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.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS