The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) last week called the bluff of its pan-blue rival People First Party (PFP) over its threats to topple the Cabinet.
Forty-six DPP lawmakers, sick of the legislative mess and the opposition blocking several important bills -- most notably the government's budget for this year, already six months overdue -- called on the PFP to put its money where its mouth is, with predictable results.
This means that the deadlock that has afflicted the legislature over the last seven years is likely to continue until the legislature is finally dissolved ahead of December's elections.
The new electoral system that will make its debut in December will change the landscape in the legislature, with half the current crop of lawmakers set to lose their jobs.
But even if the PFP is deservedly eradicated, the nation could still face the possibility of yet further gridlock.
The DPP's ability to appeal to the electorate's Taiwan consciousness could very well see its candidate Frank Hsieh (
The outcome of retaining the executive-legislative status quo would likely be at least a further three years of legislative stalemate, bickering and shoe-throwing.
This is a very unappealing prospect indeed and may well re-ignite debate on changing the nation's political system.
As it stands, Taiwan's oddball semi-presidential political system -- which was never a problem during the four decades of one-party rule by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) -- has proven a serious obstacle to effective government during President Chen Shui-bian's (
The standoff we have seen over the last few years, with the DPP in the Presidential Office and the pan-blues holding a majority in the Legislative Yuan, has been the best possible advertisement for a parliamentary system -- where the leader of the party with a majority becomes the premier or prime minister and there is no rigorous separation of the executive and legislative branches of government.
Certainly a parliamentary system allows legislation to be passed more efficiently than the existing system.
The irony about the debate on switching to a parliamentary system is that it is the side with the most to lose -- the DPP and its pro-independence allies -- who are the main advocates; the pan-blues remain firmly opposed to further constitutional change.
It's hard to understand why, because as things stand under a parliamentary system, the pan-blues would have a legislative majority and control of the executive.
For some strange reason they seem content to sit out the remainder of Chen's term, almost arrogant in their belief that they will be returned to power next year.
But complacency can be risky.
That is a lesson the pan-blues should have learned in 2004.
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
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
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
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