On Aug. 24, in his weekly electronic letter, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) said that it was time the public directly expressed its opinion through a referendum to decide whether the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) should return its "stolen wealth" to the state.
It is quite understandable that some people, particularly pan-blue-camp supporters, think that Chen and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are doing this to divert attention from the ongoing anti-Chen movement.
However, there is no doubt that resolution of the KMT's assets is long overdue. If there is a truly non-partisan national issue, this is it.
A recent DPP survey found that 77.8 percent of respondents support the return of assets "stolen" by the KMT. Among pan-blue supporters, 70.9 percent shared this view.
Is it not crystal clear that there has been a general consensus on this issue for many years?
Unlike changing Taiwan's national title and the adoption of a new constitution, this is a domestic issue that does not affect the US' national interest. There is no reason to be concerned about possible interference from the US.
Why then have the Chen administration and the DPP not succeeded in taking advantage of the issue when even KMT leaders have realized that the party's wealth would be a burden?
If the pan-green camp had pushed hard enough for this issue to be resolved, the national coffers would have been boosted.
The KMT's own report released on Aug. 23 admitted to NT$80.8 billion (US$2.33 billion) in party assets when Lien Chan (連戰) took over as party chairman in 2000. But according to Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) ("Sloth and politics stop recovery of KMT assets," Sept. 3, page 8), the party greatly underestimated the number of its stolen assets.
In addition to benefiting the national treasury, the process of uncovering how the KMT amassed its wealth would have confirmed that the party is greedy and corrupt. Most importantly, the KMT's financial wings would have been clipped. The playing field would consequently have been made more level in the political contest between it and the DPP.
A more level playing field would also have been beneficial to the People First Party (PFP) in its competition with the KMT for the support of pan-blue voters. With this in mind, PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) at one time was ready to support a bill depriving the KMT of its assets.
According to a Taipei Times report on Aug. 25 ("KMT forms `assets response team,'" page 3), Soong challenged the KMT over its apparent failure to clarify which assets had been acquired illegally.
He also made it clear that the KMT should return the money to the public if any assets were acquired illegally. It is also important to point out that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
The same report said that there were prominent KMT members, such as Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (
For Hu, apparently, "votes are more important than money."
But there are other KMT members who have opposed making any concessions.
For example, KMT Legislator John Chiang (蔣孝嚴), on behalf of his grandfather Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and father Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), did not think that the KMT had to explain anything.
There is no doubt that much of the KMT's wealth has been used to subsidize candidates in elections, buy votes and arrange for perks and job offers for party members.
RSS