After Tainan city and county’s recent elevation to special municipality status, the Greater Tainan City Government and council are deadlocked. Led by an alliance of independent councilors, the council is demanding that its members be given over NT$10 million (US$340,000) each in an annual engineering fund for local construction projects. Greater Tainan Mayor William Lai (賴清德) has rejected the demand, causing councilors to stop reviewing proposals and reject the mayor’s policy suggestions. Three extraordinary council meetings have already amounted to nothing. With the city more than NT$100 billion in debt, it is hoped that Lai will prevail, so taxpayers’ hard-earned money can be used most effectively.
The budget process includes allocation, review, implementation and oversight. Allocation and implementation fall under the government, review under elected public representatives and oversight under the supervisory powers of the controlling branch of the nation’s five-branch system. No “right of allocation” has been assigned to councilors.
Councilors have a constitutionally protected right to make suggestions on government budget allocations, but not a right to receive allocations. Any demands for a fixed engineering fund will make it impossible to allocate political responsibility for policy implementation failures and this violates the constitutional separation of the legislative and executive powers.
Some may wonder why councilors cannot be given an engineering fund following Tainan’s elevation to special municipality status, since they had a small fund in the past. However, that fund was also controversial and violated constitutional principles. We should also give some more consideration to the fairness and use of the fund.
First, any construction project must go through comprehensive planning and evaluation. Splitting the fund on many small projects is not effective.
Second, councilors are demanding funds and government approval of their applications. However, the councilors represent different districts with different characteristics and environments, which in the past frequently led councilors to borrow from each other. That should be seen as an illegal transfer of public funds.
Third, in the past, Tainan City was urban and Tainan County was rural. These differences meant that these areas had different needs. This raises the question of whether assigning the same amount to all councilors is unfair to those representing rural districts.
Fourth, the number of councilors is based on the number of residents, not the size of a district. Bigger districts with fewer residents can elect one councilor, while smaller districts with more residents might have four or five councilors. If the engineering fund allocation is calculated based on councilor numbers, urban district councilors will have access to more funds than rural district councilors. That will only lead to greater disparity between urban and rural districts.
A democratic system that works for the good of city residents should allow councilors to suggest a comprehensive evaluation based on residential and district needs, under the strict supervision of the council. That would enable the most effective construction and allow every New Taiwan dollar to be spent where it gives the most bang for the buck.
Greater Tainan councilors refuse to review social welfare policies and budgets that could directly benefit city residents, but insist on the need for an engineering fund to be administered by individual councilors. Who is right? Bring the issue out in the open to let city residents decide for themselves.
Wang Chin-shou is an associate professor of political science at National Cheng Kung University.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS