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.
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Swiftly following the conclusion of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) China trip, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled 10 new policy measures for Taiwan. The measures, covering youth exchanges, agricultural and fishery imports, resumption of certain flights and cultural and media cooperation, appear to offer “incentives” for cross-strait engagement. However, viewed within the political context, their significance lies not in promoting exchanges but in redefining who is qualified to represent Taiwan in dialogue with China. First, the policy statement proposes a “normalized communication mechanism” between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This would shift cross-strait interaction from