Both the ruling party and the opposition have been manipulating procedures to block each other's legislative bills. The pan-blue camp uses its majority in the Procedure Committee to block bills proposed by the Executive Yuan, thereby keeping them out of the legislative agenda. Meanwhile, the green camp retaliates with the "reconsideration" process.
Thanks to this mutual destruction, none of the bills passed by the Fifth Legislative Yuan since its inception almost a year ago are major public-goods or reform laws.
After the media criticizes the legislature's fruitless operations, lawmakers from the two sides would start another war of words blaming each other and further ensuring the legislature's status as the source of chaos.
The boycott methods employed by the current opposition camp are neither as dexterous nor fierce as those employed by the DPP before the first full-scale legislative elections in 1992.
At that time, the DPP similarly blocked legislative procedures just for the sake of opposing the ruling KMT, but for doing this the DPP was able to gain the image of a reform advocate.
In contrast, the KMT is now simply viewed as a troublemaker. The reasons behind this are misuse of the methods and the lack of a correct understanding of the political situation.
Solid doctrine
First of all, no matter what methods the DPP adopted for resistance, it had a complete set of political concepts and propaganda. Take for example the abolishment of Article 100 of the Criminal Code. The DPP caucus made an announcement clearly stating that it would refuse to negotiate and would reject all budget and legislative bills until Article 100 was abolished. (The article proscribes punishments for dissent and subversion.)
After that goal was achieved, the DPP caucus immediately showed goodwill and a harmonious atmosphere emerged during that session. The backlog of bills was then cleared. The issues under contention were clearly defined, as were the different layers of strategies. Principles regarding when to stand firm and when to let go were also followed.
In contrast, ever since it became an opposition party more than two years ago, the KMT has uniformly boycotted all bills and policies that have to do with President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) political platform. The KMT does not publicize an all-round set of political concepts, nor does it have any proper alternative proposals. Naturally, the public will feel that the KMT is obstructing the ruling party and opposing everything that has to do with Chen.
In the past, the KMT controlled a majority in the legislature and therefore was still able to push important bills through despite the opposition. The DPP was also able to respond according to the circumstances, making appropriate concessions on some issues and demonstrating a willingness to consider the country's interests.
Today, however, the DPP does not have a majority in the legislature, and the Procedure Committee is controlled by the pan-blue camp. As a result, major legislative bills do not even have a chance to be voted upon on the legislative floor. Certainly, one reason for this is the ruling party's mistakes in its governance strategies, but the KMT-controlled Procedure Committee cannot shirk the blame for putting the legislative car in neutral.
Some of the bills currently frozen at the Procedure Committee are aimed at implementing Chen's election promises, but there are a larger number of reform bills planned and formulated during the KMT era.
The KMT discussed and listed those bills as important policies when it was in power, but now that political power has changed hands, the KMT is not even giving those bills a chance to be discussed.
It is only right and proper for an opposition party to oppose the ruling party's policies. If the KMT wants to strike down the DPP's policies, it can righteously put them through policy debate and a vote on the legislative floor. Using its head-count advantage in the Procedure Committee to block the Executive Yuan's important reform bills out of the agenda amounts to abuse a loophole in the legislature's internal rules.
The emperor's father
This has made the Procedure Committee something of an emperor's father -- the legislature's overlord. A loophole in the internal rules can deprive important proposals of a chance to be put on the agenda and reviewed. This is deprivation of the right to propose legislation as stipulated in the Constitution. It is also anathema to the democratic procedure.
The results of the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral elections appear to show that public support for the KMT has stopped falling and started rising again. However, the falling public satisfaction with the DPP's performance does not appear to have translated into support for the KMT. Apparently, the public is disappointed with the DPP but they have are not looking to KMT leadership either.
This is a result of the KMT's strategic mistakes in the legislature. If the KMT merely hopes to unify the pan-blue parties and retake power, the pan-blue camp may still split and lose power once again. On the political stage of the legislature, the KMT should play the role of a pillar and help the DPP push through key legislation. Only then can the KMT win back the people's hearts and have a chance to rule the country again.
Perhaps the KMT is worried that the passage of important bills will help improve Chen's track record and make it difficult for the party to take back power in 2004. However, Chen's strong performance and a high public approval rating during his Taipei mayorship did not prevent his defeat by Ma Ying-jeou (
Apparently a strong performance record does not necessarily guarantee re-election. If the pan-blue parties work together and come up with outstanding candidates, they still stand a chance to win back power. Whatever selflessness they demonstrate now by helping with important legislation will translate into an opportunity to realize their grand ambitions at another time.
Another possible scenario is that the DPP may still be unable to improve its performance even after those legislative reform and budget bills are passed. In that case, the ruling party would no longer be able to blame it on the opposition's obstructionism. It would lose the people's hearts even without KMT propaganda. By doing its job properly, the KMT can have the president's seat in its pocket even without cooperating with the PFP.
A gridlock at the legislature means mutual destruction for the ruling and opposition parties. If the situation continues to deteriorate, the KMT would be merely inheriting a big mess if it wins back power. It would also face retaliation in the form of numerous obstacles to its rule.
For the sake of the country's long-term interests, and in preparation for future KMT rule, the party should rationally evaluate which bills will be needed by future governments, and unfreeze them from the Procedure Committee so that the legislation can be reviewed and completed. This is the only wise approach.
Jan Shou-jung is a legislative assistant.
Translated by Francis Huang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry