Even before President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) move against Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said he was ready for “a legislature without Wang Jin-pyng.” However, just as was the case in 2008, when Ma ran an election campaign advertisement saying “we are ready,” Ma is not ready. As a result, his approval ratings have dropped to the lowest for any Taiwanese president.
The case against Wang is his alleged improper lobbying, but Ma has refused him any opportunity to defend himself. This makes it clear that the accusations are simply an excuse. Ma’s motivation is to gain control over the legislature, so that he can enforce his own will and policies.
The Presidential Office and the Cabinet have long complained that a lack of legislative efficiency hinders policy implementation. Both institutions are also unhappy that Wang has been unwilling to call on police to break opposition blockades. In addition, they feel that Wang’s slow consultation procedure has reduced the government’s efficiency. Eliminating Wang is considered necessary to quickly settle issues surrounding the service trade agreement, the commercial operations of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市), and the reform of the retirement pension system for public school teachers.
The legislature will be able to function without Wang, but his speakership has been notable for a particular approach. He is a gentle and warm person who will not entertain hostilities, and he is willing to communicate and assist people. He does not want brawls and clashes in the legislature and he wants time to give an issue his full consideration so the right decision is made. He feels that spending time and effort on negotiations is the way to move forward.
He also insists on the dignity of the legislature and will not call in police because he does not want outside forces to become involved in legislative disputes. After Wang’s 14 years as speaker, it has become increasingly rare to see violence in the legislature, although lawmakers still get into scuffles or forcibly occupy the podium.
Ma might be able to arrange it so that a more obedient legislator becomes speaker if Wang has to step down, but the atmosphere and attitude on the legislative floor would change drastically. In past conflicts, legislators from both the governing and the opposition parties have asked Wang to conduct party-to-party talks. His effective facilitation would be missed.
Wang has rarely been a target in scuffles because of the respect he has earned. If he has to step down, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators might be unwilling to come to a new speaker’s aid and opposition lawmakers might have less restraint. This could result in the speaker being bruised in a scuffle and deciding to call in police, which could lead to further violence and a deteriorating atmosphere that would slow down the legislative process even more.
The legislature is an image of society in miniature, and legislators are a reflection of the citizenry. The legislative problems will not go away just because there is a new sheriff in town.
The Ma administration should engage in some self-reflection. As long as the Cabinet treats the legislature as a rubber stamp for Cabinet policies and otherwise ignores it, there should not be any surprise that the lawmaking process takes so long.
After five years in power, Ma still has not had any meetings to communicate with the leaders of the opposition parties. How can he hope for easy solutions to major political problems?
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs