During the DPP's Ninth National Congress meeting, President Chen Shui-bian (
At the present time, the DPP has executive power, but it is severely constrained by its lack of legislative power. The DPP has faced frequent and deliberate opposition boycotts. Many policy proposals have therefore become the focus of battles of words between the parties. Bills have often either been approved in a peremptory manner or viciously voted down out of rage. The national budgets were reduced in an irrational manner. All these, together, have become obstacles to policy implemen
tation.
Chen and DPP members therefore hope that the DPP will have an opportunity to lead the legislature, thereby facilitating the implementation of its policies. The DPP is not, however, in a position to win a legislative majority. That is why the president proposes cross-party alliances. Others have gone as far as to call for a joint Cabinet.
While a joint Cabinet is certainly one option to be considered, it is not the only option. In fact as a DPP member or supporter, one should not even broach the subject at this stage. I believe the president simply hopes that the DPP will strengthen cooperation with non-DPP groups. These could include any party. It doesn't matter who takes charge; cooperation is to be encouraged if it helps policy implementation, brings back rationality, and involves individuals holding the same ideals. As for whether the cooperation is to take the form of a joint Cabinet or to remain simply at the inter-party level, that depends. It is not something to be decided in advance.
Inside the DPP, a joint Cabinet remains merely a topic of discussion. Some people outside the party, however, have begun talking about the pre-conditions for a joint Cabinet, and speculating that the DPP's motive is to divide the opposition, when in fact placing too much emphasis on a joint Cabinet will not help the DPP.
One problem with just talk is that voters may think it indicates a lack of confidence on the part of the DPP in its ability to perform well in the elections. Secondly, it would cause DPP members to lose faith in the party. In the end, the DPP would become unable to distinguish itself from other political parties. One-sided wishful thinking by the DPP about a joint Cabinet, therefore, would create a crisis. We should not underestimate the potential damage.
A joint Cabinet can become a reality only when all the parties involved agree on it. The parties have talked about a reconciliation for a long time, yet the standoff remains. No one trusts one another. No one is willing to take a back seat. It is too early, therefore, to even begin talking about a joint Cabinet. Attempts to put together a joint Cabinet right now will only create unnecessary political instability and generate more suspicion among the parties. It is okay to treat the issue as a topic of leisurely discussion, and an option in the future reorganization of the Cabinet.
As for different issue-specific alliances among the parties, we should learn to perceive them as the norm. Last year's presidential election took place in a backdrop with such alliances. If we become too serious about a joint Cabinet, the greater the expectation, the greater the disappointment. It will facilitate neither the government's ability to implement policy nor any reconciliation between the parties.
Yen Chin-fu is a DPP lawmaker.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS