Xinhua Daily Telegraph: "Transplanting Hanging Ear Corn" is the pinnacle of formalism | Farmland | Formalism
Recently, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and the National Supervisory Commission reported on the "transplanting of corn with hanging ears" in the reclamation of farmland in Shuangliu District, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China, to address the issue of "non agriculturalization" of farmland in a coping manner. This notice once again clarifies that farmland reclamation cannot be superficial, superficial, or formalistic. In recent years, through hard measures such as joint responsibility between the Party and the government for farmland protection, comparison of satellite remote sensing images, and public notification and supervision, the continuous decline in farmland across the country has been effectively curbed, and a net increase in total farmland has been achieved for two consecutive years. However, the practices of "transplanting corn with hanging ears" and "forcibly demolishing fruit trees" are not in line with the true protection of farmland, and can be called the "pinnacle of formalism", which harms the interests of farmers and the seriousness of policies. This unhealthy trend must be stopped. Resolutely curbing "non agriculturalization" and effectively preventing "non grainification" must ultimately seek practical results through practical measures. Any extravagance, sensationalism, blind recklessness, and opportunism are all variants of formalism. From relevant reports, it can be seen that some places have adopted a coping approach to the "non agriculturalization" of cultivated land. For example, in some places, policies have been implemented layer by layer, and efforts have been made to demolish and restore illegal land within 2 days, completely ignoring agricultural laws. In some places, there is no in-depth investigation and research, and the area occupied by some areas with doubts about land consolidation has already been replaced. However, without verification, the grassroots focus solely on solving the "doubts" problem, resulting in the joke of "planting crops on cement ground". There are also some places that arrange farmland occupation and compensation balance projects in areas with desertification, desertification, and severe saline alkali land, resulting in production capacity losses and ecological losses. These new manifestations of formalism do not consider history and reality, and do not care whether they can truly take effect. Behind them is a deviation in the view of political achievements. To secure a job, one must rely on hard work and hard work, but in some areas, one should not change their erroneous view of political achievements and only focus on superficial things. The harder they work, the more outrageous their mistakes may become. In some places, farmers have established orchards and fish ponds, investing a large amount of costs. If they ignore the objective reality of fruit trees in their prime, trees in their mature forests, and fish ponds in their harvest season, they forcibly uproot seedlings, cut trees, fill pits, and level ponds, seemingly completing the "task", but essentially deviating from the people-centered development concept. The relevant departments have clearly stated that in the rectification and restoration of farmland, they will safeguard the rights and interests of the people, provide compensation according to the actual situation, leave a transitional period, and resolutely prevent a "one size fits all" approach. The core of this requirement is to take the satisfaction of the people as the focus and foothold of work, lay a foundation for long-term benefits, and avoid rushing for quick success or wasting money. Agricultural issues are quite complex, with a lot of historical debts, difficult coordination and organization, and slow effectiveness, requiring long-term efforts to nail the nail. If the work style is floating, rely on "temporary" methods to implement the work; If the task is decomposed downwards, everyone will be happy to submit the materials; If it is simple and crude, only seeking "differences" without seeking sustainable results, it is a for
