On Monday, the dispute between Taipei City Hall and the National Health Insurance Bureau over the government subsidy for national health insurance premiums took a a surprising new twist: the Supreme Administrative Court ruled in favor of Taipei City Hall. The dispute has stemmed from City Hall's refusal to pay the bureau NT$10.8 billion (US$325 million) of overdue insurance premiums on the grounds that the city should not be obligated to subsidize the insurance premiums of those individuals whose registered residence is outside the city.
The bureau's position, on the other hand, is that City Hall is obliged to subsidize those who are insured through employers located within the boundaries of Taipei City, regardless of where their household registration is.
The ruling on Monday came as a surprise because both of the two previous rulings entered by lower courts had found in favor of the bureau. At the time, many were disappointed with City Hall's decision to appeal those rulings, believing that Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Of course, Monday's ruling is far from the end of the feud. The National Health Insurance Bureau wasted no time in responding and has already indicated that it will file a request for a constitutional interpretation with the Council of Grand Justices to overturn Monday's ruling.
All eyes are now focused on this legal dispute, because the final outcome of this case will determine not only whether Taipei City Hall will need to pay the NT$10.8 billion in premiums to the bureau, but also whether the bureau will need to collect a substantial chunk of the outstanding premiums from other local governments.
If Monday's ruling is upheld by the Council of Grand Justices, it will bring chaos to the national health insurance scheme, and could lead to a serious financial crisis for both the central government and the National Health Insurance Bureau. It is no secret that the central government has been running at a serious financial deficit over the past few years. If it has to shoulder an even greater percentage of the subsidy, surely there will be serious ramifications for other social and welfare programs sponsored and financed by the central government. If the central government cannot pay the bureau, the nearly bankrupt bureau's ability to continue operating will be jeopardized.
It is noteworthy that Kaohsiung City -- like Taipei City, a special municipality -- has opted to take an entirely different approach in dealing with its large sum of outstanding premiums. Kaohsiung City Hall has chosen to sell off some of the real estate and land it owns in order to pay off the debt, as well as negotiate a five-year payment plan with the bureau. This is obviously a much more responsible way of dealing with the issue at hand -- especially when compared with Taipei.
Ultimately, no matter whether the city hall or the central government subsidies the premiums, the taxpayers of Taiwan will have to pick up the tab. So instead of passing this financial hot potato on to the central government or dragging its feet in making the payment, Kaohsiung City Hall has decided to tackle the problem head on, and in a mature manner.
Back in Taipei, it is widely believed that Ma has his heart set on running for the presidency in the 2008 election. One cannot help but wonder how he will deal with financial crises or problems if he gets elected. Shoving problems into the central government's lap will no longer be an option, since that would be political suicide.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS