TECO Electric and Machinery Co has recently come under a lot of pressure because its chairman, Liu Chao-kai (劉兆凱), is the younger brother of Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄). As a result, the Bureau of National Health Insurance has decided not to renew its contract with TECO to make the National Health Insurance Card in view of the Civil Servants Conflict of Interest Prevention Act (公職人員利益迴避衝突法).
I could not help thinking about the concept of “original sin” and how this incident reflects the excessive attempts by some people to rectify problems. Do all government officials have to be people without parents, brothers or sisters and no family history? It seems so if they wish to stop people from being jealous and insulting them.
Looking to other countries, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) brother Lee Hsien-yang (李顯揚) remains chief executive officer of Singapore Telecommunications and continues to serve the public and help develop infrastructure. Jeb Bush, brother of US President George W. Bush, was governor of Florida while their other brother Neil Bush was a cofounder of an e-learning software company. The Bush brothers have served the public and been involved in business, maintaining a separation of public affairs and private benefits. Another example is Hong Kong: When Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) was chief executive, his father’s shipping company continued to operate, even on government business.
In Taiwan, however, there is the “sin” of family relations. A strange anti-business attitude lies behind the idea that the law shall be strictly adhered to, running counter to how business is done in other countries.
I would find it acceptable if the bureau wanted to change the manufacturers of the National Health Insurance Card because the cards were inferior or too expensive, or if they were only used by a minority of people so that a change of manufacturer did not affect the rights of 1.8 million people.
It is not acceptable, however, that the bureau switches manufacturers of the card simply because of a family relationship, because this involves not only changing a manufacturer, but also increasing social disruption and distrust and inflicting major losses on the public.
The health insurance cards are not manufactured by Liu Chao-kai alone. Has anyone considered the rights of the other employees? After having won a tender in accordance with the law and invested in materials and manpower, the company should not be asked to give it all up without compensation — whoever is more suitable should be doing the job. The bureau’s decision may avoid a minor conflict, but it damages overall public welfare. Wasting public resources because of family relationship makes everyone the loser.
On Aug. 1, a newspaper reported that 71.89 percent of business owners said business is worse this year than last year — foreign companies are leaving Taiwan and the information-technology (IT) industry is in a trough. If these companies can’t make money now, they are not likely to return later.
On Aug. 5, the stock price of seven IT companies ranged from NT$6 to NT$13.15. If the IT industry does not get the respect it deserves, if these companies are involved in public non-profit projects and if policies are issued and retracted on a whim, then how will they regain even a basic investment? Soon they will be left with nothing but international contract manufacturing.
If the government’s goal is to only look at the facts and look beyond the pan-green/pan-blue conflict, then society at large should also look only to the facts and not to family relationships.
Rosemary Ho is a former consultant for the Executive Yuan’s IT and Structural Reform Committee.
Translated by Drew Cameron and Perry Svensson
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS