After 15 months on the job, former premier Lin Chuan (林全) tendered his resignation, saying he had accomplished his mission. Soon after his resignation was approved, he was replaced by former Tainan mayor William Lai (賴清德).
Since Lin became premier, the academic-turned-politician performed the tasks given to him by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) — he pushed through several changes as the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for the first time controlled both the Cabinet and the legislature.
He should be given due praise for doing this, but the overall performance of his Cabinet was unsatisfactory, and resulted in low approval ratings and frequent calls for a reshuffle.
To be fair, Lin made contributions to the nation during his term. Under his leadership, the Executive Yuan proposed the industrial innovation plan, the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program and tax reform. It also initiated transitional justice, energy transformation and a five-day workweek, while beginning to implement long-term care, childcare, food safety, air pollution prevention and social housing policies.
The Lin Cabinet should also be credited for its cooperation with Tsai’s push for pension and judicial reform.
However, Lin undeniably failed to gain public support. He was strongly criticized for appointing “old pan-blue men,” and pan-green camp supporters found it difficult to agree with such appointments after the DPP regained power.
As expected, this “old” Cabinet lacked a fresh and aggressive approach, and the pan-blue members lacked local awareness and remained stuck in their old bureaucratic routines.
Many Cabinet members were also technocrats whose implementation and problem-solving abilities were inferior to their knowledge, and their ideas and attitudes were out of touch with the civil sector, common sense and the general public as they displayed an inability to understand people’s hardships.
They remained in their ivory towers and failed to act with a civil servant’s humility and communicate policy decisions to the public.
Another flaw was the absence of coordination, although this is a long-standing flaw that did not originate with Lin.
This departmentalism must be eliminated, because it is crucial that the government’s left hand knows what its right hand is doing, an issue that any Cabinet must address with urgency.
Lin’s insistence on certain issues and personnel appointments was also controversial.
The implementation of a five-day workweek should have been welcomed, but the “one fixed day and one flexible day off” workweek became inflexible due to changes to labor regulations.
This has hurt the economy and elicited a lot of complaints, causing workers, employers and the government to all lose.
Still, Lin insisted against amending the act, delivering a serious blow to the overall performance of his Cabinet.
In addition, the nation’s most urgent task is to boost the economy, but Lin — an economist — was criticized for appointing financial and economic officials who failed to boost the local economy even though the global economy was recovering.
Since this “financial gang” dominated the financial sector during Lin’s premiership, government agencies became more conservative. The long-term habit of officials shielding one another was exposed in the Mega Financial Holding Co case, and mistakes were repeatedly made in the Chang Hwa Commerical Bank case, badly hurting the Cabinet’s image.
In light of the previous Cabinet’s low support rating, the public has placed high expectations on Lai.
Since he took over the premiership from a less popular predecessor, the support rating for his Cabinet is likely to rise if he listens to public opinion, and remedies personnel and administrative flaws.
In particular, judging from his basic values, ability, statements, political achievements and crisis management, Lai has withstood these tests ever since entering government.
Some of his fans even call him “Lai the Divine,” but political affairs are not about creating gods, which are unlikely to exist in Taiwan’s political environment.
The Cabinet should focus on practical results by taking advantage of the public’s high expectations.
From this perspective, the responsibility is heavy and the road is long for Lai. It is crucial that he knows his subordinates well, recruits talented people from all sides and puts them in the right positions.
Lai is in charge of identifying political appointees, so it is only natural that he should make their ability his first consideration.
The Cabinet should not be restricted to academics and experts — it could also include people from the industrial sector or with political experience.
Since stimulating the economy is the primary task, financial and economic officials should make this their focus while avoiding less pragmatic policies.
Lai should also pay attention to DPP factions to avoid causing chaos as a new political situation is developing.
Lin should not take the full blame for his Cabinet’s low approval rating, because he was not responsible for security and diplomatic appointments. Since Tsai took office last year, she has safeguarded the bottom line of her China policy, but has lacked aggressiveness.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government disgusted the public by the manner in which it curried favor with Beijing, but Tsai’s government has also disappointed by trying not to offend China.
Decisions are made by people, so with a new premier and Cabinet, Tsai should also adopt new thinking and a new approach in personnel deployment.
With the replacement of the premier, a new phase has begun. The government must make an effort to meet the public’s expectations.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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
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