Yesterday’s argument over whether suit jackets should be worn in the comfort of an air-conditioned legislative chamber is interesting for reasons other than the alleged environmental benefits of taking them off.
The sight of KMT Legislator Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) humorlessly chiding Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) for keeping his suit jacket on and then getting into a verbal tussle with Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) marked another low point in the circus of ill manners and upside-down priorities that is this nation’s legislature.
The befuddled-looking premier didn’t have a good day. Accustomed to more civilized treatment in academic circles, Liu started the session with a rude and ridiculous pasting by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘).
Ker’s rude behavior was a typical and appalling example of the culture of lecturing and dominating Cabinet officials and ministers during question-and-answer sessions in committees and on the legislative floor.
It was ridiculous because Ker would not let Liu finish a single sentence before interrupting him with a new tirade of unanswerable questions.
This legislative behavior is a bipartisan disease, and it seems to have advanced to the point where a legislator who does not whine, pout, scream like a baby, shout people down, make threats, use exaggerated hand movements and put on a grotesquely uncouth and spoiled air will be considered by his colleagues to be a soft touch.
The legislative speaker has presided over this stupidity for too long for him not to be held partly responsible. With his complicity in legislative gridlock and the legislature’s lack of transparency under the previous government, Wang probably needs a general environment of boorishness for his inscrutability to look dignified in comparison.
Even so, the mayhem in the legislature seems to have mellowed in recent years, though when there were physical battles in the previous legislative term, such as when Wang was prevented from entering the chamber, the same old tendencies expressed themselves with gusto, to the disgust of anyone watching the proceedings.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was the model of courtesy — even under extreme and gratuitous provocation — when he was mayor of Taipei. Sadly, few of his KMT colleagues and just as small a number of DPP legislators see this as a positive feature of political life, even though it is quite clear that Ma’s professionalism in this regard had a role to play in his later electoral success.
Taiwan does not need a Chinese-style legislative environment in which a facade of polite and orderly speech masks a very different and frightening structure.
At the same time, defending democracy involves raising the standard of its basic practices.
When this can be achieved, any attempt to corrode democracy can be more effectively combated by a judicious, strong response in proportion to the provocation.
But until officials in both parties are prepared to address the legislature’s culture of boorishness, this is unlikely to change. The danger is that the dismal reputation of so many legislators will extend permanently to the legislature as an institution.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS