The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative caucus’ withdrawal on Monday of its pension reform proposal, citing “pressure from rank-and-file party members,” highlighted the conundrum outlined by caucus convenor Sufin Siluko (廖國棟) just three days before when presenting the proposal on Friday last week.
“Party headquarters are taking only some people into consideration, but the party should face all people nationwide,” he said.
As the Legislative Yuan yesterday began reviewing pension reform proposals, protesters outside the building shouted at lawmakers — especially those from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and New Power Party — calling for justice. Even some KMT legislators who agreed to file proposals, including pension reform team convener Lin Wei-chou (林為洲), were subjected to loud criticism.
Lin was “let off the hook” after he explained to the protesters that the proposal had been withdrawn.
The caucus’ decision to propose a draft came after KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) had — at a rally organized by the group behind the protests -— discouraged a plan to submit a version that she suspected would play into the DPP’s hand.
The KMT legislators have been out of tune with party headquarters since Hung became chairwoman, dragging the party further toward the far end of the political spectrum.
The caucus’ reversal was therefore a surprise, because Sufin had earlier taken a stand against party headquarters, which is solely focussed on next month’s chairperson election.
The withdrawal of the bill marked a retreat by the caucus — which really has the popular mandate — in the face of party central.
The pressure might not have come from Hung or her camp, but it did not have to given that the other five candidates in the election have been carefully currying favor with party members, the most vociferous of whom — if not the most numerous — are retired military personnel, public servants and teachers.
The candidates visited the protesters camped outside the legislature and echoed their complaints that the government has been trying to “strip them of their dignity.”
They promised that the KMT would rebuild a “just society” if it were to regain power and said reforms are needed, but not of the kind the DPP has proposed. However, they never explained how the KMT would reconcile protesters’ grievances with the need for reforms.
However, when an answer was finally presented, it was crushed within days by vested interests.
KMT lawmakers might not all be Hung supporters, but neither are they truly independent. In the end, legislators belong to various chairperson candidates’ camps and are subject to pressure from rival factions.
It is most unfortunate that the policymaking process has turned into a propaganda battle among KMT chairperson candidates.
Those who protest pension reform like to compare themselves to the Sunflower movement and point to the subsequent resurgence of the DPP. However, while the DPP benefited from the 2014 movement in later elections, its victories were largely due to the KMT’s failures. It is also crucial that the Sunflower movement, despite the KMT’s allegations, was not directed by political parties.
Even if the two movements were remotely comparable, it is important to remember that the DPP refrained from and indeed condemned partisanship, electioneering and slogans on its stage.
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS