Farmers 'long-term worries and immediate worries about their reluctance to settle down in cities

■ focus observation

Gradually breaking down the household registration barrier is the first step, and exploring the establishment of the withdrawal mechanism of rural arable land and homestead is the key to making migrant workers willing to settle in cities and towns.

Recently, the State Council issued the "opinions on further promoting the Reform of the Household Registration system" and decided to establish a unified hukou registration system in urban and rural areas to achieve the settlement of about 100 million agricultural migrants and other permanent residents in cities and towns by 2020. However, according to the 2014 Survey report on the status of migrant Workers in Sichuan Province released by the Sichuan Provincial Bureau of Statistics, 93.7 percent of migrant workers are used to urban life, but only 10.7 percent are willing to settle in cities. The report surveyed migrant workers in Chengdu, Zigong, Panzhihua, Deyang and other nine cities.

Although the scope of this survey is limited to one province in Sichuan, the results are representative in view of the fact that Sichuan is a major labor export province. Judging from the media reports in Hunan, Guangdong and other places in the past two days, there are not a few farmers who think that land is more important than urban hukou. So, what is the reason why migrant workers are used to city life but do not want to enter the city with a hukou? Can the new policy of household registration reform, which is highly expected by public opinion, provide timely assistance?

The reluctance of migrant workers to transfer their households is mainly due to the maintenance of rural interests and concerns about urban social security. According to a survey conducted by the Sichuan Provincial Bureau of Statistics, the three most worrying problems for migrant workers are the lack of pension, the lack of housing security, and the inability to find a job after entering the city. If they are converted to urban hukou, 59.3% of migrant workers want to maintain the status quo of their land or paid circulation, and 57.4% want rural housing to maintain the status quo.

I have paid close attention to the issue of farmers' land and housing rights and the protection of their urban households in the State Council's "opinions on further promoting the Reform of the Household Registration system". In the section entitled "effectively protecting the legitimate rights and interests of agricultural transferred population and other permanent residents", it is written as follows:

Improve the rural property rights system. Adhere to the principle of being legal, voluntary and paid, and guide the agricultural transfer of the right to contracted management of land in an orderly manner. Whether farmers settled in cities withdraw from the "three rights" (the right to contracted management of land, the right to the use of homestead and the right to distribute collective income) should be carried out in accordance with the spirit of the third Plenary session of the 18th CPC Central Committee and on the premise of respecting the wishes of farmers. At the present stage, the withdrawal of the right to contracted management of land, the right to the use of residential land and the right to distribute collective income shall not be taken as the conditions for farmers to settle in the city.

Expand the coverage of basic public services. We will ensure that the children of the agricultural migrant population and other permanent residents enjoy equal access to education. Farmers settled in cities will be fully incorporated into the urban social security system, and the old-age insurance and medical insurance standards that participate in rural areas will be integrated into the urban social security system. Farmers who have settled in cities will be fully incorporated into the urban housing security system, and a variety of ways will be taken to ensure the basic housing needs of the agricultural migrant population.

However, these safeguards are only visions and blueprints, and there are no specific implementation measures for the time being. Under the background that there is still a two-track system or even a multi-track system in the security of urban workers, few people believe that the protection of migrant workers can quickly be "on an equal footing" with urban residents. If the central government is determined to cash out state-owned enterprises in stages and in batches and enrich the social security, medical insurance, and education security funds for all citizens, equal social security for all people can still be expected, otherwise, it will only rely on local governments to get money, even if it is ostensibly fully covered, it is also a very low level, unable to solve the worries of the people. If that is the case, no matter how beautiful the vision is, it is only "distant water", which cannot satisfy the "near thirst" of the people who enter the city.

The "distant water does not quench the near thirst" over there, but the "near worry" here is still there-if the hukou goes to the city, what about the land and farmhouses? The opinion of the State Council only says, "at this stage, the withdrawal of the right to contracted management of land, the right to the use of residential land, and the right to distribute collective income shall not be taken as the conditions for farmers to settle in the city." after settling down? Are they still members of the rural collective? If so, how to solve the problem of dual identity? If not, the loss of rights will be a worry for farmers in the future.

Farmers are not stupid, the real benefits of hukou into the city have not been obtained, rural property is always worried, they will not easily let hukou into the city. A survey in Sichuan shows that even if nearly 50% of their families move to the city, more than 20% have bought or plan to buy a house in the city, that is, nearly 50% of migrant workers have the ability to settle in the city, but only 10.7% of farmers are willing to settle in the city. This fully shows that even if farmers have the ability to settle down, most people are still unwilling to settle in cities out of their own interests. The most important reason is that farmers who have the ability to settle down in cities are unwilling to settle down, and the most important reason is that they are worried that the property rights of their land and houses in rural areas will not be guaranteed.

If farmers' land and houses are not freed from the shackles of the collective and become property that families can freely control and trade, the situation of farmers "in the city and in their hometown" is likely to be very difficult to change. In this case, it is likely to lead to the "amphibian" situation of rural residents-people in the city, the heart in the countryside; land and rural houses even if abandoned do not give up, or in the city to earn money to build houses back home, all these will affect their peace and contentment in the city. The possible consequences of this phenomenon are also serious: directly affect children's on-site schooling, resulting in a prolonged phenomenon of left-behind children left behind the elderly; from output to quality, a direct impact on food security. Because growing grain is a sideline, fishing for three days and drying the net for two days, the soil, seeds, and quality are not strictly screened; it directly affects the accumulation of wealth and the security of living in the city, because many people earn money or go back to their hometown to build houses, which are left vacant for years, but there are no houses to live in the city.

Thus it can be seen that gradually breaking the household registration barrier is only the first step. Exploring and establishing the withdrawal mechanism of rural arable land and homestead is the key factor of whether migrant workers are willing to settle in cities and towns. Whether this key factor of household registration reform can change from theory to reality depends on whether land and farm houses can become independent property rights of farmers, and whether land and farm houses can establish a unified urban and rural trading market that is not limited to "within the village collective".