someone exaggerates this statement, or takes it out of the context of the whole speech, it will be easy to misunderstand and even alienation of this meaning.I may be an early participant in the investigation of soE reform.In 1982, when rural reform was in conflict with urban reform, enterprise reform and administrative system reform, I launched an investigation into Shanghe County.Later, I spent about 50 days living in a company for market economy investigation, mixed ownership investigation and capital operation investigation.Although I have never worked in an enterprise, as an outsider who has been thinking about the reform of state-owned enterprises for a long time, I still have a say in these reforms.I support this kind of reform, especially in the long process of the primary stage of socialism, where market reform will continue to be pushed forward unswervingly. Mixed-ownership economy is an important form of realizing the basic economic system.In terms of actual effect, I feel that mixed-use reform has been the most loudly shouted, most dedicated and most difficult problem in the past decade. The difficulty lies in the mechanism.”Mix” is the path, “change” is the goal, state-owned enterprises to seize the “mix” to promote “change” this main line, to prevent “mix but not fit”, “mix but not change”, “together but not strong”.And in fact, the majority of enterprises that have mixed change exist “mixed do not change” or change not enough.The reform of mixed ownership should take a leap from the first stage to the second stage and the second stage to the third stage, focusing on reform mechanism and supervision mechanism.I emphasize the mechanism innovation of state-owned capital relative to holding enterprises, and I hope that differentiated control can provide a convincing basis.In the final analysis, the reform of the regulatory mechanism is to cut ourselves, involving delegating power and many other issues. That is why the reform is so difficult.We often talk about how difficult reform is, but in fact, it is a matter of putting less control over ourselves and letting go of more control. While letting go is conducive to living, it is not easy to do this. It is a capacity for reform, and I am not just talking about it.The reform of mixed ownership is a “double-edged sword”, just like the employee ownership of enterprises. It can not only fully enhance vitality, mobilize the enthusiasm of employees and “form a community of interests between capital owners and workers”, but also may lead to the loss of state-owned assets and other problems.Under the background of the new round of soE reform with the focus on mixed ownership reform being pushed forward at full speed, the lack of legal thinking and legal support will easily lead to all kinds of unexpected “mixed ownership reform chaos”, and even turn state-owned assets into opportunities for profiteer in the wave of reform.This kind of concern has a precedent, such as the wave of “state retreat and private advance” in the late 1990s, some of which resulted in the loss of state capital on a large scale due to fever, weak legal awareness, imperfect supporting mechanism of detailed rules and standards, and non-standard operation.A new round of mixed ownership reform, it is necessary to “ensure that the reform on the orbit of law”, in Chinese, assets evaluation, equity transfer, capital operation, corporate governance structure, etc., to control the company law, the contract law, “the state of our”, “securities law”, “labor law” and other legal requirements, have the courage to explore, and don’t wander,We should break through the red line of the rule of law, ensure that there is a basis for the rule of law, give full play to the role of the rule of law in safeguarding, regulating and promoting, and prevent illegal transfer and embezzlement of state-owned assets, turning the public into private interests, transferring interests, operating in the dark, and evading or rejecting debts, so as to ensure that the ship of the “reform of the People’s Republic of China” moves steadily and further.In terms of mixed ownership reform, can say for sure, to further expand the depth and breadth of the mixed ownership reform of state-owned enterprises, on the macro grasp direction, micro to control the quality, reasonable introduction of investment subject, classification, layering, promote the reform of the mixed ownership, not only to achieve the “mix” on the level of equity, more should implement the “change” on the level of management,In particular, differentiated management and control of state-owned non-absolute holding enterprises will be explored to stimulate the innovation vitality of enterprises and inject new momentum into the transformation and upgrading of China’s economy.There is no change in the direction of the soE reform and the mixed ownership economy needs to be reiterated.If we focus more on reform and reform mechanisms, differentiated management and results, people will have more confidence and feel more stable.Source: Li Jin interpretation of state-owned assets news editor by Ye Zi

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.