Recently, Hunan announced the list of serious dishonesty behaviors in the fifth batch of engineering construction project bidding, involving 7 enterprises and 204 individuals. The notice points out that these illegal and irregular enterprises and individuals will be restricted from engaging in bidding activities, disqualified from financial subsidies, strengthened tax monitoring and management, and increased loan interest rates within the disciplinary period (one year from the date of publication). Increasing punishment for serious dishonesty such as bribery and collusion in bidding is one of the important measures to optimize the business environment and build a pro Qing political business relationship. Bidding is an important part of government investment projects, with concentrated power and intensive capital. By sorting out the cases reported by various regions, it can be found that many of the disciplinary and illegal issues investigated and dealt with by party members and leading cadres in recent years are related to bidding. There are several types of disciplinary and illegal cases in the field of bidding and tendering: firstly, evaluation experts, evaluation team members, and personnel of the owner's unit are surrounded by bidding units, illegally receiving gifts, gifts, and banquets; secondly, public officials illegally intervene and intervene in bidding and tendering, including personal participation in the project, purchasing engineering targets from the winning unit, and participating in the winning project through equity participation; thirdly, public officials use the funds in their hands Power or influence to help their relatives and friends undertake engineering projects Introduction by Wang Hua, Director of the Party and Political Conduct Supervision Office of the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission in Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province. From the above manifestations, it can be seen that there are various forms of violations of discipline and law in the bidding process. To strengthen supervision and regulation, the key lies in the "people" - the tenderer, bidder, and evaluator. Behind the "carrot pit" phenomenon of "clear moves and dark decisions" often lies the transmission of benefits. Sometimes, from the perspective of relevant procedures and materials alone, it seems that they all meet the procedural requirements. However, during the bidding process, there are hidden issues such as leaders' "greeting", changing the bidding setting conditions, and illegally leaking bidding information. Starting from April this year, the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission of Liyang City, Jiangsu Province, carried out a special inspection in the field of government investment project bidding in the city. The focus was on whether the bidding project was "broken down into parts" to avoid bidding, whether bidding announcements and public information were published in the public resource trading center, and whether the bidding project was invited to comply with relevant regulations. The focus was on supervising the illegal interference of public officials in bidding. Liyang Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision introduced that in order to further streamline the regulatory system, the Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision has urged the establishment of a normalized accountability system for government investment project bidding, such as the "Measures for Accountability of Violations of Bidding Laws and Regulations", to ensure standardized and orderly bidding for government investment projects. On August 28th, Lin, former deputy general manager of Yangshuo Urban Investment Company in Guilin City, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, was "double opened". After investigation, it was found that Lin, as the company's bidding leader and project judge, provided assistance and received a "benefit fee" of 600000 yuan from the business owner Peng by greeting the bidding company, giving high scores to specific bidders, and disclosing relevant information about the bidding project and judges. The case of Lin exposed that the policy oriented and professional evaluation process is also a high-risk area for bidding corruption. In past practice, due to the scarcity of evaluation experts, there were only a few people coming and going, making it easy for them to be 'hunted'. The news that evaluation experts were notified to go to the evaluation site in just a few minutes may