Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators have been calling for legal amendments to curtail the powers of the Examination Yuan and reduce its number of members.
This is because Examination Yuan President Wu Jin-lin (伍錦霖) and Examination Yuan members have come out against government plans to reform civil service pensions. While the spectacle of the DPP-controlled Legislative Yuan at loggerheads with the Examination Yuan — whose members were appointed by former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration — is entertaining for commentators and the public alike, a moment’s reflection is needed.
The Presidential Office’s Control Yuan Nomination Committee is also in the process of nominating 11 candidates to replace members whose terms of office are coming to an end.
The contradiction of these two events begs the question: Should the DPP-majority legislature approve these nominations when the time comes?
A legislator once said that politics is merely a superior form of trickery. At the time, this unleashed a wave of anger among the public, while legislators on both sides condemned the statement and distanced themselves from the legislator’s remarks.
Although many years have passed since this incident, no legislator has dared to publicly restate this sentiment; yet how many of Taiwan’s politicians — and the political parties to which they belong — actually conduct politics with integrity and honesty?
The DPP has consistently advocated amending the Constitution to abolish both the Control and Examination branches to reduce the number of government branches to three.
This policy is not just concerned with rectifying a poorly designed system, it is equally concerned with slimming down bureaucracy, cutting costs and improving efficiency.
Pragmatists understand that reform is about finding a workable plan that will not necessarily be the most perfect of solutions. However, it is crucial that the government does not lose sight of its aims during the reform process.
Sometimes it is a matter of taking small steps in the right direction to find an expedient solution. Pragmatism of this nature is recognized as an acceptable practice — and indeed is key to effective governance. It should not be confused with political chicanery.
The DPP legislative caucus claims that it wants to amend the Organic Act of the Examination Yuan (考試院組織法) to reduce the number of Examination Yuan members and reform the composition of its sittings so that draft bills proposed by the Ministry of Civil Service and Ministry of Examinations can be directly submitted to the legislature for deliberation without first passing through the Examination Yuan.
If the intention is to gradually abolish the Examination and Control branches, then this makes sense. The Examination Yuan has 19 members and its only functions consist of holding sittings and carrying out its duties as members of the Board of Examiners. Members do not have to attend all sittings, and even if they do, they do not have to take any responsibility. For all this, they receive the same benefits as as a minister.
The reason for the urgency over pension reform is that there is a pressing need to relieve pressure on the nation’s finances. There is no reason why taxpayers should continue to support these costly and wholly redundant officials.
In the past, members did next to nothing while sitting in their ivory towers and enjoying the trappings of power. Now, they have awoken from their slumber to make mischief for the government. If their numbers were cut back to about five members, this would not be an excessive wielding of the axe.
The same logic should be applied to the Control Yuan and its members.
Under the current system, the Control Yuan president, vice-president and members amount to 29 people. The combined experience of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Ma administrations provides ample proof that the Control Yuan is capable of doing far more damage to Taiwan’s democracy than the Examination Yuan. At the very least, the continued viability of the Control Yuan should be examined from the point of view of public finances.
Since President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration took office last year, the Control Yuan has essentially discharged its duties fairly and in accordance with the Constitution.
However, the Presidential Office is in the process of nominating another 11 members to supplement the 18 members nominated by the Ma administration and approved in the previous legislative session. The idea is that the 11 newly appointed members would better reflect current public opinion.
However, this is out of kilter with true public opinion. Taiwanese have no desire to continue supporting so many members with ministerial-level benefits that have no real function, yet cost significant amounts of public funding.
This is especially true since other countries’ supervisory divisions usually have one person, and none have more than three.
It seems that it is already too late to avoid filling the Control Yuan with a fresh batch of members, but does anyone really believe there is an urgent need for these roles?
It seems that the Presidential Office has used the “logic of power” to justify its decision and in doing so has deviated from its plan to abolish that branch.
If this is the case, how will the Tsai administration ever cut through the political trickery that has hampered reform efforts of previous governments?
The thinning of government bureaucracy and civil service pensions are actually two sides of the same coin and should be approached as a single issue.
If Tsai believes that the appointment of officials is an important way to extend her power — leaving aside that she has yet to appoint a Presidential Office secretary-general — why then, after nine months in office, has she decided to enlarge the money-guzzling peripheral institutions of state so that the old guard can continue to enjoy a life of luxury at the taxpayer’s expense?
The Tsai administration has the time and the means to send an unequivocal statement to the nation that shows how it intends to govern. It should be expending its energy in this direction and quickly rectify this gap in their defenses.
It is not possible for the Examination Yuan to block pension reform. Even if the Examination Yuan were unwilling to take the lead in introducing the required amendment to the law, the DPP legislative caucus can propose amendments.
After all, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus is preparing to dust off a pension reform plan drafted by former Examination Yuan president John Kuan (關中) during the Ma era.
If government members who are calling for the Examination Yuan’s powers to be curtailed are doing so for show, then this is not good enough.
However, if they are making a solemn promise to the public, then they must follow up words with action. At the same time, they must reflect upon the appropriateness of stuffing the Control Yuan with yet more members, and get serious about putting constitutional reform at the top of the legislative agenda.
Why is Taiwan, 20 years after democratization, still carrying out transitional justice? The problem is not that successive presidents have lacked a sufficient sense of righteousness; rather, once they enter office and are surrounded by power, they begin to lose their way. They think: “If the previous incumbent could do that, I can do the same.”
Consequently, transitional justice takes a back seat. This is why transitional justice is incomplete.
The public has given the Tsai administration a clear mandate to overhaul the nation’s political system. The government must sincerely and with integrity repay the trust bestowed on it by the electorate.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry