In a recent telephone interview with the BBC, I was asked about whether the "New DPP" reform movement of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was similar to that of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) "New KMT" movement, as both dragged their respective parties into a quagmire of internal division. I responded that it was normal for the DPP to be plagued with internal division, so this situation was different from the KMT.
Not long after this, President Chen Shui-bian (
Subsequently, with the backing of younger DPP lawmakers, a proposal for 10 major reforms proposed by the DPP legislative caucus was passed. The proposal added four more issues to the six reform priorities addressed by Chen during his Double Ten National Day speech this year. The four reforms are related to government-owned stock bonuses, payment for honorary government posts, dual monthly incomes of retired officials and legislative reform. Rumor has it that the DPP legislative caucus will establish 10 different taskforces to push forward these reforms. However, the direction of the DPP's reforms up to now has caused mixed feelings. The positive side is that we see that the DPP still has the motivation and impetus to carry out reform. The negative side is the public's suspicions about whether there is any meaning to these reforms and what benefits they will bring to the public.
The four additional reforms do not seem to be difficult to accomplish. For example, cutting the salary of national policy advisers and consultants to the president seems to be supported by lawmakers of both the ruling and opposition parties. Also, the goals of prohibiting retired officials from receiving a double income and establishing a system of providing government-owned stock bonuses in order to eradicate any illegal acquisition of money should not be difficult. Although these three draft reforms are considered as plausible and concrete in terms of social justice and administrative ethics, they are still not regarded as being fundamental structural reforms. As a result, problems remain and they cannot be solved by simply cutting paychecks.
It was very inappropriate for Chen to give only one media outlet his interview. What's worse is that in his capacity as president, Chen seemed grouchy and pushy throughout the interview and defended himself against accusations that he always rewards his henchmen by giving them government patronage. Chen even believes that there is nothing wrong with employing people such as former vice presidents as presidential advisers. However, the crux lies in how Chen structures his personnel. When Chen spoke of former vice presidents, he was probably referring to former vice president Lee Yuan-zu (
Even if Chen has quite a few national policy advisers and presidential advisers, it is unlikely that these people will be able to provide any advice. The recent resignation tendered by national policy adviser Huang Wen-hsiung (
Since the DPP came to power it has been in a predicament, for it is simply unable to map out national policy and implement it effectively. In terms of decision-making, Chen does not seem receptive to different ideas. Besides, there is still a lot of room for improvement in terms of important decisions made by the Executive Yuan, the DPP legislative caucus and the DPP itself. Since the Executive Yuan is in charge of mapping out government policy, it has to be responsible for all the government's failures.
The DPP legislative caucus should have had a dependable mechanism for formulating dec-isions rather than only serving as a rubber stamp for decisions made by the Presidential Office and the Executive Yuan. If a party is only hellbent on winning elections, it does not have to be responsible for government policy. However, the DPP is more than a electoral machine and the party should play a more active role in formulating national policy and should even seek to reach a consensus on policies of national importance, and check and balance those in power to bring about genuine reform.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a sociology professor at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY YA-TI LIN AND DANIEL CHENG
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US