Why does the Ministry of Finance insist on the overall planning of the Red Cross Society to encourage direct donation to Wuhan?

category:Society
 Why does the Ministry of Finance insist on the overall planning of the Red Cross Society to encourage direct donation to Wuhan?


One of the policies is to encourage social donation by expanding the scope of recipients and reducing taxes.

On February 7, Yu Weiping, Vice Minister of the Ministry of finance, said at the press conference of the State Councils new office that in order to encourage all sectors of the society to actively donate and relieve the pressure of medical relief materials and funds, on the one hand, we should increase the strength of existing policies, expand the scope of units receiving donations, and allow them to donate directly to hospitals for preferential treatment. At the same time, the restriction on the proportion of pre tax deduction shall be removed, and the full amount of pre tax deduction shall be given to the donations of enterprises and individuals. On the other hand, VAT, consumption tax and other relevant taxes on goods donation are exempted.

The message delivered by the Ministry of finance is very clear: to encourage social donation, at the same time, measures should be taken: first, to expand the main body of receiving donation and allow direct donation; second, to reduce taxes and fees for donation.

Coincidentally, on the same day, Wuhan municipal market supervision and Administration Bureau issued a reminder: try to achieve donation through the Red Cross Society as a whole, so as not to bypass the Red Cross Societys directional donation, increase the burden of hospital inspection and bring safety risks. Those suspected of violating laws and regulations will be dealt with according to law for the protective articles donated directly to relevant units by bypassing the Red Cross Society.

After the news was sent, there was a sudden public outcry. Because of its signal, many people understand that the practice of Wuhan is contrary to the spirit of the Ministry of finance to encourage social donation and expand the recipients.

The Ministry of Finance requests to expand the scope of recipients of donations and allow direct donations; Wuhan prompts that donations should be made as a whole through the Red Cross Society as far as possible. The Ministry of Finance decided to give full amount of pre tax deduction to enterprises and individuals, and exempt from value-added tax and consumption tax of goods donation; Wuhan said that those who bypass the direct donation of the Red Cross Society will be dealt with according to law if they are suspected of violating laws and regulations.

Public confusion is that the Ministry of Finance said that direct donation is encouraged. Why does Wuhan still insist on Red Cross coordination?

Has Wuhan ever evaluated whether insisting on the overall planning of Wuhan Red Cross Society will hit the enthusiasm of social donation when the credibility of Wuhan Red Cross Society is questioned? Have you ever evaluated how many people are not willing to donate through Wuhan Red Cross Society?

This reminder was issued by Wuhan municipal market supervision administration. As a law enforcement department, all regulatory objects should be treated equally. Is it necessary to give special illegal reminder to people or institutions who bypass the direct donation of the Red Cross? Can we not handle the illegal donation through Red Cross Society? Is it suspected of differential treatment to divide the subjects by whether they are donated by the Red Cross? Is it appropriate to transfer the legal obligation to identify fake and inferior products to the donor?

This is a general question from society.

Any administrative action of the power department should be based on the law, and should have enough awe for the overall rule of law. A few days ago, China economic weekly published Wuhan Red Cross Society monopolized the allocation of donated materials. Is it against the public welfare donation law? u300bOne article raised four questions, so far we have not seen any response from Wuhan.

Four questions about Wuhan Red Cross Society

One question: all donated materials must go through the Red Cross. Is there any legal basis for this?

From the very beginning, Wuhan required that all material donations must go through the Red Cross. Any transport vehicle donating urgently needed materials to Wuhan red cross society can enter Wuhan.

According to media reports, from January 29, the green channel opened by logistics companies for Wuhan can only be connected with the Red Cross Society, no longer receiving personal business, and the channel directly sent to the hospital is closed.

However, from the current results, under the high monopoly of donation, it can not achieve efficiency, order and fairness, not only can not meet the needs of fighting the epidemic, on the contrary, to some extent, it delays the first-line doctors treatment and rescue. Why does Wuhan ask for this?

Ma Guoqiang, Secretary of the CPC Wuhan Municipal Committee, specially explained this: we stressed that all donated materials must go through the Red Cross Society. Its purpose is to make our donors and donated things timely and accurately registered, and the use of donated materials and funds can be registered in the case.

The original intention is good, but is there any legal basis for the requirement of Wuhan municipal government?

According to the provisions of the public welfare donation law, public welfare social organizations, public welfare non-profit institutions and the peoples governments at or above the county level and their departments can all accept donations as the subject of donations.

Public welfare non-profit institutions here refer to non-profit educational institutions, scientific research institutions, medical and health institutions, etc. That is to say, all medical institutions in Hubei province that treat the new crown pneumonia epidemic can accept donations as the subject of donation according to law. In other words, any donation of medical materials directly to medical institutions should be protected by law, and local governments have no right to interfere.

However, in fact, the news that the materials donated by private hospitals were intercepted and transported by the government to the Red Cross Society was constantly seen in the media.

Does Wuhan have the right to designate that all donations must go through the Red Cross? At least in terms of the current laws, including the public welfare donation law, no local government is authorized to designate the donation to the red cross before unified distribution. Unless authorized by the State Department.

During the period of SARS in 2003, the general office of the State Council issued the notice on strengthening the management of social donations for the prevention and treatment of SARS, authorizing the civil affairs department and the health department to accept social donations, and the Red Cross Society of China and the Charity Society of China can also accept social donations.

In the absence of any legal basis or the authorization issued by the State Council, what is the basis for Wuhan to stipulate that all donated materials must pass the Red Cross Society?

The latest news is that on February 1, the official website of Wuhan municipal government issued a message saying that the Wuhan Red Cross Society has made appropriate adjustments to the directional donation process. If there is a directional donation hospital for domestic and foreign units or individuals, they can directly connect with the directional donation medical institution, and after confirmation, they can directly send materials to the recipient.

However, it remains to be seen whether the logistics channels of private directional donation are unblocked.

Second, is the distribution right abused? Is there a problem of unfair distribution?

These days, the Red Crosss anger comes down to two main problems: one is that it is inefficient; the other is that it has doubts about the fairness of distribution.

On the one hand, materials from all over the country have been continuously transported to Wuhan and piled up in warehouses. On the other hand, the news that medical personnel are in a hurry is flying all over the Internet. The first line is already in a hurry. But in the media reports, medical personnel go to the Red Cross Society to collect materials, but they encounter obstacles everywhere.

In the live broadcast of CCTV news, a medical staff of Xiehe Hospital said to the camera that their entire department had received only two protective clothing the day before.

Media witnessed at the scene: some hospitals waited for three hours, only received a box of masks and no protective clothing; some hospitals waited for a whole morning and failed to receive them.

The public is very worried about this, but what ignites the anger is the question of the fairness of distribution, which is not totally groundless:

For example, even after the two explanations, it cant be explained clearly why 18000 masks were allocated to Putian benevolence hospital, which is not in the list of targeted treatment, but only 3000 to the first-line main Concord Hospital? What are the principles and basis for the distribution of donated materials?

Tianyancha information shows that the donor Beijing sengenbia has a complex relationship with the recipient Wuhan benevolence hospital. Netizens questioned whether the donor had made a false donation by turning his left hand to his right in order to avoid taxes? Has the Red Cross Society of Hubei Province verified this? Why has there been no response in the two public statements? Public information also shows that Hubei red cross and benevolence hospital have cooperated closely for many times in the past few years. How deep is the relationship between them?

For another example, what are the basis and principle of material distribution for the 3M mask that the general office of Wuhan municipal government uses to borrow from the warehouse of Wuhan Red Cross Society for official business? Has the front-line medical personnel material been guaranteed prior to receiving it? Is the procedure proper?

At noon on February 2, the general office of Wuhan municipal government responded as follows: after investigation, in order to ensure and solve the protection problem of front-line staff, the relevant personnel of the special epidemic prevention and control work team of the general office of Wuhan municipal government inquired about and understood the storage situation of protective equipment in the emergency material storage warehouse of Wuhan. The management personnel of the municipal emergency material storage warehouse informed that the relevant protective articles had been distributed to all hospitals and communities in the city according to the requirements. At present, there are a small number of protective articles in the warehouse. At 2:30 p.m. on February 1, 2020, when the staff member participated in the municipal emergency materials storage and management meeting, he went to the management personnel of the municipal emergency materials storage warehouse to get masks and other related protective articles. The management personnel of the municipal emergency material storage warehouse have gone through the procedures of registration, approval and other procedures for the whole batch of materials.

Many netizens said they could not understand this response.

Three questions: who has the right of distribution?

Wuhan red cross once refuted the rumor and explained that: Wuhan red cross is only responsible for receiving donated materials, and the specific distribution and distribution are arranged by the municipal health and Health Committee according to the actual needs of each hospital.

However, the notes on the distribution of donated materials made in response to social doubts were issued in the name of Hubei Red Cross Society.

According to the interview with Sanlian Life Weekly in Wuhan red cross material warehouse, the on-site command group includes the leading Red Cross staff and personnel from the Municipal Bureau of statistics, the health and Health Commission and other functional departments, but the specific rules of division of labor are contradictory. According to the Wuhan Red Cross Society, the Red Cross Society is only responsible for receiving, and has no power to decide on distribution and matching. This task is decided by the health and Health Commission and other departments. A relevant person in charge of the health and Health Commission said that the municipal health and Health Commission and other functional departments are to assist the Red Cross Society in its work.

So, the question is, who is in charge of the distribution right of materials? Since the materials are donated by the public, there is no doubt that the public should have the right to know who decides the distribution of materials, so that effective supervision can be achieved.

Four questions: what if the Red Cross is in chaos and the insiders get into a hole? Who will supervise the Red Cross?

Ma Guoqiang, Secretary of the Communist Party of China, also explained at the conference that the purpose of material donation is to unify the centralized management of the Red Cross society so as to avoid being exploited by some people or others in the process of epidemic prevention and control due to confusion.

Of course, this concern is necessary. However, the problems that Secretary Ma worried about are well-established in the law on donation of public welfare undertakings. For example, those who misappropriate, misappropriate or embezzle donation money and goods shall be ordered to return the money and goods they used and obtained and be fined. Those who constitute crimes shall be investigated for criminal responsibility according to law. So, if these problems happen, they should be solved by law.

(function() {(window. Slotbydup = window. Slotbydup| []). Push ({ID: u5811557, container: ssp_, async: true});)))); however, the current problem is just the opposite. After the Red Cross monopolized the right to allocate donated materials, the public has a strong doubt about the possible chaos and hollowing out behavior of the Red Cross. Under the pressure of surging public opinion, the Hubei Red Cross Society said it would pursue responsibility for those directly responsible according to discipline and regulations. However, public opinion supervision is not the normal mechanism. How to realize the normal mechanism of internal and external supervision of the Red Cross is the key. Netizens urged the central steering group to send an inspection team to focus on the Red Cross in Hubei and Wuhan. On February 1, the Hubei Red Cross Society said it would pursue responsibility for those directly responsible in accordance with discipline and regulations. Of course, according to the provisions of the public welfare donation law and the criminal law, the staff of the donee who misappropriate, misappropriate or embezzle the donated money or goods, or abuse their power, neglect their duties, or engage in malpractice for personal gain, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility according to law if the crime is constituted. Extended reading: why does the Ministry of finance still insist on the overall planning of the Red Cross Society to encourage direct donation to Wuhan? Wuhan Red Cross Society: strengthening the disclosure of social donation information; Huangshi Charity Federation of Hubei Province announced the donation details, with a total revenue of about 191 million yuan; source: China Economic Weekly responsible editor: Yu changzong_nbj11145

But now the problem is just the opposite. After the Red Cross monopolized the right to allocate donated materials, the public has a strong doubt about the possible confusion and loopholes of the Red Cross.

Under the pressure of surging public opinion, the Hubei Red Cross Society said it would pursue responsibility for those directly responsible according to discipline and regulations. However, public opinion supervision is not the normal mechanism. How to realize the normal mechanism of internal and external supervision of the Red Cross is the key.

Netizens urged the central steering group to send an inspection team to focus on the Red Cross in Hubei and Wuhan.

On February 1, the Hubei Red Cross Society said it would pursue responsibility for those directly responsible in accordance with discipline and regulations.

Of course, according to the provisions of the public welfare donation law and the criminal law, the staff of the donee who misappropriate, misappropriate or embezzle the donated money or goods, or abuse their power, neglect their duties, or engage in malpractice for personal gain, shall be investigated for criminal responsibility according to law if the crime is constituted.