PM’s Official Dispatch 242/CD-TTg points out what must be done, specifies who will do it, and does not dodge the question of who is responsible if tasks are not completed. In that sense, this is a test of the reform capacity of the apparatus.

Official Dispatch 242 appeared in a special institutional context. Just a few days earlier, the National Assembly of Vietnam at its 10th session passed 51 laws and eight regulatory resolutions – a rare legislative volume, accounting for nearly one-third of the laws for the entire term.

This number not only reflects the working intensity of the National Assembly but also shows the effort to "clear the legal path" for the next development stage, when the economy needs a clearer, more transparent framework with less legal risk for citizens and businesses.

Official Dispatch 242 is not a single command. It is an enforcement link in a chain of reforms being pushed in both areas: legislative and executive. When the National Assembly passes a large volume of laws, the question is no longer about the number of documents, but whether those laws actually enter life.

And if administrative procedures remain cumbersome, internal processes overlapping, and data fragmented by industry and administrative boundaries, the answer can easily fall into silence.

Therefore, administrative reform in this period carries a different meaning. It is no longer technical editing but a condition for laws to have practical effect.

Figures announced by the Government show the scale of that effort. In 2025 alone, eight bill projects were submitted and passed, leading to the cutting of 38 conditional business fields.

In addition, 14 ministries and ministerial-level agencies received approval for plans to cut and simplify 3,085 out of 4,888 administrative procedures related to production and business activities, or more than 63 percent. The number of conditional business requirements reduced reached 2,371 out of 6,974, equivalent to nearly 34 percent.

At the local level, all 34 provinces and cities have published lists of administrative procedures that do not depend on administrative boundaries within the provincial scope, with 18 localities completing 100 percent.

This marks a notable step forward, as administrative boundaries have long been a familiar bottleneck, forcing citizens and businesses to travel, seek confirmations, and submit documents based on place of residence or original registration, even when the substance of the procedure is unrelated to geography.

However, in Dispatch 242 itself, the Government candidly points out the remaining gaps: amendments and supplements to legal documents needed to implement approved plans remain slow; and the proportion of end-to-end online administrative procedures in some ministries, sectors, and localities is still below target.

Sixteen localities have yet to complete 100 percent of procedures independent of administrative boundaries. The restructuring of internal and electronic processes is progressing slowly. More notably, some databases have yet to be made public or fully connected to support data-driven procedural reduction.

These shortcomings are not merely technical. They reflect a familiar reality: administrative procedure reform often gains consensus at the policy level but stalls at the implementation stage, where authority, responsibility, and entrenched management habits are tightly intertwined.

In such a situation, Dispatch 242 resembles an “ultimatum” on administrative discipline. Its goal is clearly stated: to cut at least 30 percent of business conditions, compliance costs, and procedure processing time. The deadline is specific: from December 25-31, 2025. Responsibility is no longer abstract, but directly assigned to ministers, heads of ministerial-level agencies, and chairpersons of provincial and municipal People’s Committees.

The message is clear: reform is a public duty that can be measured, inspected, and held accountable.

The issue is not whether political determination exists, but whether that determination can penetrate the intermediate layers of the administrative apparatus. Administrative reform rarely falters at the policy issuance stage; it more often stalls at interpretation and operation. Here, administrative discipline becomes the decisive factor.

Dispatch 242 shows that administrative procedure reform is being placed within a broader framework of building a service-oriented state. The ultimate metric is not the number of resolutions or dispatches issued, but the extent to which citizens and businesses genuinely benefit.

Reform only has meaning when businesses feel compliance costs falling, processing times shortening, and legal risks narrowing. Only then do administrative procedures cease to be barriers and become tools for development. And only then will the 51 laws recently passed by the National Assembly truly take effect in daily life.

Tran Thuong