黑云压城城欲摧下一句

  • hanson
  • November 13, 2017
  • Legal
  • Comments Off on 黑云压城城欲摧下一句

PICC Life Insurance: who is more serious patrol problem? The Sina Financial e observation (WeChat public No.: sinaeguancha) columnist Yan Shuxin young central to carry out inspection work is a major event, but also a major event for the populace, the terror of corrupt officials. PICC, life group, Taiping group, export credit insurance four major insurance companies in the last two months of 2015 ushered in the inspection work. Inspection teams before the spring festival gives the inspection results, four enterprises have serious problems in varying degrees. 1, Taiping Life Group VS group 10 central inspection teams to Chinese life insurance group, Chinese Pacific Insurance Group feedback on the effectiveness, life group is achieved certain results, but the Pacific Group is better, although there is a "life group tour, life group Party committee to enact change, serious the behavior of executives to discipline, plus a larger deterrent, but apparently Taiping group performed better. From the party’s construction, life group is "not implement the two responsibilities, and Pacific Group is the" two responsibility is not in place, apparently not in place than those that do not implement the responsibility of light. From the eight paragraph, life group is a premise to implement the provisions of the central eight mental retardation reaction ", is a more serious criticism, four winds," there is the problem of discipline violations ", and" [Pacific Group is a prominent problem of discipline violations". From the point of view of organizational discipline, life insurance group has an independent "overstaffed", Taiping group more than a "sick" promotion". From the major investment, life insurance group is the lack of supervision of major investment projects "," Taiping group is some major investment projects, the lack of supervision "and" loss "of the consequences. Life group is "bidding irregularities", Taiping group is "bidding has a major hidden danger", but no specific violations were found. From the view of financial discipline, life insurance group, Pacific Group has financial problems of falsifying expenses ", but also" the basic life group discipline violations frequently, fraud and other "corruption around the masses’ bad influence". From the cadre problem, Taiping Life Insurance Group, the group received questions reflect some clues leading cadres, have been transferred in accordance with relevant provisions of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the central organization department and other relevant departments". On the whole, the life insurance group has more problems than Taiping group. 2, the people’s Insurance Group VS export credit insurance to the central eleventh inspection teams to Chinese insurance group and China feedback on the effectiveness of credit insurance, PICC group "to promote the" two responsibilities "implementation of clean government and anti-corruption work and achieved certain results, the export credit insurance to promote two responsibility and discipline inspection" three "the implementation of the work, clean government and anti-corruption work and achieved certain results, the export credit insurance has a" discipline inspection agency three turn work ", obviously better. From the construction of the party, the people’s Insurance Group "group Party leadership core role play is not enough, the lack of grass-roots party leadership", "export credit insurance" weakening the party’s leadership, the construction of the party is missing, Party leadership.

人保人寿太平信保:谁的巡视问题比较重?   文 新浪财经金融e观察(微信公众号:sinaeguancha)专栏作家 燕梳新青年   中央开展巡视工作是一件大事,也是群众喜闻乐观、贪官心惊胆战的一件大事。人保集团、人寿集团、太平集团、出口信保四大保险企业在2015年最后两个月迎来了巡视工作。巡视组在春节前给出了巡视结果,四家企业不同程度存在严重问题。   1、人寿集团VS太平集团   中央第十巡视组向中国人寿保险集团以及中国太平保险集团反馈情况   从成效上看,人寿集团是取得了一定成效,而太平集团是取得较好效果,尽管人寿集团有个“巡视期间,人寿集团党委能够立行立改,严肃处理了多名高管的违纪行为,起到较大震慑作用”的加分项,但显然太平集团表现较好。   从党的建设上看,人寿集团是“两个责任不落实”,而太平集团是“两个责任落实不到位”,显然不到位要比不落实责任轻。   从八项规定看,人寿集团有个大前提“落实中央八项规定精神反应迟缓”,是个较为严肃的批评,四风方面,“存在顶风违纪问题”,而[太平集团]是“顶风违纪问题突出”。   从组织纪律看,人寿集团有一个独立的“机构臃肿”,太平集团多了一个“带病提拔”。   从重大投资看,人寿集团是“重大投资项目监管缺失”,太平集团是“有的重大投资项目监管缺失”,且有“损失严重”的后果。人寿集团是“招标有违规行为”,太平集团是“招标存在重大隐患”,但没有发现具体的违规行为。   从财经纪律看,人寿集团、太平集团都具有“虚列费用”的财务问题,但人寿集团还有“基层违纪违法案件频发,集资诈骗等‘群众身边的腐败’影响恶劣”。   从干部问题看,人寿集团、太平集团都“收到反映一些领导干部的问题线索,已按有关规定转中央纪委、中央组织部等有关部门处理”。   整体来看,人寿集团问题要多于太平集团。   2、人保集团VS出口信保   中央第十一巡视组向中国人保集团以及中国信保反馈情况   从成效上看,人保集团“推进‘两个责任’的落实,党风廉政建设和反腐败工作取得一定成效”,出口信保“推进两个责任和纪检机构“三转”工作的落实,党风廉政建设和反腐败工作取得一定成效”,出口信保多了一个“纪检机构三转工作”,显然表现较好。   从党的建设看,人保集团“集团党委领导核心作用发挥不够,基层党的领导缺失”,[出口信保]“党的领导弱化,党的建设缺失,公司党委领导核心作用发挥不够,基层党组织建设薄”。相比较而言,人保集团党委核心作用发挥不够,领导缺失比弱化更为严重。   从从严治党看,人保集团、出口信保都存在“全面从严治党不力,纪律意识淡薄”。但人保集团多了一个“违反政治纪律、不讲政治规矩的现象时有发生”,批评较为严厉。   从监督执纪看,人保集团、出口信保都存在“监督执纪问责力度不够”,人保集团主体责任缺失,出口信保“两个责任”落实不到位。比较而言,人保集团党委主体责任缺失较之不到位更为严重。   从落实政策来看,人保集团“选择性执行中央经济工作方针政策”,出口信保“执行中央经济工作方针政策不到位,政策性职能履行不全面”。比较而言,“选择性执行”是较为严重的政治问题。   从八项规定看,人保集团“存在企业特殊论思想”“违反中央八项规定精神问题突出”,而出口信保“查纠违反中央八项规定精神问题不力,自查自纠走过场”。比较而言,人保集团企业特殊论是尚未入脑入心,问题较大,而出口信保则是查纠行动层面执行不力。   从利益输送看,人保集团“有的重大投资决策未经集体研究”,出口信保“集中采购占比偏低”,涉及利益输送的原因上,人保集团较为严重。   从选人用人看,人保集团“有的下属单位选人用人不讲规矩,裙带关系泛滥,一些领导干部亲属参与保险业务谋利”,出口信保“选人用人不讲规矩,存在用人不公、亲亲疏疏和违反程序提拔干部问题。”彼此彼此。   从财经纪律看,人保集团有的弄虚作假套取费用,利用保险资源为“小团体”谋利。[出口信保]没有涉及。   从干部问题看,人保集团、出口信保都“收到反映一些领导干部的问题线索,已按有关规定转中央纪委、中央组织部等有关部门处理”。   整体来看,人保集团问题要多于出口信保。   几项比较下来,发现企业规模越大,问题越多,尤其是人保集团、人寿集团,存在不少的思想上的问题,比如反应迟缓、特殊论、选择性执行等。当然,到底是领导干部的问题、还是机制体制的问题,究竟是总部管理的问题、还是所有员工都不同程度参与的问题,还是留给四家企业整改报告揭晓答案吧。   中央要求“要高度重视中央巡视组反馈的意见,在条条要整改、件件有着落上集中发力,建立问题、任务、责任清单,逐一抓好落实,按时报告整改情况。”“对巡视整改情况,要以适当形式向社会公开,接受干部群众的监督。”   随着春节假期结束,各项工作重新启动,问责必然提上日程,有些人日子不好过了。   (本文作者介绍:燕梳新青年,保险锐力量。)   本文为作者独家授权新浪财经使用,请勿转载。所发表言论不代表本站观点。相关的主题文章: