1

Thayer Consultancy

Background Briefing:

ABN # 65 648 097 123

Vietnam: Analysis of Politburo

and Secretariat Vote of
Confidence1
Carlyle A. Thayer
January 19, 2015
The Central Committee of the Vietnam Communist Party (VCP) held its tenth plenum
from January 5-12. This was a long-delayed meeting. According to party statutes the
Central Committee should meet twice a year. The ninth plenum was held in May
during the HD 981 oil platform crisis in the South China Sea. Ordinarily the tenth
plenum would have met in October immediately prior to convening the second
annual session of the National Assembly. Due to the confrontation over the HD 981
there were authoritative reports that the tenth plenum (or a special meeting of the
Central Committee) had been brought forward to August to discuss possible legal
action against China. However, Chinas unexpected withdrawal of the HD 981 in July
resulted in the reported postponement of the plenum until December. The
December meeting was re-scheduled for January 2015.
On January 10, the VCP Central Committee conducted its first vote of confidence on
its highest leadership sixteen-members of the Politburo and four members of the
Secretariat (who were not members of the Politburo).2
Although Vietnams media reported that the vote of confidence had taken place no
further details were provided. Diplomats, analysts and journalists who pumped their
sources for information came up virtually empty handed. Members of the Central
Committee reported that they were under a disciplinary injunction to maintain strict
secrecy.
On January 16, the blog Chn dung Quyn lc published what purported to be the
official results (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bophieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html). According to the blog all full and alternate
members of the Central Committee were asked to rate members of the Politburo
and the four members of the Secretariat into one of three categories: high
confidence (tn nhim cao), confidence (tn nhim) and low confidence (tn nhim
thp). The results were published in a table showing rank order, name, current
position, and number of votes received in each category (see Appendix 1).
These votes were also displayed in a colour-coded chart showing the percentage of
high confidence votes (blue), confidence votes (green) and low confidence votes
1

A draft of this report was sent to several colleagues diplomats, journalist and academics who
specialise on Vietnam for review and comment. I wish to acknowledge their valuable inputs.
2
Ngo Xuan Lich, Tran Quoc Vuong, Truong Hoa Binh, and Ha Thi Khiet.

2
(red) received (see Appendix 2). The veracity of this data cannot be confirmed
pending the release of official voting results. For example, two incomplete lists of the
voting results were circulated among observers in Hanoi prior to the release of the
Chn dung Quyn lc blog results (see Table 1 below).3
Table 1
Comparison of Unofficial Lists of Vote of Confidence Results
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

CDQL Ranking
Nguyen Tan Dung
Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Phung Quang Thanh
Ngo Van Du
Tran Dai Quang
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Le Thanh Hai
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Dinh The Huynh
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Le Hong Anh
To Huy Rua
Pham Quang Nghi

List 1
Nguyen Tan Dung
Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Nguyen Phu Trong
Phung Quang Thanh
na
na
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
na
na
na
Dinh The Huynh
Pham Quang Nghi
Tong Thi Phong

List 2
Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Tan Dung
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Phung Quang Thanh
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Nguyen Phu Trong
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na

Legend: CDQL = Chn dung Quyn lc blog; Lists 1 and 2 were leaked by
Vietnamese party sources and were incomplete; na = data not available.

It should be noted that the colour-coded chart published by Chn dung Quyn lc
duplicated the model used by the Vietnamese media, including television, to display
the vote of confidence for ministerial-level officials by National Assembly deputies
last year.
What does the data tell us? First, 197 out of 200 members of the Central Committee
cast ballots for all twenty officials under review.4 This contrasts with the vote of
confidence by National Assembly deputies last year in which the number of votes
cast varied by individual. There were no abstentions in the Politburo vote of
confidence.
Second, the table issued by Chn dung Quyn lc ranked Politburo members by the
total number of high confidence votes received. This raw data needs to be
interpreted.
Third, none of the twenty high-ranking party officials scored under fifty percent on
any of the three categories of votes of confidence (high confidence, confidence, low
3

One confidential source suggested that the Chn dung Quyn lc results were genuine but may have
been altered for political purposes (to slander some politicians). In other words, there is the
possibility the voting results were manipulated prior to being released.
4
Two members were deceased (Nguyen Cong Dinh and Pham Quy Ngo) and one was ill (Nguyen Ba
Thanh).

3
confidence).
The analysis below uses descriptive statistics to provide a method of determining
central tendency where the votes clustered. Three measures are used, the range,
the mean (or average vote) and the standard deviation.5
Table 2
Results of the Vote of Confidence in Members of the Politburo
Name

HC
Vote

C
Vote

Total C
Vote

LC
Vote

Total
Vote

Nguyen Tan Dung

Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Phung Quang Thanh
Ngo Van Du
Tran Dai Quang
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Le Thanh Hai
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Dinh The Huynh
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Le Hong Anh
To Huy Rua
Pham Quang Nghi

152
149
145
144
137
136
135
128
127
126
122
116
116
112
110
100

22
30
41
33
33
44
40
57
62
49
50
73
46
64
46
64

174
179
186
177
170
180
175
185
189
175
172
189
162
176
156
164

23
18
11
20
27
17
22
12
8
22
25
8
35
21
41
33

197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197
197

Legend: HC = High Confidence, C = Confidence, Total C = high confidence plus confidence,

LC = Low Confidence; Total Vote the number ballots cast by members of the Central
Committee. Source: (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bophieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

Table 2 above displays the voting results for the sixteen members of the Politburo in
rank order based on the number of high confidence votes received.6 Table 3 below
5

The standard deviation is a statistic that measures the amount of variation or dispersion from the
mean. A low standard deviation indicates that the data points tend to be very close to the mean; a
high standard deviation indicates that the data points are spread out over a large range of values. In a
normal distribution the dispersion of the data should approximate a bell-shaped curve as shown
below.

Voting for the four members of the Secretariat (Ban B th) is not included in this analysis.

4
displays the voting results in each of the three categories as a percentage of total
votes cast. Who won? Who lost?
The High Confidence votes ranged from a low of 100 (51%) to a high of 152 (77%) or
a difference of 52 votes (26%).
The mean (or average number) of High Confidence votes received was 128 (65%).
Eight members of the Politburo received either an average or above average vote
while the other eight members received less than the average vote.
The top High Confidence vote getters Nguyen Tan Dung, Truong Tan Sang, Nguyen
Thi Kim Ngan and Phung Quang Thanh all scored one standard deviation above the
mean. The three bottom High Confidence vote getters Le Hong Anh, To Huy Rua
and Pham Quang Nghi all scored one standard deviation below the mean. These
are significant results. The Standard Deviation for High Confidence votes was 15.
Another way of interpreting the results is to look at who received the most votes of
confidence by adding the High Confidence and Confidence votes together (see Table
4). The Total Confidence votes ranged from a low of 156 (79%) to a high of 189
(96%), or a spread of 33 votes (17%). This is a narrower ban than for the High
Confidence votes.
Table 3
Results of the Vote of Confidence in Members of the Politburo
(Percent Vote Received)
Name

% HC
Vote

Nguyen Tan Dung

Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Phung Quang Thanh
Ngo Van Du
Tran Dai Quang
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Le Thanh Hai
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Dinh The Huynh
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Le Hong Anh
To Huy Rua
Pham Quang Nghi

77.15
75.63
73.60
73.10
69.54
69.03
68.53
64.97
64.47
63.95
61.93
58.88
58.88
56.85
55.84
50.76

% C Vote

% Total C
Vote

11.17
15.22
20.81
16.75
16.75
22.34
20.3
28.93
31.47
24.87
25.38
37.06
23.35
32.49
23.35
32.49

88.32
90.86
91.42
89.85
86.29
91.37
88.83
93.91
95.94
88.83
87.31
95.94
82.23
89.34
79.19
83.25

% LC
Vote

11.88
9.14
5.58
10.15
13.71
8.63
11.17
6.09
4.06
11.17
12.69
4.06
17.77
10.66
20.81
16.75

Legend: HC = High Confidence; C = Confidence, Total Confidence = high confidence

plus confidence, LC = Low Confidence.
Source: (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bo-phieutin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

The mean (or average) Total Confidence vote received was 176 (89%). The Standard
Deviation was 5. Two members of the Politburo scored one standard deviation

5
above the mean - Le Thanh Hai and Tong Thi Phong - while three members of the
Politburo fell one standard deviation below the mean - Pham Quang Nghi, Nguyen
Xuan Phuc and To Huy Rua.
Table 4 shows the difference in ranking when Total Confidence votes is used as a
measure of who won. When the rank order determined by High Confidence votes
received is compared with the rank order determined by Total Confidence votes
received there is a marked difference in ranking. This is displayed by the fourth
column that shows the change in rankings (plus or minus).
The data in Table 4 reveals that the ranking of only two members of the Politburo
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan and Nguyen Sinh Hung remained unchanged.
Two members of the Politburo advanced in ranking when measured by Total
Confidence votes received compared with High Confidence votes received. Le Thanh
Hai jumped to first position from ninth, and Tong Thi Phong catapulted to second
position from thirteenth.
Two members of the Politburo plummeted in ranking. Nguyen Tan Dung tumbled
from first on High Confidence votes received to eleventh on Total Confidence votes
received. Ngo Van Du fell from eighth to thirteenth position.
Table 4
Change in Rank Order
from High Confidence Vote to Total Confidence Votes
Name
Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Tran Dai Quang
Truong Tan Sang
Phung Quang Thanh
Le Hong Anh
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Nguyen Tan Dung
Dinh The Huynh
Ngo Van Du
Pham Quang Nghi
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
To Huy Rua

TC
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

HC
Rank
9
13
3
8
6
2
4
14
7
10
1
11
5
16
12
15

Change
Plus/Minus
+8
+11
0
+4
+1
-4
-3
+6
-2
0
-10
-1
-8
+2
-3
-1

Legend: TC = Total Confidence Votes, HC = High Confidence Votes,

Change = difference between High Confidence vote and Total
Confidence Vote.
Source: (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ketqua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

A third way of interpreting the results is to rank members of the Politburo by the

6
number of Low Confidence votes received. Table 5 above displays this data ranking
members of the Politburo from least number of Low Confidence vote to highest
number of Low Confidence votes. The data ranged from a low of 8 votes (4%) to high
of 41 votes (21%) or a spread of 33 votes (17%). The mean (or average) Low
Confidence vote was 21 (11%). The Standard Deviation was 9.
Table 5
Members of the Politburo Ranked by
Low Confidence Votes (Least to Most)
Name
Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Tran Dai Quang
Truong Tan Sang
Phung Quang Thanh
Average
Le Hong Anh
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Nguyen Tan Dung
Dinh The Huynh
Ngo Van Du
Pham Quang Nghi
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
To Huy Rua

LC Vote
8
8
11
12
17
18
20
21
21
22
22
23
25
27
33
35
41

% LC
Vote
4.06
4.06
5.58
6.09
8.63
9.14
10.15
10.66
10.66
11.17
11.17
11.88
12.69
13.71
16.75
17.77
20.81

Rank LC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Legend: LC = Low confidence Vote; %LC = percent of vote received

divided by number of votes cast; Rank LC = lowest to highest
number of Low Confidence Vote received.
Source: (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ketqua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

Three members of the Politburo fell one standard deviation below the mean: Pham
Quang Nghi, Nguyen Xuan Phuc and To Huy Rua. Four members of the Politburo fell
one standard deviation above the mean: Le Thanh Hai, Tong Thi Phong, Nguyen Thi
Kim Ngan and Nguyen Thien Nhan. These are significant results.
Conclusion
This Background Brief presents a qualified analysis of the vote of confidence by the
VCPs Central Committee on twenty high-ranking officials. The voting results
released by the blog Chn dung Quyn lc have not been confirmed by official party
sources. They remain unverified. This analysis is therefore speculative.
This is the first time the VCP has conducted a vote of confidence on its top leaders.
Even if the voting results published by Chn dung Quyn lc are official there are
difficulties in interpreting the results and what these results might mean for the
seven party officials eligible to stand for re-election to the new Central Committee to
be selected at the eleventh party congress scheduled for early 2016.

7
Table 6 below sets out a summary of which members of the Politburo performed
best (one standard deviation above the mean) and worst (one standard deviation
below the mean) using the three measures discussed above: High Confidence votes
received, Total Confidence Votes received, and Low Confidence votes received.
Table 6
Summary: Winners and Losers
Ranking
Above One
Deviation

Below One
Deviation

Standard

Standard

High Confidence

Total Confidence

Low Confidence

Nguyen Tan Dung

Le Thanh Hai

Le Thanh Hai

Truong Tan Sang

Tong Thi Phong

Tong Thi Phong

Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan

Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan

Phung Quang Thanh

Nguyen Thien Nhan

Le Hong Anh

Pham Quang Nghi

Pham Quang Nghi

To Huy Rua

Nguyen Xuan Phuc

Nguyen Xuan Phuc

Pham Quang Nghi

To Huy Rua

To Huy Rua

The vote of confidence remains an ambiguous concept. There has been no

explanation of the criteria used by members of the Central Committee to select why
a Politburo member should receive a vote of high confidence, confidence or low
confidence. For example, Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan outscored Tong Thi Phong on high
confidence votes received, while Tong Thi Phong outscored Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan on
total confidence votes received. What accounts for this difference? How will the VCP
rank these two individuals? How will low confidence votes be factored into VCP
rankings?
In the absence of opinion survey or in-depth interviews of those who voted by the
media it is impossible to know why a particular member of the Politburo received
the number of votes that he/she did. For example, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung
scored highest in the number of high confidence votes received. Was this because of
his handling of the economy, overall management of his portfolio, or his outspoken
views on Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea?
Table 7 below indicates that of the present sixteen-member Politburo, nine
members will reach the mandatory retirement age of 65 in 2016 when the next
national party congress is scheduled to be held.
Although current party rules require party officials to retire at 65 years of age a
special exemption may be given. According to sources, party rules permit those who
are over 65 years of age to stand for re-election if they are able to serve two-thirds
of their five year term before reaching 70. This rule was applied at the ninth (2006)
and tenth (2011) national party congresses.
Table 7 also shows that five members of the Politburo were born in 1949 and will be
66 at the time of the eleventh party congress. They would qualify under the special

8
exemption rule because they could serve two-thirds of their five year term (three
years and four months) before reaching 70 years of age. A person born in 1949
would turn 70 in 2019 (or the least year of term of the eleventh congress).
Table 7
Date of Birth Current Members of the Politburo
Status 2016
Over 65 in
January 2016

Potentially
eligible for age
exemption

Under 65 in
January 2016

Name

Date of Birth

Nguyen Phu Trong

Nguyen Sinh Hung
To Huy Rua
Ngo Van Du
Truong Tan Sang
Phung Quang Thanh
Pham Quang Nghi
Le Hong Anh
Nguyen Tan Dung
Le Thanh Hai
Dinh The Huynh
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Nguyen Xuan Phuc

April 14, 1944

February 18, 1946
June 4, 1947
December 21, 1947
January 21, 1949
February 2, 1949
September 2, 1949
November 12, 1949
November 17, 1949
February 20, 1950
May 15, 1953
June 12, 1953
February 10, 1954
April 12, 1954
July 20, 1954

Tran Dai Quang

October 12, 1956

Comment

Very High CC support

Solid CC support
Very High CC support
Very High CC support
High CC support
Solid CC support with a
bloc of members holding
reservations
High CC support

Legend: CC = Vietnam Communist Party Central Committee.

It is possible, should circumstances warrant that a special exemption could be given

for one person (although some party sources say two exemptions could be given in
very exceptional circumstances). At the last party congress, for example, Nguyen Phu
Trong was the beneficiary of this exemption and was elected VCP Secretary General.
Seven incumbent members of the Politburo are eligible for re-election based on age
criteria (see Chart 1 below). What influence will the vote of confidence have on their
political futures?
In order for an incumbent member of the Politburo to retain a seat on the new
Politburo he/she must pass through a two-step process. First, the individual must be
nominated for re-election to the Central Committee by a Politburo sub-committee
charged with recommending candidates to the next party congress. These
nominations must be approved by the current Politburo.
Under Politburo Directive 244 all candidates for nomination to the next Central
Committee must be approved by the current Central Committee (elected at the
tenth congress). At the eleventh national party congress in 2016, nearly 2,000
delegates will select the next Central Committee on the basis of nominations put to
them by the outgoing Central Committee. This represents a change in past rules that
permitted candidates to be nominated from the floor of congress by party delegates.
Chart 1

Second, once the new Central Committee is elected it will meet separately and select
the new Politburo. The new Politburo will then elect the party Secretary General and
assign its senior members to one of the three top remaining positions of power:
state president, prime minister, and chairman of the Standing Committee of the
National Assembly. All these posts are subject to ratification by the National
Assembly. The new Politburo also will select the head of the party Secretariat.
The possibility of an exemption to the mandatory retirement age for one of the five
incumbent members born in 1949 is significant because of reported political rivalries
among the current leadership. The Hanoi rumour mill suggests Nguyen Tan Dung has
ambitions to become the next VCP Secretary General. He is likely to be opposed by
Truong Tan Sang and/or Nguyen Phu Trong.
The Hanoi rumor mill also suggests that outgoing party Secretary General Nguyen
Phu Trong is promoting either Pham Quang Nghi or Tran Dai Quang as possible
candidates for the next party Secretary General. Political blogs have suggested that
the current Minister of National Defence, General Phung Quang Thanh, might be a
candidate.
In sum, because of the potential fluidity in leadership selection, the next party
Secretary General (or state president) could be selected from among the five
incumbent members of the Politburo born in 1949. If no age exemptions are granted
the next party Secretary General, state president and prime minster will be selected
from among the seven incumbents who are under 65 in 2016.7

Appendix 1
7

It has been past practice to reserve the top four positions of power for members who have served
one five-year term on the Politburo. Nguyen Thien Nhan and Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan were elevated to
the Politburo in May 2013 at the Central Committees seventh plenum.

10

Results of Vote of Confidence

in Members of the Politburo and Secretariat

Legend: tn nhim cao = high confidence, tn nhim = confidence, tn nhim thp = low confidence
Source: http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinhtri.html.

11

Appendix 2
Results of Vote of Confidence
in Members of the Politburo and Secretariat
(in per cent of votes received)

Legend: tn nhim cao = high confidence, tn nhim = confidence, tn nhim thp = low confidence
Source: http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinhtri.html.

Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, Vietnam: Analysis of Politburo and Secretariat

Vote of Confidence, Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, January 19, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.

Background Briefing:

Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123

Vietnam: Analysis of Politburo

and Secretariat Vote of
Confidence - Supplement
Carlyle A. Thayer
January 19, 2015
This Background Brief is a supplement to Vietnam: Analysis of Politburo and
Secretariat Vote of Confidence, Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, issued earlier
today.
This Supplement present four methods of ranking members of the Vietnam
Communist Partys (VCP) Politburo as a result of the VCPs first vote of confidence by
members of the Central Committee conducted on January 10th.
Table 1
Politburo Rankings
by High Confidence Votes Received

Rank

Name

HC
Vote

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Nguyen Tan Dung

Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Phung Quang Thanh
Ngo Van Du
Tran Dai Quang
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Le Thanh Hai
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Dinh The Huynh
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Le Hong Anh
To Huy Rua
Pham Quang Nghi

152
149
145
144
137
136
135
128
127
126
122
116
116
112
110
100

Legend: HC = Total High Confidence vote received.

Source:
http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01
/ket-qua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html.

2
Three of the measures used to rank Politburo members were analysed in the earlier
Background Brief ranking based on the number of high confidence votes received
(Table 1 above), ranking based on total number of confidence votes received (Table
2 below), and ranking based on the total confidence votes minus low confidence
votes received (Table 3 below).
The earlier Background Brief noted that rankings for individual members varied
considerably when these three measures were compared. The weakness of the
rankings generated by the first measure is that it omits the impact of confidence
and low confidence votes. The weakness of the second method is that it gives
equal weighting to high confidence and confidence votes and does not take low
confidence votes into account.
Table 2
Politburo Rankings
Based on Total Confidence Votes Received

Rank

Name

1
2
3

Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thi Kim
Ngan
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Tran Dai Quang
Truong Tan Sang
Phung Quang Thanh
Average
Le Hong Anh
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Nguyen Tan Dung
Dinh The Huynh
Ngo Van Du
Pham Quang Nghi
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
To Huy Rua

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

HC
Vote
127
116
145

C Vote
62
73
41

Total Vote
HC + C
189
189
186

128
136
149
144
128
112
135
126
152
122
137
100
116
110

57
44
30
33
47
64
40
49
22
50
33
64
46
46

185
180
179
177
176
176
175
175
174
172
170
164
162
156

Legend: HC = High Confidence, C = Confidence, Total C = high

confidence plus confidence.
Source: (http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ketqua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

The weakness of rankings based on the third method (total confidence votes
minus low confidence votes) is that it also gives equal weighting to high
confidence votes and confidence votes.

3
Table 3
Politburo Rankings based on
Total Confidence Vote minus Low Confidence Vote
Name
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thi Kim
Ngan
Nguyen Thien
Nhan
Tran Dai Quang
Truong Tan Sang
Phung Quang
Thanh
Average
Le Hong Anh
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Nguyen Tan Dung
Dinh The Huynh
Ngo Van Du
Pham Quang Nghi
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
To Huy Rua

Total C
Vote
189
189
186

LC
Vote
8
8
11

TC - LC

185

12

173

180
179
177

17
18
20

163
161
157

176
176
175
175
174
172
170
164
162
156

21
21
22
22
23
25
27
33
35
41

155
155
153
153
151
147
143
134
127
115

181
181
175

Legend: Total C Vote = High Confidence + Confidence

votes; LC Low Confidence Vote; TC LC = Total
Confidence vote minus Low Confidence Vote
Source:
(http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ketqua-bo-phieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html).

This Supplement presents a fourth method of ranking Politburo members. It assigns

additional weighting to high confidence votes. For purposes of this exercise each
high confidence vote is given a value of 1.5. Each confidence and each low
confidence vote is given a value of one. This fourth measure combines the weighted
high confidence and confidence votes and subtracts the low confidence votes
received. Politburo members are ranked by the number of weighted votes received.
This data is displayed in Table 4 below.

4
Table 4
Politburo Rankings
by Weighted High Confidence Vote
Rank

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Name

Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan

Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Truong Tan Sang
Tran Dai Quang
Phung Quang Thanh
Nguyen Tan Dung
Nguyen Phu Trong
Average
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Ngo Van Du
Le Hong Anh
Dinh The Huynh
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Pham Quang Nghi
To Huy Rua

HC Weighted
Vote
HC
145
127
116
128
149
136
144
152
135
128
126
137
112
122
116
100
110

217.5
190.5
174
192
223.5
204
216
228
202.5
192
189
205.5
168
183
174
150
165

C
Vote

Total
C
Vote

LC
Vote

41
62
73
57
30
44
33
22
40
47
49
33
64
50
46
64
46

258.5
252.5
247
249
253.5
248
249
250
242.5
239
238
238.5
232
233
220
214
211

11
8
8
12
18
17
20
23
22
21
22
27
21
25
35
33
41

Weighted
Result

Legend: HC Vote: High Confidence Vote; Weighted HC = High Confidence vote multiplied by
weighting of 1.5; C Vote = Confidence vote; Total C Vote = Weighted HC plus C; LC Vote = Low
Confidence vote; Weighted Result = Total C Vote minus LC.
Source:
http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bophieu-tin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html.

Table 5 below summarises the ranking of Politburo members based on the results of
each of the four measures. This data clearly indicates that rankings based solely on
high confidence votes are misleading. The other three measures used to rank a
Politburo members relative standing are more consistent.
Table 5 takes this analysis further by ranking Politburo members on the basis of the
average of the four voting measures discussed above. The result is that the ranking
based on the average is congruent with the weighted ranking.
Of the seven incumbent Politburo members eligible for re-election at the eleventh
party congress in 2016, five individuals stand out: Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan, Le Thanh
Hai, Tong Thi Phong, Nguyen Thien Nhan and Tran Dai Quang.
Two incumbents fared poorly in the vote of confidence: Dinh The Huynh and Nguyen
Xuan Phuc.
Of the five incumbent members born in 1949 who would require a special exemption
to remain on the Politburo and to hold high office, three stand out: Truong Tan Sang,
Phung Quang Thanh and Nguyen Tan Dung. Both Le Hong Anh and Nguyen Xuan
Phuc performed poorly.

247.5
244.5
239
237
235.5
231
229
227
220.5
218
216
211.5
211
208
185
181
170

5
These finding are significant because they indicate the level of support each
individual can command from the Central Committee that will be the final arbiter of
who is nominated for re-election at the eleventh congress in 2016. The fate of who
actually gets elected will be in the hands of party delegates to the national congress.
Table 5
Politburo Rankings
Based on Average Position in Four Measures of Voting Results
Name
Nguyen Thi Kim Ngan
Le Thanh Hai
Tong Thi Phong
Truong Tan Sang
Nguyen Thien Nhan
Tran Dai Quang
Phung Quang Thanh
Nguyen Tan Dung
Nguyen Phu Trong
Nguyen Sinh Hung
Ngo Van Du
Le Hong Anh
Dinh The Huynh
Nguyen Xuan Phuc
Pham Quang Nghi
To Huy Rua

HC
Rank
3
9
12
2
8
6
4
1
7
10
5
14
11
13
16
15

TC
Rank
3
1
2
6
4
5
7
11
9
10
13
8
12
15
14
16

TC-LC
Rank
3
1
2
6
4
5
7
11
9
10
13
8
12
15
14
15

W
Rank
1
2
3
5
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

AVG
2.5
3.25
4.75
4.75
5
5.5
6.25
7.75
8.5
10
10.5
10.5
12
14.25
14.75
15.5

Legend: HC Rank = High Confidence votes received; TC Rank = the sum of High
Confidence and Confidence votes received; TC LC Rank: Total Confidence votes minus
Low Confidence votes received; Weighted Rank = HC Vote (multiplied by 1.5) plus
Confidence vote minus Low Confidence vote. AVG = the average of all four ranking
measures (HC Rank + TC Rank + TC-LC Rank + Weighted Rank divided by four).
Source:
http://chandungquyenluc.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/ket-qua-bo-phieutin-nhiem-bo-chinh-tri.html.

Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, Vietnam: Analysis of Politburo and Secretariat

Vote of Confidence - Supplement, Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, January 19,
2015. All background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove
yourself from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the
Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.