From the gas pipeline explosions in Greater Kaohsiung on July 31 and Aug. 1 to the unfolding waste oil scandal, Taiwan’s reputation is taking a real battering. The Shanghai municipal government has required all Taiwanese food products to be taken off the shelves, and other Chinese provincial-level cities are preparing to follow suit. We know we are in trouble when even China, which practically invented knockoffs and dodgy practices, is drawing the line when it comes to Taiwanese foodstuffs.
People are calling on officials — from local to central government, including the premier and the president — to resign. And so they should. After all, these officials have proven negligent, failing even to guarantee citizens the right to freedom from fear that the government is constitutionally beholden to do.
The problem is endemic to the system. There are no exceptions in government today, and it is all because the electorate have tolerated this, allowing this abomination of a government, this collection of officials with a distinctly odd way of looking at things. We can only blame ourselves. Activists and social movements proclaim the need to bring down the government, and yet the government ends up with more power and bigger budgets.
Whenever disaster strikes, governments are allocated special budgets, while negligent officials eschew responsibility, using taxpayers’ money to vent their own frustrations and enmities. How does this make sense?
The problem originates in the system by which elected public officials, government officials and civil servants are created. From the president at the top all the way down to contracted staff, it is hard to find someone who thinks like you and me. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), for example, has served two terms as Taipei mayor, and is now in his second term as president, but political pundit Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) nailed it when he said that Ma was a man obsessed, and that he should really seek treatment to be able to function properly. And yet Ma is the most powerful man in the country.
As the nine-in-one elections draw near, the candidate that seems the most normal is Neil Peng (馮光遠), who is running for Taipei mayor and is no stranger to controversy in his day job. The others, who usually come across as civilized and refined, have not emerged too well from the grueling election process. Not many have been able to retain their normality.
All I want is to be able to vote for a normal person, but how does one identify who is “normal”? I have a friend who made a wrong turn somewhere and ended up working in government. Less than six months into the job, my friend told me that, without exception, each and every one of the career civil servants who had passed the Examination Yuan tests was not quite right in the head and was guaranteed to mess up anything they were given to do. The only solution would be to outsource or to contract the tasks out, or find temps to do the work instead.
I once chanced upon several Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials buying breakfast at a food stall outside the legislature. I asked them how they could tell whether it was safe to eat the egg rolls served there. They laughed and said that I was just like everyone else, and that one would not get ill by eating this stuff, no matter how unhygienic it was.
When he assumed the post of FDA director-general, Yeh Ming-kung (葉明功) told a press conference that he avoids eating oily, salty food at home. Reading between the lines, we are now in the midst of a pork lard scandal, but may look forward to revelations about soy sauce, salad oil and peanut oil among others.
All Cabinet officials and career civil servants have a doctorate. Whenever one of these innocuous, reliable professors comes into the light, nobody questions their field knowledge. The problem lies in their mentality and their lack of common sense. Knowledge is a great thing, but it can be misapplied. Our mothers brought us up by dint of common sense on how to raise a child. The vast majority of mothers cannot boast a doctorate, and yet they did perfectly well by us.
It is not specialist knowledge that keeps society together, it is a consensus forged through common sense. When these officials are forced out of office, they retreat to a university teaching position. This is how the connivance between politics and academia in Taiwan is bred, and it is also how the universities produce more academics and officials with a strange mindset.
With all the dodgy food products on the market, which company does not have ISO 9000, ISO 14000, ISO 22000, HACCP, GMP or CAS accreditation? What do these letters and code numbers actually mean in Taiwan? Most people think national accreditation is a guarantee of quality, but the awarding of these codes is all kept in the family. Civil servants neglect their obligations, and after they retire they not only milk the public purse with perks like the 18 percent preferential interest rate on their pensions, they continue to act as parasites by becoming chairperson of an accreditation body.
Behind all these inspections and accreditation awards lie official corruption and academic connivance, together with a skewed mindset. Shady forces are undoubtedly at work in how accreditations are awarded.
Jay Fang is chairman of the Green Consumers’ Foundation.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with