News this week that the presidential “state affairs fund” may increase by a third next year likely raised a few eyebrows, and for a number of reasons.
The announcement flew in the face of public opinion. It also ignored the debate over the fund’s lack of transparency and the risk of abuse resulting from ambiguous regulation and inadequate oversight. Furthermore, the Presidential Office’s motivation for boosting the fund — to help disadvantaged groups — seemed contrived and illogical.
Long after the controversy erupted over the presidential state affairs fund and the special allowances that come with senior government positions, the hope of reform has dwindled. Not surprisingly, Taiwan’s politicians are uninterested in changing a comfortable system that has benefited them for decades.
To sober observers, however, it is clear that this reimbursement system, born under a dictatorship, is a relic within Taiwan’s democratic transformation.
Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) has confirmed a report that it is seeking legislative approval to increase the fund from NT$30 million (US$913,000) to NT$40 million. The fund was NT$50 million for 24 years until 2007, when it was slashed to NT$30 million amid corruption allegations against then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his family.
The Presidential Office’s statement — that the funds were needed to support marginalized groups not covered by current government programs — was ambiguous. It is not clear what Ma intends to spend the money on, while gaps in the government’s welfare net should be addressed by revamping whatever programs the office was referring to.
As it stands, the public has little reason to believe that misuse of these funds and questionable accounting practices have changed in the past few years. Short of making the system transparent — President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) had proposed posting a weekly online report detailing the presidential fund’s use — taxpayers can only hope that a fear of being exposed will keep officials in check. But the public may be forgiven if they do not have much faith in the consciences of officials as agents of restraint.
Unfortunately, Ma’s proposal for an online report, made to Transparency International, has not materialized. Implementing the idea could be a first push toward reform, backing calls for better legislation and stricter oversight of other officials’ special funds.
The Presidential Office’s announcement came just one day before news that three former minor secretaries to Ma during his terms as Taipei mayor had been granted deferred prosecution over shady accounting. Wu Li-ju (吳麗洳), Liu Jin-jung (劉靜蓉) and Hsu Yu-mei (徐玉美) have admitted to forging paperwork detailing non-existent employee bonuses to account for fund reimbursements and have said the practice was nothing new. They will not be indicted in the next three years, however, and could even be spared prosecution after that.
Ma’s secretary, Yu Wen (余文), who was sentenced to 12 months in prison, was not as fortunate.
Ma was indicted in the same case as Yu. Although he conceded to wiring millions of NT dollars from his mayoral fund directly into family accounts, the court said he didn’t break the law. The question is whether the public approves of a system that allows officials to wire public funds into personal bank accounts.
The decision two years ago to cut back the state affairs fund was a welcome gesture, though hardly sufficient to quell concerns about the fund. To justify an increase now, the Presidential Office will not only have to make a better case for why the money is needed, it will have to introduce safeguards to ensure that the funds are spent in the public interest.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS