A year ago, the government launched the National Development Council to better meet the nation’s economic needs. By merging the Council for Economic Planning and Development, the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission, as well as parts of the Public Construction Commission, the new council represents six decades of organizational evolution for the nation’s top economic policymaking organ, so it should be able to achieve greater efficiency in economic planning.
Wrong. The review of a draft bill governing the establishment of free economic pilot zones — which the development council has geared up for implementation to help boost private investment and create jobs in Taiwan — has progressed rather slowly in the Legislative Yuan over the past year. In addition, if one takes into consideration the results of the Nov. 29 nine-in-one elections — which showed the general public’s “deep dissatisfaction toward the government,” in the words of National Development Council Minister Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) last week, the bill is not likely to be passed before next year’s presidential and legislative elections.
That is in part why Kuan tendered his resignation on Thursday last week, even though he recently made headlines by gaining the approval of Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for the council’s planned cluster of business startups in the Taipei Expo Park. In his resignation statement issued on Thursday night, Kuan said he decided to step down because he had sensed people’s discontent and impatience with the current political and economic situation.
Political observers have quickly pointed out that frustration over the legislative process was the main reason behind Kuan’s resignation. Some commentators have also said several former ministers quit jobs in President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) adminstration because they had been hampered by lawmakers’ efforts to block important economic projects, but are these resignations really connected to legislative gridlock over controversial bills or the personal attributes of individual officials?
Critics and government watchdog groups have long suggested one simple, straightforward idea for government officials pushing forward controversial bills: Move the policymaking process out of the back room and into the light of day, allowing the public access to information through transparent practices, and making it easier to hold ministers and legislators to account. On the other hand, Financial Supervisory Commission Chairman William Tseng (曾銘宗) makes an example for other ministers that one must engage in comprehensive communication with lawmakers and all parties concerned in order to obtain a certain level of consensus on important bills during negotiations.
Since he took the helm at the commission in August 2013, Tseng has been equally determined and flexible in promoting new policies while helping the financial sector cope with the fast-changing landscape. More importantly, he has a harmonious, well-rounded personality, offsetting his characteristic prudence and pragmatism, that helped smooth the legislative passage last month of draft amendments to the Banking Act (銀行法), the Insurance Act (保險法), the Act Governing International Financial Business (國際金融業務條例), the Financial Consumer Protection Act (金融消費者保護法) and the Electronics Payment Processing Institutions Act (電子支付機構管理條例). He is the first chairman since the commission was established in 2004 to see five financial bills clear the legislative floor in a single session. That is not easily achieved.
Good policies without the necessary public support are doomed to fail in the legislature. The challenge for Cabinet members is not why lawmakers do not support their policies, but how to share their vision with the public, whose trust the government needs to win back.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations