改革开放以来,农村经济有了长足发展,政治格局也发生了很大变化。我们越来越清楚地看到,农村的事情没有村民的同意,不仅不合法、不能办,也办不成。由此越发感到中央推行村民自治、实行民主政治是非常英明的。但是,多年来我们做了很多工作, 效果总是不理想,干群矛盾没有解决, 又出现了“两委矛盾”。经认真分析, 问题集中在一点——“老板”不到位: 尽管《村组法》赋予了村民会议直接行使民主的权利,但大多数村无法经常召开村民会议,造成权力落空,直接民主的路子实际上走不通;按规定村代会经授权也可以代行村民会议的权利,但却没有给它独立行使这种权利的权力,反要由村委会主任——被监 Since the reform and opening up, the rural economy has made great strides and the political pattern has undergone great changes. As we see more and more clearly, things in rural areas without the consent of villagers are not only illegitimate, they can not be done, nor can they be done. From this, I feel more and more that the Central Government is implementing villager autonomy and implementing democratic politics is very wise. However, over the years we have done a lot of work, the effect is always unsatisfactory, and the issue of “contradictions between the two committees” has emerged since the contradiction between cadres and the masses has not been solved. After a careful analysis, the problem is a little bit focused - the “boss” is not in place: Although the Village Group Act gives the villagers’ assembly the power to exercise democracy directly, most villages can not hold village meetings frequently, resulting in the loss of power and direct democracy In fact can not get through; according to the provisions of the village assembly will also be able to take over the power of the villagers’ meeting, but did not give it the right to exercise this right independently, but by the village director - was supervised