民主党派的民主监督建设初探

Introduction:

It is important to improve the democratic supervision mechanism for the building of democratic politics. How to safeguard the civil rights of the masses, to prevent the same level of government supervision, to guaid against the higher can no longer monitor the lower, are becoming the major problems for the harmonious development of every country. This essay is based on the demonstration helding in Canberra on March against the government taxes to analysis the status and problems in the construction of the Australian democratic supervision. Then it will address this problems how to build a truly democratic oversight mechanisms. Finally, it will will compare and contrast how the same question is dealt with in China. the status and problems of democratic supervision in Australia

On April 23, 2011, there was helding a rally against the government taxes, appearing many flags covered with the words \"off witches\" and s \"Bob Brown bitch” and other slogans. At the rally, the Australian opposition leader delivered a speech, against Bob Brown listening to the Australian left-wing leader Girard • Greens and violating of previous promise about \"no tax on carbon emissions,\" He said that \"If the prime minister were honest to Australian people, we would not be living in a situation like the current one.\" This large-scale assembly, is driving the embodiment of democratic supervision.

Currently, in Australia, the democratic parties of the democratic supervision has the following characteristics:

1, equality. Both the democratic parties and the ruling party are political parties within the Constitution and own the legal freedom.

2, cooperative. Multi-party cooperation are aimed to improve the party's leadership to realize that people being the masters.

3 People. As the democratic parties are part of the people of their political alliances, therefore, the democratic parties’ democratic supervision are people’s supervision. There are some problems about democratic parties’ democratic supervision:

1, poor access to information. The communication between Ruling party and the Democratic party is not enough, leading to informed sources for the Democratic Party is not smooth and the feedback information is not timely.

2, the conditions for protection is not enough. The economic strength of the democratic parties are often smaller than the ruling party, the number of support is not dominant.

3, views can not put into action. Not all democratic parties can put forward views about government decision into action.

4, the mechanism is not smooth. In practice, democratic supervision can take out advice easily but improvements can not get recognized. how to build a truly democratic oversight mechanisms

For such problems, there are some improvements on the following aspects:

1, increasing the transparency of democratic supervision of the public. Before making decisions the government should seek the views of the people

2, exploring various ways to broaden the channels of democratic supervision. The government should increase the depth and breadth of information dissemination to create a good atmosphere for public opinion.

3, providing enough security . Government should take measures to establish equality between the democratic parties and the ruling party to encourage suggestions and comments.

4, understanding the public’s real opinion. Democratic parties and governments need to do information work to understand people's real needs. how the same question is dealt with in China

In China, because of the Communist’s autocracy, so the democratic supervision of the Democratic Party is more narrow. The Chinese government would do enough in the investigation before making decisions, and then draft of policy-making plans. On the controversial issues, the govement usually carry out on a small scale test, and then spread across the country. Therefore, in China, the govement would do more work before and through the decision-making to guarantee democratic supervision.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the democratic supervision in Australia is broader and can turn into more direct action, but the effect can not be well maintained the true will of the people. In China, democratic supervision mainly work before government decision-making and play a role in decision-making process, once the government decisided, the role of democratic supervision becomes very small.

民主党派的民主监督权利建设初探

在民主政治建设中，如何完善民主监督机制，真正维护广大人民群众的民主权利，防止同级政府无力监督、上级无法监督的情况出现，是每个国家和谐发展所面临的一个重大问题。本文从3月份在堪培拉举行的反对政府征税的集会入手，分析澳大利亚民主监督建设的现状和存在问题。然后针对存在问题提出如何建设真正的民主监督机制。最后比较了在中国同样的问题下政府的解决措施。

2011年4月23日，堪培拉举行反对政府征税的集会，现场挂满了写有“赶走巫婆”等标语的旗子，还有一条标语将吉拉德称为“鲍伯•布朗的婊子”。在集会上，澳反对党领袖发表演讲，讽刺吉拉德听从澳大利亚左翼绿党领袖鲍伯•布朗的建议，违反此前“不会对碳排放征税”的承诺，决定自2012年7月1日开始对碳污染征税。他认为“如果总理在选举前就做到

对人民坦率，我们就不会身处目前这样的境地了。”民主党派举行大规模的集会，是行驶民主监督权的体现。 目前，在澳大利亚，个民主党派的民主监督权有以下几个特点：

1,、平等性。互相监督的主体，各民主党派和执政党一样，都是政党，在宪法范围内的政治自由和法律地位是平等的。

2、合作性。多党合作，能更好的改善执政党的领导，实现人民当家作主。

3、人民性。由于民主党派是各自所联系的一部分人民的政治联盟，所以，民主党派的民主监督具有人民性。

民主党派的民主监督机制存在以下几个问题：

1、 知情渠道不畅。执政党往往与政协及民主党派之间双向、主动的沟通不够，导致民主党的知情渠道

不是通畅，反馈信息不及时。

2、 条件保障不够。民主党派的经济实力往往比不上执政党，人数支持也不占优势。

3、 不敢付诸行动。不是所有的民主党派都能在对执政党的政府决策有意见时能够提出来，并付出行动。 4、 机制不顺。民主监督在实践中提建议容易，提改进意见却得不到认可。 针对这样的问题，可以从以下几个方面进行改善：

1、 加大民主监督的公开透明度。政府在做决策前可以征求民众的意见，通过再决定决策发布。 2、 探索多种途径，拓宽民主监督的渠道。政府要加大宣传的深度和广度，营造良好的舆论氛围，让社

会各方面广泛了解、支持和参与民主监督。聘请执法监督员队伍，带领民主监督工作顺利开展。组织委员通过调研、观察、座谈等形式对政府决策进行民主监督。

3、 加大保障力度。政府要采取措施，建立民主党派和执政党的平等关系，鼓励对政府决策提出建议和

意见。

4、 认真了解民意。民主党派和政府需要做好信息工作，健全网络，了解民众的真实需求。

在中国，由于是共产党专政制度，所以在政府决策方面，民主党的民主监督更狭隘。所以中国政府决策过程在决策前就做足够的调查，草拟决策方案，征求民众意见。对于有争议的重点问题，一般是在小范围内进行试验，然后推广到全国。因此，中国实际上是在决策前和决策中接收更多的民主监督，在决策后会实施条例压制民主监督的权利行使。

比较澳大利亚和中国的政府决策过程中民主党的民主监督权利的行使情况来看，澳大利亚的民主监督范围更广，行动更直接，但效果并不能很好的维护民众的真实意愿。中国的民主监督主要在政府决策前和决策过程中发挥作用，一旦政府作出决策，民主监督的作用变得很小。