At a time when the world is concerned about global warming, when the government is pushing energy conservation and reduced carbon emissions, media reports showed that Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Philip Yang (楊永明) racked up an electricity bill of more than NT$20,000 at his 130m2 residence for July/August. This is many times more than an average family would use. It seems that the man in charge of announcing the government’s policy on the environment is setting a rather bad example.
In his defense, Yang said he had a young child at home and needed to have the air conditioning on all day. He then criticized the press for writing that he was “harming Taiwan” by wasting electricity. The GIO followed this by bringing out records of previous agency heads, pointing out that GIO chiefs when the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was in power also had high electricity bills.
The press dug deeper. Some media reports said that the July/August bill the year before last for the residence of Greater Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) was as much as NT$120,000. And if you think that was high, how about the bills run up by former premier Liu Chao-shiuan’s (劉兆玄) residence, which topped NT$300,000. Of course, one must remember that these bills included electricity used by their respective retinues.
These astronomical bills have roused the ire of the public. It takes some gall to bang on in public about the importance of conserving energy only to waste it in private. Worse still, these officials are not even paying for it: The taxpayer is.
That’s not to say that the individuals singled out here are the worst offenders. By the same token, just because someone has not been named does not mean they are not just as wasteful; it simply means that their records have not been made public. However, putting aside the actual figures for a minute and how they compare with the average bill of NT$3,000 paid by ordinary households, the most striking thing about this is how widespread the phenomenon seems to be.
Even though the story of the astronomical bills has just broken and senior officials have been found to be saying one thing and doing another, some good has already come of it. The universal public condemnation has obliged Yang to apologize and to look into the cause of these excessive bills. Apparently it was because of old equipment in the building, something which has now been addressed.
Yang missed an opportunity here. He should have apologized to the public and investigated the problem instead of dragging others into the fray. It would have been perfect if he had used his own experience to promote policy. He could have reminded the public of the importance of checking their electrical equipment and not being lured into the false economy of not buying the latest model. Old equipment laps up electricity at an astonishing rate, which makes it important to upgrade. He could have turned the situation around for himself quite easily and better promoted energy conservation.
These electricity bills have also caught the attention of the Control Yuan, which has decided to launch a comprehensive review. Senior officials with energy-inefficient households and officials or public institutions who fritter away taxpayers’ money may well find themselves on the wrong side of the Control Yuan’s attention.
However, it would be even better if the government set a standard for amenities usage levels, and required any officials or institutions that exceed these standards to foot the bill themselves. Why should the taxpayer have to bear the brunt of official excesses and abuses?
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited
Tokyo-Beijing relations have been rapidly deteriorating over the past two weeks as China tries to punish Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks about Taiwan earlier this month, and the off-ramp to this conflict is yet to be seen. Takaichi saying that a “Taiwan contingency” could cause a “situation threatening Japan’s survival” — which would allow Japan to act in self-defense — has drawn Beijing’s ire and sparked retaliatory measures. Her remark did not gain public attention until Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) made an apparent threat to behead her. The two sides lodged protests against each