Over the last week, local politics has been the hottest topic in Taiwan. Several opinion polls have shown that the approval ratings of Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) have dropped and that his chances don’t look too good for the upcoming elections because of recent procurement scandals surrounding the Taipei International Flora Expo and the Xinsheng Overpass reconstruction project. Some people have even urged Hau to withdraw from the election.
CommonWealth magazine recently released the results of a survey rating 25 mayors and county commissioners. The results showed that the top six spots were occupied by mayors and commissioners belonging to the pan-green camp, while the bottom 12 positions were occupied by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) incumbents. While opinion polls are not elections, they are a reflection of voter sentiment.
The opinions about local leaders reflected in these polls conform to democratic common sense, reflect public sentiment and, as such, are important.
There are individual and unique reasons why mayors and commissioners have different levels of approval. However, t that the opinion poll results were so uniform is clearly a reflection of the direction of mainstream public opinion. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) sees this as reaffirmation that the public feels that a pan-green government is a guarantee for good quality governance and that they are more capable at ruling than the KMT. In comparison, these approval ratings have become a source of embarrassment for the KMT, which is now complaining of unfair treatment, and the Taipei City Government, which has conceded it may not have been so good at marketing itself. The Taipei County Government, ranking last, says it “cannot understand the poll results.”
It is clear that the view that the KMT is better able to govern was a misconception that has now been proven wrong. From the national level down to the local level, the KMT is unwilling to face public opinion and now finds itself coming up with various excuses to defend itself.
The above-mentioned approval ratings of mayors and county commissioners should be interpreted based on democratic common sense. In other words, the main reason DPP mayors and commissioners perform better is that in most localities, the ruling DPP is in a minority while the KMT is in the majority. Regardless of whether the DPP is in charge, they are in a minority on the city and county councils in all the 25 cities and counties, which means that the KMT controls all these local councils. The administrations of pan-green mayors and county commissioners are thus subject to strict monitoring and the party — which still hasn’t reached its 25th year of existence — has never controlled the courts or the media.
As a result, it must remain cautious and never become lazy. That is why — regardless of whether it is dealing with public interests or local development issues — DPP leaders manage to meet public demands and fulfill their responsibilities. In comparison, the KMT, with their control over the local councils, is rarely subject to checks and balances from popular institutions or the media. Over time, this has distanced the party from the public, thereby creating a rift between its policies and public expectations.
Appropriate checks and balances make a democracy more effective, while a lack of them leads to political irregularities. Based on this democratic reasoning, it is not hard to understand Hau’s current behavior. Taipei City is viewed as a pan-blue stronghold, the city has been ruled by KMT mayors for the last 12 years, they have all won with a large margin, and the pan-blue camp controls the city council — this has made the Hau administration feel that its re-election is a matter of course. With such a government, it is very easy for problems like administrative bureaucracy, arrogance, incompetence and corruption to rear their ugly heads.
After Hau came into office, there have been problems with the Maokong Gondola, the Wenhu MRT Line, the Xinsheng Overpass reconstruction, the bicycle path along Dunhua Road, the road-repaving project and even the recently installed cylinder-shaped bus stop signs.
These inconveniences to the public are a waste of public funds and a major source of public discontent. In the scandal surrounding the Flora Expo, the public has seen how government officials freely spend public funds while ignoring standard procurement procedures. As soon as something goes wrong, senior officials, including the deputy mayor, have responded with arrogance, stubborn arguments and with distorting facts, and have even threatened to take legal action against those who reveal the irregularities. Our great mayor never knows anything about these incidents or is the last one to find out. This makes one wonder how long Taipei residents will be able to put up with this.
It must be stressed that such developments occurring on the local level are also happening, but on an even worse scale, in the central government. It was only because the KMT won the presidential election by a large majority and holds a two-thirds legislative majority, and because President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) promised “full authority and full responsibility” that voters gave the KMT such a huge responsibility.
However, it was not because the DPP administration did poorly, but because voters were tired of the infighting resulting from the then-KMT opposition’s control of the legislature that hampered national governance. Without sufficient checks and balances, the Ma administration and its incompetence and arrogance is destroying the economy, causing democracy to regress and kicking national defense to the backburner. They have used the goodwill of voters as an excuse to issue pro-China policies, while the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) is a piece of one-party legislation placing the Republic of China in an extremely precarious position even within its own borders. These are the real reasons behind Ma’s low approval ratings.
The direction of public opinion as reflected in these opinion polls is in line with common sense. Beginning with the upcoming special municipality elections, Taiwanese must express their opinions with their ballots. The day when voters express their opinion is the day when Taiwanese democracy will enter a new level of maturity.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers