CMF:
[1]
(1) Reducing travel costs and helping create various economic opportunities
Ms. Tania Meyer (the Country Manager of the World Bank for Cambodia) also highlighted some of the additional benefits associated with these roads, which provide advantages to citizens across all sectors. They not only reduce travel costs for commuters, but also help create various economic opportunities. Just now, while walking back after cutting the ribbon for the inauguration, I met an aunt and uncle at a house along the way. I asked them whether the cars drive fast. (They said) the road is nice so they drive a bit faster, but they still respect traffic rules. Even though it is a bit faster, a bit livelier, and perhaps the noise (from cars and motorbikes) is louder than before, it is still better than being dead quiet —(though) it is a bit difficult to get in and out of their house, and security and other things are also a bit challenging. And this is just at the beginning of the route; imagine further down the road.
(2) A road that pumps blood from one place to another; domestic and international tourists traveling, increasing further promotion
Just now, she mentioned that the 100-Column Pagoda is a historic pagoda, and Kampi and the dolphin pool area are among the many tourism sites that can sustain the economic heartbeat of the people living there. Through the road, it is (as if) bringing blood from elsewhere to nourish that place. Domestic and international tourists traveling create the potential for further promotion. In a moment, I will say there are many domestic tourists — not a few. If something goes viral like in Siem Reap, it will definitely be and completely packed or exploding. Not a bomb exploding, but going viral on Facebook with good things, promoting (ecotourism) places like Kampi and Koh Trong, which is most famous for its pomelos. Delicious. But it varies by place; some places turn out to be hollow or disappointing. Kratie’s Krolan (sticky rice in bamboo) is also extraordinary.
(3) Building and strengthening provincial, commune, and rural roads to push connectivity everywhere
This means that in each province, there are potential products, such as historical sites, but the most important thing is accessibility. If accessibility is difficult and traveling is hard, even the locals themselves do not want to go — let alone visitors coming from Phnom Penh or elsewhere, who would just pass right by along the national highway. Because of this, we are building not just national highways, but also provincial roads. National highways are the main arteries bringing traffic in, but once reaching those areas, provincial roads, commune roads, and rural roads must be strengthened to distribute traffic out into the various branches (organs).
The construction and repair of this 98.4-kilometer road is no small feat. Just now […] the helicopter flew low and saw the Prek Prasop Bridge, which will be inaugurated in the future. This bridge is also an additional major artery connecting the east and west sides of the (Mekong) river in Kratie, extending to Kampong Cham, connecting to National Road 71C across to Kampong Thom via National Road 6. We will continue to construct National Road 7 further to the Lao border. This will make the economic zone connection even more vibrant.
(4) Prioritizing logistics infrastructure development with high potential for creating added value
Following Samdech Techo’s Win-Win policy and the end of the war, agroindustry in this northeastern region — especially Ratanakiri, Mondulkiri, Stung Treng, and Kratie, which used to be adjacent to Kampong Cham, though now is the Tboung Khmum province — has evolved. However, parts of Kratie remain remote. More than 20 years ago, traveling and industrial expansion were difficult. No one could have imagined that Kratie would become a province with industrial potential, with a number of factories already operating, like it is today. In the future, there could be even more because it is close to the Vietnamese border. Once National Road 7 is completed, there will be no need to push (industrial and agro-industrial products) downstream via waterways or other routes; instead, they can sometimes be transported directly along our road, connecting up through Laos. Therefore, all of these represent the potential for development — among which logistics infrastructure is a major priority that creates added value.
(5) Having roads can attract investment to generate further demand
Building this single road cost 44 million (dollars). Some brothers and sisters might say it is expensive […] but let us ask what the returns are. If it were a BOT (Build-Operate-Transfer) road, people would know how much it cost to build and how much revenue is collected each year. But this road does not collect tolls from the citizens. However, the returns gained in return are immense […] If we measure just by driving — how long it used to take from here to Kampi and how much time it took — we can calculate that. But what (these roads) create additionally, the potential to attract others afterward, we cannot fully measure. If the road didn’t exist, would (these activities) be there? Not necessarily all of them. With (these roads), can we attract (investment) to generate further demand? For example, a factory comes to set up and produce (something). Naturally, it needs agricultural products — especially if it is agroindustry, it requires farm produce. Thus, it pushes areas that never used to cultivate those crops into becoming sites for (cultivation) and various processing activities.
(6) Kratie has many flat areas that can be used for industrial land; upcoming multi-purpose port in Kratie
Looking ahead, we will build a multi-purpose port in Kratie. Kratie is among the four northeastern provinces and holds a great deal of potential. To Stung Treng, Ratanakiri, and Mondulkiri — do not be jealous (of Kratie, because) we also have our own unique potential, such as mountainous regions and certain natural resources. Kratie has many flat areas and plenty of land suitable for industrial development. (The northeastern provinces) are interconnected. In some areas, they can complement each other, such as in tourism. These are all potentials that can be realized. This place is a crucial connecting hub for Kratie Province. Recently, the Royal Government has also introduced a policy to promote the development of the northeastern region. Early last year, I announced a pilot initiative in Sihanoukville.
(7) Establishing the working group to promote the development of Sihanoukville to expedite and restored stalled construction buildings
Previously, in Sihanoukville, we had investment promotion procedures and investment incentives, featuring the CDC (Council for the Development of Cambodia), the provincial administration, and provincial investment sub-committees overseen by the Council for the Development of Cambodia. So, we already have those. However, in certain special regions and specific areas, we had to provide additional short-term assistance by establishing a pilot development promotion working group in Sihanoukville, as back then we wanted to push for and restore stalled construction buildings. Therefore, we provided new incentives for stalled buildings during that period. We established a working group so that investors wouldn’t need to run back and forth to the CDC or multiple different institutions; instead, they could deal with just a single group, led by His Excellency Hean Sahib. After our withdrawal from the CLV-DTA, I instructed His Excellency Academician Aun Pornmoniroth to arrange a similar mechanism for (Kratie) province.
(8) The development promotion program in the northeastern provinces requires stability, clarity, and long-term incentives
We are doing this (similarly) to Sihanoukville. There, we run the program on a one-year basis; next year, if needed, we extend it for another year. But here in Kratie, we are providing the program directly for 2025–2028, spanning a full 4 years to encourage investors, because investing here differs from investing in Sihanoukville. In Sihanoukville, investments are mostly in hotels, which have a short timeframe. In the northeastern provinces, investments are predominantly in tourism and agroindustry, which require stability, clarity, and longer-term incentives […] These include tax and customs incentives, the provision of financing under appropriate interest rates, assistance in reducing production costs, procedure streamlining, and the resolution of challenges through the establishment of a streamlined working group equipped with the authority to make accurate and prompt decisions.
(9) 57 out of 72 investment proposals for the northeast have been reviewed and are moving forward, utilizing a total capital of $2.7 billion and creating 80,000 jobs
As of August 7th, we have a total of 72 investment projects, of which 57 projects have been reviewed and are moving forward, representing a total capital investment of $2.7 billion USD. If fully implemented, all 72 proposed projects will create more than 80,000 jobs.
For Kratie Province, it received 19 projects, of which 14 have been reviewed and are proceeding. These 19 projects have a total investment value of $1.1 billion. Once implemented, these 19 projects plan to recruit approximately over 26,000 workers.
Stung Treng Province received a total of 20 projects, of which 16 have been reviewed and are proceeding. These 20 projects utilize a total capital of $141 million. Due to the different types of investments, even though the count is 20 — which is more than Kratie’s 19 — in terms of financial value, it is slightly smaller. In Kratie, industrial projects are larger individually, whereas (Stung Treng) focuses more on agroindustry and tourism. Projects in Stung Treng will create nearly 4,000 jobs.
Ratanakiri Province has 11 proposed investment projects, of which 10 have been reviewed and are proceeding. If these projects reach implementation, the 11 proposals will have a total value of over $886 million USD and employ approximately 48,000 workers. Thus, procedures are currently underway.
According to the historical application rate at the CDC, projects that apply and proceed all the way to implementation exceed 95 percent—meaning out of 100 projects, only 5 are abandoned. Therefore, we hope that the operational realization rate in these provinces will also be high. Even if it doesn’t reach 95 percent and only achieves 70 percent, that is still quite good. Nevertheless, I hope we achieve 100 percent.
For Mondulkiri, there are 22 investment projects, with 13 having been reviewed and proceeding. These 22 projects account for an investment capital of $511 million and can create around 5,000 jobs. Most of those projects are in the tourism sector.
(10) “Building roads alone without promoting various projects will not work”
This is an (achievement resulting from) the promotion of connectivity. If we only build roads, it is not enough. If we just build roads without promoting other projects, it simply will not work. For example, if we build roads but do not arrange tourism infrastructure — such as resorts and other amenities — no one will visit. There might be backpackers going to pitch tents in the forest, but if people want to take their families out for a trip, they need proper restrooms and comfortable facilities. Nowadays, people no longer walk or ride elephants; they drive cars and need gas stations and various services. Promoting connectivity in this manner is an essential task. We are promoting agroindustry. We have land, but we do not want to just produce and ship raw materials abroad; we want finished products.
(11) Produce, process, can, and export to fetch higher prices and ensure domestic value-added
Mondulkiri pepper has a GI (Geographical Indication) registration. Do we just want to grow it and ship raw materials to other countries for them to can it? No. We want to produce, process, can, and export it ourselves in order to fetch higher prices and ensure that value-added remains right here in the country for the farmers who grow it. This year, pepper prices seem to be going back up. Who is a pepper tycoon? Is anyone here? Is His Excellency Huot Hak here? Oh! He switched from growing pepper to growing coconuts. His Excellency Huot Hak grows pepper in Kampot. There is a great area for it in Kampot. I just watch: every time foreign guests visit, they give pepper as a gift. If that gift package is large, you know pepper isn’t fetching a high price; but if the package is small, you know pepper is doing well, because they are keeping more to sell (rather than giving it away as gifts) […] It is just like rubber, like Oknha Heng Long. Whenever you meet him, if he has a smiling face, you know rubber prices are up — no need to ask. But if his face is sour, rubber prices have dropped a bit. If we continue to grow and push (exports as) raw materials, the prices will fluctuate greatly. But if we process them into finished products, we can better guarantee (stable and higher) prices.
(12) Organizing roads, logistics, and tax incentives to sustainably attract investment to the northeastern region
To get processing factories to invest their capital here, we must solve issues regarding roads, logistics, and various tax incentives. The Royal Government is addressing these matters in order to promote sustainable development in the northeastern region. Shortly, there will be a multi-purpose port here. We have the Mekong River in Kratie Province, which can transport agricultural products via cargo boats and barges all the way to the deep-water port in Sihanoukville through the Funan Techo Canal, eliminating the need for long and costly land transport. Transporting by road container by container cannot match the volume carried by a barge. Sometimes, hauling 5,000 or 10,000 tons requires numerous trucks. Thus, connectivity reduces travel time and shipping costs.
We are connecting with neighboring countries and facilitating cross-border transit — just as the Ministry of Agriculture signed an MOU with Laos allowing us to transport agricultural products from Cambodia up to the Chinese market via overland transit through Laos duty-free. Therefore, in the future, the northeastern region will channel agricultural goods straight northward. From the north, things will flow back this way as well, including tourism flows. We will build a bridge connecting Preah Vihear Province at Tonle Leap with Laos to further boost tourism connectivity.
(13) Infrastructure as a top priority in building the logistics system
The construction of infrastructure, roads, and bridges is a major priority in building the logistics system and reducing transportation costs — all of which are crucial goals established by the Royal Government (in the Pentagonal Strategy), focusing on people, roads, water, electricity, and now information technology as well. The other day, I met an economic analyst — I won’t name him, as he analyzes a lot on Facebook and elsewhere. He said, “The government needs to consider building a sustainable and resilient foundation. Our economy lacks resilience.” I told him, “Let me ask you, what exactly needs to be done to achieve resilience?” He hesitated a bit. Economics is my field, so I asked him. He has a PhD, while I only know a little bit, but I asked him like a student questioning a teacher. Now, when talking about resilience, what should we be talking about? If we just talk about things growing fast — this increasing and that increasing — that is called “growth,” not “resilience.”
(14) Means of production (land, labor, capital, technology), institutions, and administrative reforms are factors for enhancing and strengthening resilience
I told him that the Royal Government (has formulated and launched) policies (and implemented them) over many mandates (to build and strengthen resilience). What constitutes resilience? First, what is production comprised of? It involves land, people (labor), financial resources, and so on. In economic terms, that is Land, Labor, Capital, and Technology. These are all areas whose policies the Royal Government has strengthened over the past four to five mandates. What else is resilience? It is institutions. This relates to policies, principles, and laws. We have been carrying out reforms for mandate after mandate. Analysts always pop up claiming the government lacks proper policies and that development work lacks resilience.
I asked, “What is resilience?” (Resilience) requires people. Even as the economy fluctuates, people must have the skills to withstand it. It requires roads and infrastructure. It requires existing land with proper land policies — such as our hard work in issuing land titles — to prevent conflicts and clearly demarcate areas designated for development from those preserved. Administrative reforms and decentralization are all measures that strengthen resilience. They are part of what the (entire) government has put in place.
The government is not just me alone, nor was it just Samdech Techo alone. There are officials, experts, those with PhDs, those with even more than PhDs, those who implement things directly, and those working hands-on in the field who come together to synthesize policies. We welcome ideas and discussions, but we must debate and clearly explain what the government’s past policies actually mean – What was the Triangle Strategy? What was the Rectangular Strategy? What is the Pentagonal Strategy? What benefits do these implementations bring? Are they just for sounding nice? Or is it like someone writing policies just to add one more side when moving from the Rectangle to the Pentagon? …
It is not like some political parties, right before an election, hastily promising 2 million or 3 million (in subsidies) just to hook customers and win votes. That is not how it is. We consider economic growth and resilience. If something is increased, how will it affect the state’s budget expenditures on other things? What pace of acceleration should be set? What challenges need to be addressed? These are policies that we implement step by step.
(15) “Resilience is when, after floodwaters recede, we can proactively take charge and recover”
This is why we define roads as the second priority after people — a policy that ensures resilience. Resilience does not mean that floodwaters strike and nothing breaks; that would just be structural strength. Resilience means that even though floods cause difficulties and damage some crops, once the water recedes, we can proactively take charge and recover. The foundation lies right there: the people’s land ownership, the presence of roads, and the Ministry of Agriculture helping to restore agricultural production. That is true resilience — preventing total devastation where you lose all control.
We acknowledge that floodwaters are rising significantly right now. This year, the Mekong River water level is high. All the provinces participating here — except for Phnom Penh — comprise the seven provinces and capital along the Mekong River. (Stung Treng Governor) Putra mentioned how many years it has been since the water reached hazard levels: ten years. Now, this year, it has reached the warning level. Looking from the helicopter just a moment ago, a lot of areas over there are flooded. Therefore, please review and prepare for interventions. Sometimes high water for a short period is okay, but if it lasts, priority must be given to people’s lives. People’s safety is paramount. All types of armed forces everywhere must stand ready to assist.
We do not have 100 percent capacity to prevent natural disasters; no country can. In Europe, forest fires happen and are barely stoppable […] Some phenomena cannot be prevented. In our neighboring countries, storms and earthquakes [—] there is nothing that can stop them. But resilience means building a system of operations that can provide rescue. As soon as citizens are flooded, we immediately deploy boats to bring them to safe high ground, with medical teams ready right away […] Ms. Tania Meyer mentioned this just moments ago: meaning we push health centers right to the spot.
The education sector and human resources training, which are priorities for the World Bank, are also our priorities. Thus, we can ensure connectivity and guarantee solutions for problems caused by disasters. When a war broke out at the border, we certainly had to leave those areas and evacuate to safety, but education continued. Shells were falling there, yet we were still studying 50 kilometers away. Once it is over, we will strive to resolve things further.
(16) The Royal Government of the 7th Legislature of the National Assembly continues to maintain policy continuity
This is building and developing based on the priorities of people, roads, water, electricity, and technology — all of which are foundations established by the Royal Government, and they are not put forward without reason. At the same time, we have been pushing for public administration reform, judicial system reform, and public finance reform across multiple mandates to ensure Cambodia’s resilience. The Royal Government of the 7th Legislature of the National Assembly continues to implement all of these as priorities. In future mandates, when the people continue to support the Royal Government led by the Cambodian People’s Party, the continuity and sustainability of this policy will persist, because it is a policy that places the people and the nation above all else.
Policy continuity is crucial. A lack of policy continuity creates problems. The problem is that when one administration works hard to solve problems by introducing policies — for instance, take a superpower like the United States – after a president spends an entire term fighting and negotiating with Congress to implement healthcare policy for the American people, just as it is nearing realization, his term ends. Someone else comes into office, and on day one, signs away to cancel those efforts. (Consequently,) everything has had to be renegotiated from scratch. And the people who had no insurance are left with nothing, just as before.
(17) “No reduction in the number of ministries at this stage,” but reforms follow the approach of “strengthening, not expanding”
Ensuring this continuity is extremely important. We have had the Triangle Strategy, the Rectangular Strategy, and the Pentagonal Strategy for each respective phase, representing clear and thoughtful planning because nothing can be accomplished in just one day. In building and development alike, we must guarantee the continuity of administrative operations, as well as the functioning of both hard and soft infrastructure and working systems. Let me touch briefly on state reform.
The other day, I went to distribute land titles in Kandal Province, and previously to Kampong Cham. That was where we carried out initial surveying, and in Kandal, we distributed the titles. Before my visit, there were discussions on Facebook and elsewhere claiming, “Soon the state is going to eliminate this many ministries and keep only that many. Ministers are going to be promoted to be Senior Ministers.” It was utter confusion everywhere. Some people said that soon handicrafts or industry sectors under His Excellency Hem Vanndy’s ministry (of Industry, Science, Technology, and Innovation) would be transferred to under Her Excellency Cham Nimul.
I stated that, first of all, there needs to be psychological stability so people can work clearly […] I had to come out and clarify explicitly that “there is no reform or reduction in the number of ministries at this stage.” Our reform is based on the approach of “strengthening, not expanding.” We will focus on specific actions — which I will elaborate on shortly. So, if I hadn’t come out to clarify, people would still be spinning around in circles over it, and it would never end […] If I don’t speak up, people treat rumors as truth. As the saying goes, announcements made over a microphone are not easily believed, but if someone whispers and says, “Don’t tell a soul, cross my heart,” people are much more likely to believe it. State reform is not a simple matter; every single angle must be thoroughly considered.
(18) Consolidating the number of ministries aims to eliminate overlapping tasks and reduce procedures
There are some researchers, analysts, and politicians who say, “All hope is lost, life is over because the government isn’t cutting down ministries.” Most importantly, they look at recent reforms in Vietnam, where they reduced ministries from 18 down to 14, and cut provinces from 63 down to 38. Their system is different from ours. We practice decentralization, pushing services out to the (grassroots level). They practice centralization across 63 provinces, consolidating certain provinces under a single provincial administration. That approach has its own benefits — it’s not useless.
First, it eliminates overlapping duties between ministries so their work doesn’t collide. Second, it merges ministries with similar sectors under a single management umbrella, cutting down inter-agency clearance time and reducing bureaucratic procedures […] allowing problems to be resolved faster because instead of going through three ministries, you only go through one. Another critical point is reducing state budget expenditures on the administrative apparatus, preventing bloated ministry machinery by grouping departments together and potentially reducing the number of officials. This is the rationale behind the debate.
(19) Consolidating the number of ministries is not the only option; efficiency and effectiveness must be considered
So, people look at Vietnam’s approach and say, “Look at how Vietnam does it.” China does the same thing, too. Look at China — they consolidated over 100 ministries down to under 30. Look at how large their country is, and how they strengthen it. We are a small country. If we think that we can just arbitrarily reduce numbers, we could do that. But if we talk about how to ensure work efficiency and effectiveness, we must think very carefully. What approach does the Government adopt in its reforms?
Now, let us look at the experiences of China and Vietnam. Vietnam took more than 10 years; they started around 2017 and pushed hard through 2024 and 2025, experimenting step by step. China has been at it since 1982 — 44 years — to consolidate down to that level. They didn’t just cut everything overnight. Some people say, “No, you have to cut. In the next mandate, slash everything to pieces.” Let us ask – is consolidating ministries the only option in the world? It is not like that. People do not talk solely about numbers; they talk about the efficiency and effectiveness of the government’s work and its duty to serve the people […] Can cutting certain ministries alone be sufficient? Reducing a few ministries is not enough — there are other conditions that must be met.
(20) Some countries shift from centralization to decentralization, from consolidation to expansion, and vice versa; but the key is efficiency and responding to practical needs
Now, let us look – are there countries that keep things as they are? There are many. What about countries that expand? Expansion happens too. Let me mention Indonesia – in 2024, Indonesia expanded its ministries from 34 to 48. Just as Vietnam was consolidating from 18, Indonesia expanded from 34 to 48 ministries — and that was just two years ago. South Africa increased its ministries from 30 to 32. India took a path opposite to China’s. While China went from over 100 down to under 30, India — since its independence in 1947, when it had 18 ministries — has now grown to a federal system with 58 ministries plus 93 departments under the central administration, totaling over 100. They are different. We must ask – are the Indian or Indonesian models inferior to the Vietnamese model, or which one is better? It is not about the numbers; it is about effectiveness.
Let me elaborate briefly, and then I will explain what our Cambodian model does. Now, regarding the consolidation of ministries, while I have mentioned the benefits, there are also challenges. Why do some countries start consolidating rather than expanding? Because they encounter problems. Why do some nations move toward centralization while others move toward decentralization? China consolidated its ministries, but it centralized power. It reduced over 100 ministerial heads, yes, but more power was pulled back to the central administration. Vietnam delegated a lot downward. They differ. Different models exist to ensure accountability and the effectiveness of policy implementation, even among countries of similar size. We might say, “Well, China is large with a billion people”—but India has a billion people too! Why did one go from 100 down to twenty-something, while the other went from 18 up to over 100? It depends on effectiveness and practical needs.
(21) Consolidating ministries presents at least four immediate challenges
Just a moment ago, we discussed the benefits. Now, let us look at the potential challenges of consolidating ministries. For instance, suppose three ministries — say, Water Resources, Agriculture, and Rural Development — are merged into one. While this reduces the institutional structure, it does not necessarily reduce the headcount, because that single entity must now operate across all sectors without leaving any gaps. This creates what is called a “Mega Ministry” — meaning we consolidate everything under a single umbrella. This is comparable to a large corporation versus SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises). A large corporation has everything housed within it; it is convenient and managed centrally, but it can move a bit slowly. SMEs focus on specific areas with specialized expertise.
What are the challenges when a ministry becomes that large?
- First: The capacity of the Minister. If the Minister is exceptionally strong across all sectors, they can manage it. But if not, (it becomes difficult) because three ministers previously focused on their respective specialized fields. Even within a single ministry today, different departments often have competing priorities. Some departments compete with one another; if a Minister focuses heavily on one particular department, the majority of the budget flows there. What if a minister overseeing three merged ministries is more interested in agriculture and irrigation canals while paying less attention to rural roads and infrastructure? That creates an imbalance and a competitive struggle for resources.
- Second: Bottlenecks upon consolidation. We are not even talking about cutting staff numbers; in fact, staff numbers in certain areas might actually increase. The same goes for financial resources. Within those three merged ministries, different sectors will compete. Whichever sector captures the Minister’s attention receives the lion’s share of resources, while other departments and sectors receive less. This is just one factor, though we can still manage to make it work efficiently. I am simply highlighting some of the challenges that explain why certain countries choose to expand instead.
- Third: Staff capacity. If we push three ministries together — where officials were previously specialized in a single direction all the way from the national to the sub-national level — and suddenly mix them all into one, how do we distribute the work? Who does what, whose priority is higher, and how is it executed? That requires a transitional period. In the short term, it may be fine, but in the long term, which approach is better?
- Fourth: Evolving needs. Why do some countries need to expand their ministries? For example, in South Africa, they increased their ministries from 30 to 32 due to shifting operational priorities. Initially, they combined the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Land Reform, figuring that land policy had to go hand in hand with agriculture.
Over time, however, land reform and rural development emerged as critical issues. To narrow the gap between rural and urban populations, they split them up: creating a standalone Ministry of Agriculture focused purely on crop production and commerce, and spinning off land reform and rural development into a separate ministry so that a dedicated minister could have the full weight and budget to focus exclusively on that mission. It is all about shifting priorities. Previously, land reform was a priority tied to agriculture, but once a certain stage of development is reached, agriculture can stand on its own while rural development requires distinct, dedicated attention. That is how they operate.
(22) A smaller number of ministries does not mean fewer officials
Previously, higher education was combined with the Ministry of Technology. They split them up starting in 2024 — not long ago — separating higher education into its own entity and establishing the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation. Because IT and AI are now priorities that require focused attention, they had to create a dedicated ministry, appoint a specialized minister, and staff it with specialists so responsibilities aren’t spread too thin. Consequently, individual ministries are much smaller in number, but that does not mean there are fewer officials. A smaller administrative framework does not guarantee a smaller staff headcount, because we still need to strengthen and manage multiple sectors. It simply eliminates overlapping administrative layers. For instance, administrative structures might drop from three down to one, but in certain areas, the actual number of personnel might still increase. In fact, we can observe this in many other countries, such as Sri Lanka.
(23) Political and/or technical factors drive the expansion or reduction of the number of ministries
The reasons for expanding or consolidating ministries come down, first of all, to political factors. The political direction in some countries is to consolidate in order to demonstrate political will and signal ease of reform. Other countries expand due to multi-party politics and coalition dynamics. However, there are also technical reasons, as I mentioned earlier. Consolidating streamlines things, reduces overlapping functions, cuts down procedures, helps save money, and rationalizes staffing. Expanding, on the other hand, enhances focus on specific, high-priority areas of expertise. If three similar ministries are lumped together, they may look alike, but their specific priorities get diluted. It is just like the difference between an SME and a large corporation. Previously, giant American conglomerates like General Electric manufactured everything themselves, producing everything from jet engines down to small screws in-house. That required personnel across every conceivable skill set, spreading capital thin across various divisions. Later on, they spun off parts like screw manufacturing, outsourcing them to specialized SMEs that produce screws efficiently without needing bloated headcounts. These SMEs invest purely in mastering that single niche and doing it exceptionally well.
(24) Cambodia does not ask whether the number of ministries is large or small, but whether they are organized for efficiency
What I am presenting to you is that “the Government is not talking about consolidating ministries” — so please do not feel like your lives are falling apart. It is not ruined at all. Our working system, our number of ministries, and our existing institutions are not starting from zero; they have both positive and negative aspects. If you look at foreign experiences, you have had to research every country — none of them are alike. Even pairing two ministries together differs from one country to another. For example, in Australia, they combine the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with the Ministry of Trade. Other countries do not do that; they pair trade with industry. The choice depends on the prioritized outcomes desired.
What does the Royal Government of Cambodia choose? The reform approach taken by the Cambodian Government during this mandate, right now, does not ask whether the number of ministries is large or small. At this point, we are not asking whether we have too many or too few. Based on the experiences of just the few countries I mentioned, they are all completely different — some increase, some decrease. We do not ask that. Currently, what we ask is: Are these existing ministries and institutions organized efficiently? […] Are their administrative structures top-heavy with small operational bases, or how are they arranged? Do their duties overlap with other ministries, or how is that managed? Internally, are their departments and general departments structured correctly, or is there excess or a shortage?
This is Cambodia’s approach. Why do I not speak about what we must do far down the road? I do not talk about this differently from anything else. If you dare to talk about that right now, it creates utter confusion across all ministries and institutions. I only speak about what is clear, what we have studied, and what we are actively doing. If you make me say whether we will increase or reduce (the number of ministries in the future, it will cause total chaos everywhere). For instance, if left ambiguous, people will start sitting around guessing who is going to be promoted to Senior Minister, who is going to get what position — absolute confusion all around.
(25) No plans to reduce or expand, but rather to strengthen instead of enlarge by reinforcing structures, work systems, and human resources
We are not talking about that. What we are talking about is clarity. I will say it again: from the beginning of this mandate up to this very moment, “The Government has no plans to reduce or expand ministries and institutions; instead, our firm stance is to strengthen rather than enlarge — strengthening each institution and ministry through functional reviews and reforms conducted up to this point.” What do we do within that framework? First: Strengthen the organizational structure. Second: Strengthen the work systems. Third: Strengthen human resources.
We must prioritize these tasks first. Do not hastily discard what already exists, and do not immediately create something else just because (the existing system) is not yet running smoothly. We must examine it first. With what we already have—all these ministries, institutions, and officials from the national down to the sub-national level—have we distributed them correctly, or matched their skills properly? How do individual ministries and institutions overlap in their work? Can we analyze and clearly separate them? Within each ministry, are the departments and general departments structured with the right skill sets, or do they need reduction and adjustment? That is the work we are carrying out.
(26) Cambodia’s approach is to strengthen institutions and maintain stability of duties from the national down to the sub-national level; ministries must be properly organized
Structurally, we have previously carried out consolidations by reducing certain general departments and making other adjustments, while in some areas we also had to reinforce capabilities — for instance, where AI expertise was lacking, we established a dedicated AI unit within the General Department of Taxation to keep pace with developments. We are readjusting and re-determining staffing numbers. For instance, are leaders outnumbering operational staff? Look at individual ministries and institutions: you might have just one Director General, but thirty Deputy Directors General! How many regular staff are actually there? How do we set targets for future streamlining?
Take the military, for example: how many deputy commanders need to be reduced in command headquarters? How many personnel should be in each office? Right now, there is an excess, so we have halted additional appointments. We are moving toward reducing headcounts through retirement and refraining from making new appointments. The National Police is the same: how many Deputy Commissioners General and Deputy Commissioners are there, and how do we adjust that? How do we strengthen departments and offices so that they are no longer inverted pyramids, but proper pyramids again?
This is what we mean by strengthening institutions. We maintain the stability of existing functions; ministries and institutions from the national down to the sub-national level retain their specialized duties. However, within each ministry, we must reinforce and properly organize them. That is the approach Cambodia uses. Cambodia does not copy Vietnam, Indonesia, China, or India—even though those countries took varying amounts of time. The only exception is Indonesia, where a change of president led to immediate restructuring. Aside from that, other nations took time: Vietnam spent 10 years, China took 44 years, and India has revised its structure 7 or 8 times since 1947 all the way to 2024, adapting to practical needs.
(27) Whether adjusting, consolidating, or expanding, it inherently requires time, training, the revision of legal norms and ministerial laws, and the capacity-building of officials
I want to clarify this because I notice some of you still seem a bit uneasy. There is no right or wrong here; all approaches have their own valid reasoning. If we approach the question purely in terms of numbers, it simply will not work. We must ensure effectiveness based on what? It depends on the capacity of the officials and institutions in each respective country, as well as digital technology systems. How are E-Government and digital initiatives connected to help streamline procedures and reduce staff headcount?
Another factor is work culture. If the work culture does not align well, merging agencies clumsily can cause things to come to a complete standstill. Work continuity is vital. We cannot simply have a ministry do something just so people will clap and say, “They cut things down from this number to that, how wonderful! They cut more than anyone else”—only for operations to freeze up entirely, bringing everything to a screeching halt and causing public outcry.
Moreover, consider placing a single individual in charge of three distinct domains. If that person prioritizes one particular area, it could lead to the marginalization or downsizing of the other two. This is no different from our ministries and institutions today. There are many departments; do the heads of institutions give equal influence and authority to every single department? No, they do not. It depends on internal perceptions. And that is just within a single ministry! For example, one department has fewer staff and a smaller budget, while another gets more because its area is deemed a priority. Consequently, this pulls personnel back and forth without guaranteeing true efficiency.
Enhancing the capacity of officials is necessary. Regardless of whether we adjust, consolidate, or continue to expand, it requires time, training, the revision of legal norms and ministerial laws, the strengthening of personnel, and getting everything properly organized.
(28) At this stage, maintain the number of ministries, strengthen internal ministry operations through functional reviews and definitions, and incentivize officials via a performance-based system
What I mentioned the other day led to a lot of subsequent discussions and widespread commentary. There is no right or wrong; all viewpoints have their own basis. But the question for our Cambodia is – what should we choose that is best for Cambodia at each respective step, and when should specific actions be taken? In this phase, effective and impactful reform means keeping the number of ministries unchanged while strengthening the internal operations of each ministry through functional reviews and task definitions, incentivizing officials via the performance-based system we have introduced, and recruiting staff through rigorous entrance examinations. We will handle internal allocation and strengthen things along those lines.
It may not be absolute perfection, but it moves forward steadily. That is our direction. To those who felt disheartened — thinking, “The Prime Minister didn’t say the state is going to cut ministries, it feels like life is ruined” — please do not lose hope, and do not think the government has abandoned its commitment to strengthening institutional capacity. It is not like that at all. We are simply following a path different from others: we are not expanding like Indonesia, nor are we consolidating like Vietnam. We are keeping things as they are, and we are strengthening what we already have had to make it work better […]
(29) There is no single, perfectly correct formula; it simply depends on practical circumstances and priorities to respond to the needs of the citizens
Why did I need to speak about this today? Some might think this is a minor issue. Of course, there is commentary on Facebook from analysts and various individuals, but it affects the psychological morale and clarity of our civil servants, and it impacts state institutions. That is why I had to come out and explain […] Now I am taking it a step further. There is no single choice that is universally or perfectly correct. It all depends on the actual circumstances and the priorities of each government. Whether countries choose to expand or consolidate, they do it differently, in different contexts, and at different times, all to respond to the needs of their citizens. No single formula is right for everyone.
The other day, we had experts study Singapore’s model so we could expand education and TVET (Technical and Vocational Education and Training) for our youth, guiding them to study based on the framework Singapore uses. We examined the formula they applied in the past – guiding some students toward general education while directing others toward TVET to ensure a balanced workforce that matches labor demand with the right skills. We must move away from the mindset that one must pass the high school diploma to succeed, or that a bachelor’s degree — or a higher degree from a university — is inherently superior to a technical qualification from TVET. Absolutely not. The value is equal. The driving force is equal. The specialized skill is equal […]
(30) “If consolidation results in services failing to reach the hands of the citizens, we would simply have to revert to micro-decentralization and redeploy services all over again”
Let us look at this very clearly – with our current state, we cannot simply copy another country’s model right now. We must examine which policy approach fits which point in time. Look at Singapore in the past compared to our country today – given our citizens’ circumstances and training levels, when will we reach the point where we need Singapore’s model? Let us examine what Singapore’s formula was back in the year 2000, for instance.
Because some people have this habit of copying — taking whatever is the most modern model from another country and trying to drop it straight into our homeland — and it simply does not fit. We have had to look at every circumstance. Take the discussions on reform – because Vietnam cut its ministries down to 14 and slashed its provinces, people ask, “So, how many of our provinces should we cut? From 25 capital and provinces, how many should be left?” If Vietnam cut 63 down to 36, what happens to our provincial governors — who stays and who gets removed? Should the northeastern provinces be consolidated into just a single one? What would having four provinces reduced to one mean?
If public services start failing to reach the hands of the citizens, the solution is actually to move the other way — back toward micro-decentralization to redeploy and push services back out so they reach the people. The formulas are different. Why did Vietnam, a country larger than us, consolidate? Probably because their work systems, infrastructure, thoroughly deployed civil service, and capabilities are different from ours. We haven’t achieved that stage yet, nor do we need to force it. Other countries, conversely, are moving toward decentralization.
(31) Some countries reduce the number of institutions while decentralizing, whereas others reduce while centralizing … yet the formula that suits Cambodia is whatever enhances efficiency and effectiveness
If we expand when things get too large, we must start scaling up. Take communes, for example – sometimes a single district becomes so heavily populated — reaching tens of thousands of residents — that in order to deliver comprehensive services, a new commune must be established. Only once a commune is created is it possible to deploy health centers and further extend services. The closer the services get to the people, the more it is decentralization.
Some countries opt for centralization. Vietnam reduced the number of institutions, but they decentralized. In China, they centralize power, drawing authority back to the central administration to ensure transparency, accountability, and the effective management of reforms. They differ.
We must ask – which model does Cambodia adopt? […] I do not believe any single model is inherently better than another. We do not copy one country just because it seems better than another. Even within ASEAN itself, there are countries that expand and countries that consolidate. Among large nations with comparable populations of over a billion people—like India and China — one consolidates while the other expands. If you look for a universal formula, none of them fit our exact situation. Cambodia selects the formula that we have studied, evaluated, and determined is right for Cambodia — one that guarantees increased effectiveness and efficiency in serving our citizens.
This is the exact formula we are implementing: we pursue reforms by keeping the number of institutions unchanged, while strengthening each one individually to make them work better, applicable for the present and for the short- to medium-term future.
(32) “Cambodia follows the approach of ensuring sustainability, continuity, and pragmatism — walking slowly, but walking a clear path”
Some might ask – looking ahead to the long term, what kind of changes might happen then? I will not speak on that, so as to prevent people from sitting around daydreaming and over-speculating. Whichever analysts wish to put forward their theories are free to say what they think should be done. That is just what they think should be done. But when a Prime Minister speaks, it is not merely a suggestion — it sets the direction of political vision. Whatever passes our lips must be grounded in clear, solid foundations […] Minor adjustments sound great on paper, but if they bring all operations to a complete standstill, that becomes a major problem […]
Take ministries, for instance – bringing together officials with backgrounds in agriculture, water resources, and rural development who do not mesh well together would require three whole terms just to get them to synchronize, which would only make things worse. Even within a single department or institution, different entities already compete for budget allocations during each mandate, arguing, “My general department should get more because I provide this or that service …” That kind of friction happens inside a ministry dedicated to just a single sector — imagine what happens when you lump three distinct sectors together!
That is why we do not speak loosely. I am not saying that those who want to consolidate ministries are wrong, or that those who want to expand them are right. Cambodia follows the approach of ensuring sustainability, continuity, and pragmatism. Walking slowly, but walking a clear path, is better than walking fast and taking the wrong road. Taking the wrong road is dangerous […] We walk along this path with careful consideration and deep responsibility. This is how we conduct our state reforms.
We have walked this path across multiple mandates in our efforts to strengthen governance. We continue to pursue the state reform policies established in previous mandates because it is the right path. Some might argue that numbers may grow or that things might seem inefficient, but those are just opinions. What we must do is strengthen what already exists to make it run smoothly—by reinforcing legal and regulatory frameworks and reforming from within.
(33) No dissolving of ministries; instead, eliminate or streamline procedures, or strengthen coordination mechanisms for procedures following the approach of “dynamism of a single-entity system”
Take the CDC, for example: we do not dissolve the CDC; instead, we reform its internal operations. The working systems of ministries and institutions right now are being organized to coordinate authorities and manage SMEs, which intersect across multiple ministries. We do not abolish ministries or departments; rather, we enhance coordination mechanisms to ensure effective service to citizens — improving product registration and manufacturing processes for SMEs. That is what we do – streamline procedures and adjust them accordingly. But if someone suggests that we must dissolve ministries — say, because getting a license to manufacture soap requires approval from two or three different ministries like Industry and Health, and therefore one ministry must be abolished — no, we do not abolish a ministry just for that.
Who else would handle that workload? Instead, we eliminate procedures, streamline procedures, or strengthen the mechanisms for coordinating those procedures […] This is Cambodia’s reform — the approach adopted by Cambodia. Let me emphasize: this is what we call the “dynamism of a single-entity system.” It involves multiple institutions, but under a unified framework. It is just like establishing an inter-ministerial working group to drive development in the northeastern region. Existing institutions like the General Department of Taxation or the Ministry of Agriculture are already there, but we set up a temporary mechanism to help drive and accelerate progress. Investors in those four provinces do not need to run around to every separate ministry; we grant the authority to expedite things. That is how we increase efficiency. Does that mean we dissolve four ministries? No. They still have plenty of other vital responsibilities to carry out […]
(34) Building infrastructure, ensuring work systems function, guaranteeing sustainability, efficiency, effectiveness, and strong operational performance for the citizens
This is the work tied to driving progress. Once infrastructure is built, work systems must function properly to guarantee sustainability, efficiency, effectiveness, and impactful operational performance for the people. Human resources must be strengthened, encompassing education, healthcare, infrastructure — waterways, land routes, and aviation — as well as technological infrastructure. Today, technology is also referred to as infrastructure – electrical transmission poles, cellular towers, and infrastructure capable of supporting 5G and advancing toward AI […] expanding electricity grid connections across more villages and moving gradually toward lowering electricity tariffs.
We are further expanding and promoting technology. This is about building an economy with resilience across all dimensions and all sectors. We do it all at once; we do not leave one thing behind to focus on another — we push everything forward simultaneously. Regarding the formula of having fewer or more ministries and the question of what must be done right now — that is a question I will not address. If anyone is trying to bait me into talking about it, I simply will not. There is no need to try so hard; I have explained it clearly enough. At this hour, we are not talking about consolidating or expanding ministries. We are talking about preserving what we have, strengthening each existing institution from within, and potentially readjusting a number of general departments while keeping the ministries themselves intact. If we make structural adjustments at the top, we would also have to adjust the provincial departments down below, which would cause anxiety all the way to the grassroots level.
(35) “Decentralize authority to the communes, but build capacity, accountability, and management transparency…”
In Vietnam, for example, they reduced the number of provinces and even cut out a tier of districts. As I recall, they did this because their communes possessed the capability to shoulder that responsibility. For us, when we decentralize authority down to the communes, we must ensure we build the capacity, accountability, and management transparency of the commune level before we delegate further power. Not long ago, even simple procurement bidding processes generated numerous issues.
Only when there is genuine accountability and capability can we expand decentralization; otherwise, strengthening decentralized authority becomes extremely difficult. That is why, when major reforms occur, China tends to centralize and manage everything from the center. But we do not do that. When we decentralize and grant authority and responsibility, we must simultaneously build up their capacity and enforce accountability. That is why we must strengthen things in this manner. State reform is no easy task; we cannot simply copy someone else’s formula just because they made it work well elsewhere. It does not work that way.
(36) “Focus on what already exists, make it better, and maximize its potential … as for how conditions might change in the future, we will think about that when the time comes”
Some might ask – when Indonesia expanded its ministries from 34 to 48, did they lack knowledgeable people? Probably not. It was likely because they saw that with 34 ministries, certain areas suffered from inefficiency — things were too massive and moved too slowly — so they split them up to prioritize specific needs. Between the formulas of South Africa and India, which one is better? Should Cambodia consolidate or expand? I will not discuss that […] We strengthen what is already there.
It is the same for our citizens – whether an institution is large or small, what they care about is simply, “Just make the public services better for me.” It is like what was said the other day about lighting a candle from top to bottom, or bottom to top — it does not matter, as long as the whole thing lit up. The current number of ministries doesn’t matter right now. Let us not dwell on numbers; let us focus on optimizing what we already have and unlocking its full potential step by step. Looking far into the future, as circumstances change, we will consider those adjustments then.
For the immediate present, this concludes the debate… Please, let those who feel disheartened by destiny and protest against fate — thinking their lives are ruined just because the government didn’t announce ministry cutbacks — rest easy. It is not like that at all. Put those worries aside. Instead, shift your mindset to: “Since the government has chosen this path, then as a researcher or analyst, if we take this model, my recommendation is as follows …” That is the constructive way forward […]
(37) “Analyze like scholars; do not boycott analyzing, or stop contributing opinions. Please continue to share your feedback …”
I know those researchers. Some of you are very rigid and stubborn. Imagine a glass of water placed on a table: ten economists could sit there analyzing it for five hours and still get nowhere. Some would ask, “Why is it placed there?” Others would argue it is just to show off the craftsmanship of the glass. In reality, it was simply put there so someone could drink it. Sometimes, when we overthink things, we lose touch with plain simplicity. A glass of water is set down, and instead of just drinking it, everyone sits in silence analyzing it: Is the water meant to be drunk? What is the deeper meaning behind its placement? The moment they sit down, someone starts questioning it, and everyone immediately starts overanalyzing because analysts can never afford to lose an argument. Yet in truth, someone might have just said, “Since you are analyzing and talking so much, drink some water so your throat doesn’t get dry!”
Back when I was a researcher, we would spend hours on the simplest topics. The other day, literature scholars were arguing. I once participated in drafting the Trade Union Law; linguists and cultural experts spent an entire day debating just a single word — the difference between “dissolve” and “liquidate/abolish”. In the end, they decided to set it aside for later […] I am not a literature expert, so I sat there listening to the whole thing. But should we stop them from debating? No, people must express their views. We welcome all opinions, but sometimes we shouldn’t stubbornly cling to just one stance, because when things clash and deadlock, progress stops. We must set that aside and choose what serves the common good.
For instance, regarding this structural mechanism: even if that particular proposal wasn’t the option I ultimately chose, it doesn’t mean you should close the door or boycott participation. Don’t stop analyzing or offering your advice—keep your feedback coming […] Nowadays, we see many more analysts, and I warmly welcome that. In the past, we mostly saw commentators just hurling insults driven purely by emotion. Today, we have a growing number of genuine, scholarly-minded analysts.
(38) Building infrastructure and reforming state work systems are meant to enable the Royal Government to serve the people better …
It is not necessary to have a specific institutional mechanism for everything. Our citizens participate in analysis as well. Sometimes, analysis doesn’t just come from academics, but from people with direct practical experience. For instance, when analyzing and expressing opinions on work systems that facilitate certain businesses, individuals with hands-on business experience are often clearer and more insightful than academic theorists because they are directly engaged and offer practical feedback.
This means that everything we do — building infrastructure, reforming the state, and refining public work systems — is ultimately aimed at enabling the Royal Government to serve the people better, generate greater achievements, reduce negatives, and enhance efficiency and operational efficacy in delivering public services. Even though our formula does not copy any other country, we have clear and sound reasons for it, especially concerning our state reforms, institutional framework, and prioritization. Today, we came to talk about inaugurating a road, yet we ended up discussing state reform because they are all deeply interconnected.
I would like to take this opportunity to also thank the World Bank as an exceptional partner, as well as all other development partners—including Ms. Tania Meyer, who is joining us today. Our vision is aligned, and our national development priorities are the same: to serve the best interests of the citizens. The Royal Government serves the people, and our partners share the goal of national development. The World Bank has been a steadfast development partner ever since Cambodia emerged from war.
[2]
(39) The Ministry of Commerce should help publicize to both domestic and international audiences that Cambodian products have reached various destinations
Just yesterday evening, Lok Chumteav Cham Nimul (Minister of Trade) sent me a photo to report that our rice and agricultural products are now stocked at Costco in the United States. I told her: “Now, the Ministry of Commerce should help turn this into action — don’t just send photos for the Prime Minister to see. Produce interview videos with our compatriots abroad, and showcase it to our people at home and abroad so they know that Khmer products have arrived here and there, and that we have the capability to process and package them ourselves up to foreign standards.” We need to instill pride in our people, and counter those who claim we do nothing and that we do not know where our exports are going. Our rice export growth is approaching nearly one million tons! But we must also communicate clearly where those products reach and show it through video. Our compatriots living abroad, such as in the United States, feel an immense sense of pride. Some are willing to drive 50 to 100 kilometers just to buy Cambodian rice, film it, and post it online saying, “This is from Cambodia.” That is a source of national pride for the Khmer nation, reinforcing our capabilities across every single sector.
(40) “We cannot do everything all at once, but we can accomplish a great deal, and the benefits ultimately go to the grassroots …”
In the past, we had the garment sector — clothing and various textiles. One of my assistants went to the United States and went shopping. He bought a pair of “5.11” tactical pants for $45 and bragged to me about how nice they were. When he checked the label, it said “Made in Cambodia.” If he had known, he could have just bought them at Toul Tom Pong Market for $5. When my family studied in Boston, USA, they would go shopping […] sometimes the clothes they bought were the exact same ones from Toul Tom Pong that they brought over to give to friends. When they handed them to their friends, the friends were skeptical, probably thinking clothes sewn in Cambodia wouldn’t be durable. But the garments were identical; they just hadn’t looked at the brand.
Later, when they went to a store charging $80 for the same item, they realized and came back asking for more. Cambodia has the capability, craftsmanship, and quality to produce for export. What is most important is opening direct markets so we can export our products, building direct transport routes, and cutting down logistics costs. We cannot do everything all at once, but we can expand a great deal. Who do the benefits go to? The benefits go right back to the grassroots. Agricultural produce grown in Kratie, Ratanakiri, and Mondulkiri — not just raw crops, but canned goods and creatively processed products — can reach international markets rather than staying solely domestic. That is what we want to promote, and it is all interconnected, including state reform. That was the core topic this morning: everything is deeply intertwined.
[3]
(41) “We need a partnership between those who build roads and the commune/sangkat authorities who maintain them …”
On this point, I want special attention paid to repair and maintenance. His Excellency Peng Pione has already mentioned this in his report. Maintenance is crucial to extending the lifespan of our roads. Let us examine our budget allocations, whether for the Ministry of Public Works and Transport or the Ministry of Rural Development. The other day, when I asked His Excellency Chhay Rithisen, I noted that our budget for this is still low, and we need to review it. Sometimes, while the demand for new roads is high and our budget is limited, we must still look after what we already have and take percentages very seriously. If we only focus on building new roads, three years later they will be ruined and we will have to spend money to rebuild them all over again.
Therefore, they must be maintained. I ask – village and commune funds currently do not have a dedicated maintenance budget—they only have development funds. For instance, we must look at commune and sangkat roads because there must be a partnership between those who build them and those who maintain them. The Ministry of Rural Development constructs them, but the communes and sangkats are the owners. They must have the capability and resources to carry out maintenance to a certain degree. Otherwise, everything will fall apart, and we will just keep waiting for the Ministry of Rural Development to step in. With tens of thousands of villages and thousands of communes, how could they possibly cover everything? I urge that this be re-examined […]
(42) Commune allocations should include a specific budget package for road repairs, and it must be utilized with precision
Therefore, regarding the relationship between the builders and the local owners, we need to look into this. The Ministry of Rural Development builds them, but ownership rests with the district and commune levels. We must examine the budget allocations to ensure there is a dedicated funding package for repairs, used precisely for its intended target. Even small amounts help. The other day, for instance, when His Excellency Khoy Rida went down to do the work himself, it drew a lot of criticism. But it wasn’t just about a provincial governor doing physical labor — it sent a massive wake-up call and drew tremendous attention. It was a major political message urging us to take ownership seriously. Sometimes, the weight of the actors involved makes all the difference; the weight of a key figure changes everything. It is just like a comedy routine – whatever a famous comedian like Peak Mi says, people burst out laughing because the audience is already conditioned to laugh and watch them […] Yet leadership must come from the top. For smaller tasks like these, a leader must carry weight to spark momentum. It is not about provincial governors paving every single road themselves, but rather conveying a powerful political message to capture the attention of citizens and local officials so they pay close attention. He probably had already set targets and given instructions in meetings, telling specific communes to fix things and asking them to request cement or supplies if they fell short, promising to deliver them through our working group. Sometimes, taking such actions is done precisely to spark public engagement and awareness […]
(43) Siem Reap’s Green Season – weekends are packed with domestic tourists …
Now, let’s look at tourism in Siem Reap during the green season. This year is different from last year because lately, cars have been packed to the brim on Saturdays and Sundays. Even Mondays are crowded now! You might ask: who are these visitors? They aren’t foreign tourists from overseas; many are youngsters coming from places like Svay Rieng. My wife asked about them — after passing their high school diploma exams, they organize trips to visit Siem Reap. When we passed our Baccalaureate exams, we could only manage to ride bicycles or motorbikes out to Kien Svay. Nowadays, young people have the means to charter buses to Siem Reap! Domestic tourism is thriving. It’s the same in Kampong Som (Sihanoukville) and across the provinces. Now that our infrastructure is good, we just need to create something that sparks viral engagement. Take a journey across the map, from Siem Reap all the way to the Kampi. What stories do we have there? We have the legend of the crocodile Chharavarn. Mount Supor Kalei also has its own history worth filming and promoting. The other day when I went to Supor Kalei Mount and visited Han Chey pagoda, I saw the statue of the crocodile with a tongue — these unique local features. If we present them right, promote them properly, and market them well, we can draw visitors in.
(44) Develop each province to be clean and beautiful so that tourists from other provinces will come to visit
Make it so that whenever the locals see that their province is clean and has pleasant recreational spots, visitors from outside will naturally come to visit as well. In the future, tourists will come. In Kratie, we have freshwater dolphins. In Ratanakiri, we have the Boeng Kanseng lake area; in Stung Treng, we have unique attractions that can be further developed. In Kampong Cham, besides Ta Map’s restaurant, there is the riverside park area — though lately I see sections collapsing from erosion. In Prey Veng, they created something right in the center […] whenever people drive by, they take photos and post them online. The “Pig’s Nose” roundabout area has been turned into a very nice park. Here in Kratie, the riverfront has been well organized and landscaped. It hasn’t eroded, even though people used to worry about how the river currents would hit it directly. But we managed the tourism layout well […]
I remember staying at the Dolphin Hotel here when I was young. I say this is a positive process. First and foremost, it is for our own local people. Foreign tourism is one thing, but comfort and aesthetic beauty for the residents of Kratie — we make this a top priority. As long as the place is attractive, visitors from elsewhere will come too. Every province is striving to do the same. Just yesterday, I saw something new in Ratanakiri. At first, I thought Boeng Kanseng was the only attraction, along with the hornbill statues and other sights. But last evening, I saw another spot called the “Bridge of Love” […] Before long, we’ll have lots of people from Kratie marrying people from Kampong Cham […] After all, you just cross over for a short bit and you’re right in Kampong Cham […]./.
