President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) constantly compares himself with his predecessor and there’s nothing he likes to do more than spout figures. In an attempt to demonstrate just how frugal he is, he has said before that since he resolved to save money in four areas — fuel usage, electricity, water and paper — four years ago, the Presidential Office has made annual savings of more than NT$7 million (US$233,600). It is not about how much it is, he says, it is about the message it gives out. “I am cutting down on spending public money,” he says.
Of course, frugality is a virtue and is certainly commendable. It is, though, the duty of government officials of all ranks to keep a rein on spending public money. And this is how it should be. It is just that, while Ma blathers on about how much he is saving on utility bills here and how many millions of NT dollars he is saving there, and how hugely significant all this is, somebody needs to remind him not to measure the office of Republic of China (ROC) president by Ma the man.
Someone of his stature should not be dwelling on mundane issues such as minor savings in the Presidential Office or Chunghsing Apartment (中興寓所), his official residence. As president of the nation, he should be focusing on major national policy and what is good for the country.
He seems more concerned, however, with comparing himself with former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) on who was more thrifty with the public purse. Let us make that comparison, then.
First, Ma had been harping on about having the same bed for the past 30 years, wearing suits until they fall apart, getting his sports and formal shoes repaired time after time and never throwing out a perfectly good pair of swimming trunks.
Hold on, what does all that have to do with public funds?
Those are personal items that he should be paying out for anyway.
They should not come under the special allowance fund for government chiefs or the state affairs fund. The amount of public funds being saved from all this is precisely zero.
Second, it is true that Ma spends tens of thousands of dollars less than Chen did on utility bills at the Chunghsing Apartment residence every year. However, Ma uses the special presidential swimming pool every day and that amasses a substantial water and electricity bill.
Do we know how much more public funds he spends on this every year compared with Chen?
Third, is it not true that the presidential salary comes under public expenditure?
When Chen took office he had his own salary reduced by half. Ma said that he would cut his own salary if he failed to achieve his “6-3-3” goals of 6 percent annual economic growth, an annual per capita income of US$30,000 and unemployment of less than 3 percent in his first term.
He did not do that. It was another bounced check that he refused to honor. He did, however, help himself to a pay raise of NT$13,869 a month in July last year, which actually increased the relative spending of public finances on the presidential salary from NT$2.77 million a year under Chen to NT$2.94 million.
Is the State Affairs Fund not also paid for by the taxpayer? Ma has virtually spent the NT$40 million it sets aside each year. On this count, Chen spent NT$10 million less of public money every year than Ma. On health and medical expenses, Chen spent NT$14,000 a year; Ma has spent more than NT$500,000 a year. Again, Chen saved more public money than Ma, to the tune of NT$486,000.
Another way to measure how careful the two presidents were is by examining the budgets for public construction projects. When Chen was in office, Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) reserve capacity was kept at 16 percent. In the four years since Ma has taken office, this figure has jumped to above 20 percent. On this count, more than NT$40 billion worth of public money a year has been wasted relative to Chen’s time in office.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) originally budgeted over NT$500 billion for National Highway No. 3, but under Chen it was completed, ahead of schedule, for only NT$240 billion, representing a saving of more than NT$260 billion of taxpayers’ money. The KMT set aside NT$400 billion and NT$150 billion respectively for the Datan (大潭) power station and the Keelung River flood prevention project. Under Chen, these were completed at a cost of only NT$110 billion and NT$32 billion respectively, creating collective savings in excess of NT$400 billion.
Which of the major public construction projects started under Ma were completed in line with their budget?
Even worse, national debt rose more during Ma’s first term in office than it did in the eight years that Chen was in power.
If you want to know who saved the most money for the country, you need look no further than the figures.
However, figures are a bit of a touchy subject in Taiwan at the moment. International oil prices have fallen from the stratospheric heights reached in 2008, having decreased by over US$30 per barrel since that period. Also, the NT dollar is quite strong at the moment. And yet, under Ma’s “wise” leadership, domestic fuel prices keep rising, setting record highs. The average income for Taiwanese, in real terms, is back to the level it was 15 years ago. The price of daily necessities is skyrocketing and both the poverty gap and unemployment rate are increasing at an alarming rate. At the same time, the value of exports has fallen for five months in a row. The promised 4 percent economic growth rate had to be adjusted to a guaranteed 3 percent to a definite 2 percent and now stands at 1.66 percent. These figures do not paint a very pretty picture.
Is it wrong to use them to judge the achievements of Ma’s time in office?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor of National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past