Print

Mail

wiki links

Feature: Shih campaign's expense record questioned

Facing mounting criticism over its use of millions of dollars in donations, the campaign to oust President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) publicized its expenditures last Friday -- the first time it has done so since the movement began.

Since former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) initiated the campaign in early August and received donations totaling NT$111 million (US$3.36 million), a total of NT$41.7 million has been spent as of Oct. 2, with NT$62.62 million left in the account, according to Lu Tai-nien (呂台年), a deputy coordinator of the campaign.

A closer look at the expense list revealed that advertising and promotional materials, including balloons, banners and stickers, accounted for the largest share of expenditure (NT$21.47 million).

This was followed by big-ticket items such as stage and location fees (NT$13.15 million), deposits for the use of public places (NT$390,000), and workers' salaries (NT$406,000).

Lu dismissed criticism that the campaign has not been transparent about its finances, saying it balanced its account every week.

"Our financial record is very transparent. We are not afraid to provide detailed information and allow the public to check [our finances]," Lu told a press conference last Friday, adding that it would make public a more detailed financial record in the near future.

While Lu maintained that its financial records were transparent, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Spokesman Meng Yi-chao (孟義超) lashed out at the campaign for providing "questionable" records by failing to present receipts and detailed items.

receipts

"Where are the receipts of the `allowance?' How many people are paid `salaries'? And how much did each receive? The `moving fee' and `transportation' fee are even more confusing," Meng said.

Moreover, the balance should be NT$69.4 million (assuming NT$111 million in donations less NT$41.7 million in expenses), rather than NT$62.62 million, Meng said.

In response to the accusations, Lu simply said that the campaign would provide receipts in the near future, while acknowledging a NT$6.86 million difference.

"The amount of money was already spent, but hasn't been entered into the account books because we have not received the receipts yet," he said.

Aside from the financial discrepancy, members of the campaign's decision-making body offered contradictory statements when asked how much the campaign has spent.

Chang Fu-chung (張富忠), news coordinator of the campaign, said on Sept. 26 that it had spent about NT$50 million, and told a press conference on Oct. 9 that it had spent more than NT$60 million.

Another deputy coordinator, Lee Hsin (李新), said that the donations would be used up soon, and that the campaign would not rule out the possibility of launching another fundraiser in the future.

Campaign spokeswoman Wang Li-ping (王麗萍), however, dismissed Lee's remarks and said the committee did not discuss the possibility of another fundraising.

"We have been so busy with the sit-ins and the national tour, and really don't have time to calculate all the expenses and collect all the receipts," Wang told the Taipei Times.

"But we will control our expenses and won't waste the donation," she said, adding that there was no definite timeline on when the campaign would provide its detailed financial report.

According to Lu, the rental fee for audio equipment was about NT$70,000 per day, while the stage cost about NT$85,000 per day.

When asked about the transportation fee during its eight-day nationwide tour, Wang declined to comment on the rental fee for 20 tour buses.

The average rental fee for a tour bus is at least NT$10,000 per day, which adds up to NT$1.6 million for the eight-day tour from Sept. 29 to Oct. 6.

Lu said that the campaign's headquarters was still calculating the expenses of its nationwide tour, reiterating his comment that it would make public further details as soon as possible.

Commenting on the the campaign's contradictory statements on its finances, Yang Tai-shun (楊泰順), a professor of political science at Chinese Culture University, urged the campaign to offer a detailed expense report to prevent the issue from becoming a liability for the campaign.

negative impact

"The money comes from public donations. The campaign is aimed at fighting corruption. As such, any financial problem could pose a negative impact on the campaign," he said.

Lee Ting-tsan (李丁讚), a sociology professor at National Tsinghua University, agreed that the campaign had to release its financial report in response to public concerns.

"As so many people are involved in the campaign with different objectives in mind, it is not unreasonable to cast doubt on its finances," he said.

"Besides, people who made the donations have the right to know how their money was spent," he said.

In addition to questions about its expenses, campaign spokesman Jerry Fan (范可欽) and deputy coordinator Hsu Po-yun (許博允) have been accused of profiting from the campaign by Fei-Fang Weekly magazine.

The magazine accused Fan, a well-known advertising executive, and Hsu, a composer and founder of a cultural association in the country, of giving the campaign's advertising and stage projects to their agencies.

Both Fan and Hsu dismissed the allegations, but declined to clarify the allegations until the campaign offers what it claimed would be a more detailed financial report.
This story has been viewed 1610 times.