At 10pm on Tuesday, the government announced a major about-face in its policy on electricity rates. Rather than the initial plan that would have seen household electricity rates increase by an average of 16.9 percent, commercial rates by 39 percent and industrial rates by 35 percent from May 15, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) unveiled a scheme to implement the increase in phases.
There will be three stages, Ma said — 40 percent of the original increase on June 10 and 40 percent on Dec. 10, while the date when the remaining 20 percent increase is implemented depends on whether state-run Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) has presented an acceptable reform program to the government.
At first glance, it appears the Ma administration has heeded the public outcry over the rate increase and reacted responsibly by revising its policy.
However, a closer look suggests Ma remains as arrogant and callous toward the plight of the public as ever.
First, no single word of apology was offered throughout Ma’s statement over the government’s flip-flop.
As recently as two weeks ago, when defending what Ma then called the absolute necessity of sticking to the scheduled May 15 price increase, the president, in response to public criticism, said it was a result of people not understanding economics. Now that the government has made a major about-face, doesn’t the president at least owe the public an apology for having chided them for not understanding his so-called economics?
Second, the fact that not a single Cabinet official has shouldered responsibly for the government’s ill-conceived electricity policy highlights the arrogance of Ma and his administration.
Then there is the odd approach the Ma administration adopts in its dealings with the public. In an obvious attempt to assuage public anger, it has resorted to the tactic of giving the public “a discount.”
Ma outlined the policy change as if the government were doing the public a favor by opting not to make a one-time increase in the price of electricity.
The truth is that whether there is a one-time increase or a phased increase, the planned increase has already led to higher retail prices. In other words, the so-called revised policy does nothing to reduce the daily financial burden on the public.
Most significantly, Ma and the Cabinet have failed to provide the public with a convincing explanation as to why electricity prices must be increased. Saying that Taipower has accumulated losses of NT$132.2 billion (US$4.5 billion) as of the end of February is not a good enough reason to justify the increases.
If Ma is sincere about wanting to reduce people’s economic burden and conduct reform, he would have demanded that Taipower present a satisfactory reform plan by June 10, before deciding whether there should be an increase in electricity prices.
Many political observers have suggested that the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) embarrassing loss in the Lugang Township (鹿港) mayoral by-election in Changhua County on Saturday put pressure on the Ma administration, prompting it to revise its planned policy.
In light of Ma’s lack of sincerity when conducting reforms — evidenced by the fact that he failed to consider overhauling Taipower’s management structure before reaching into the public’s pockets to pay for the company’s losses — it looks like the pressure on the government is not enough.
The public must continue to push the government to formulate policies that are truly beneficial to the people.
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
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
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval