Print

Mail

wiki links

Lawmakers must learn to accept criticism

‘The legislature would become a more civilized place if lawmakers adjusted their attitude.’

A few days ago, Citizen Congress Watch held its first legislator evaluation conference, attracting delegates from academia, social groups and the media . Ahead of the conference, there was an explanatory meeting and delegates were given many documents to read. At the conference itself, they compared the overall performance of the legislature’s eight standing committees and the behavior of individual legislators. Discussion was animated but participants adhered strictly to the agenda, with no political manipulation and no predetermined standpoints.

The participants felt the conference had been a good example of deliberative democracy, and that they had done their duty as citizens by keeping an eye on our elected representatives.

However, once the results of the evaluation were announced, some lawmakers who scored poorly reacted strongly, vilifying Citizen Congress Watch and the conference delegates. This reaction was not unexpected. One purpose for the conference was for legislators to learn to deal with public oversight.

If lawmakers can’t accept oversight, do they think it would be alright for government officials to refuse to be scrutinized by the legislature? The legislature would become a more civilized place if lawmakers adjusted their attitude.

It took three months to organize the conference, with academics and experts working out the evaluation criteria, and dozens of volunteers who worked day and night to collect and compile background data. It took thousands of hours of work to prepare for the conference.

Unfortunately the conference workers were so busy that, in working out basic scores for the legislators, they omitted the “legislative reform pledge” signed and faxed in at the last moment by Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅), which affected his score. As soon as the error was discovered, Citizen Congress Watch issued an apology and accepted full responsibility. It also announced that in future it would triple check facts before making any announcement.

Politicians, however, should demand of themselves the same willingness to admit and learn from mistakes, instead of stubbornly denying any wrongdoing.

The experience of this conference has shown that the assessment criteria drawn up by Citizen Congress Watch were more suitable for long-term monitoring, since it is not easy to generate fair scores based on short-term performance. We will need to adjust our criteria and methods so that the people being assessed will be more willing to accept the results.

In Taiwan’s political climate, any public activity that touches on politics runs the risk of being classified as either “blue” or “green,” with nothing in between, instead of being judged objectively. Unless things change, rational discussion in the public domain will remain out of reach.

While humbly accepting the criticisms that have been laid against us, we at Citizen Congress Watch hope our critics will not resort to unfair labeling of the legislature, because without such monitoring the “legislative monster” will become more lawless, and the public the main victims.



Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizen Congress Watch

TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
This story has been viewed 853 times.