The eighth legislature has now been in session for a month. In some respects it has been a breath of fresh air, but in others it has fallen short of public expectations.
Let us first take a look at the more positive aspects. Not long after the session began, legislators from different parties held two joint press conferences where they spoke up for the conservation of wetlands and forests.
This was praised by the public, largely because it showed that the legislature does not have to be an arena solely for partisan infighting.
Most of the participants in the two press conferences were legislators-at-large, a testament to the efficacy of the legislator-at-large system, which is designed to force parties to consider how best to represent different sectors of society when making their nominations.
Doing so should provide guarantees of political participation for women and disadvantaged groups, and give academics and experts the opportunity to participate in the legislative process, thus elevating the quality of legislation.
Looking back at the elections for the seventh legislature in 2008, legislators-at-large were criticized as tools of factional compromise and patronage, and only a few made any effort to act in accordance with public opinion. In contrast, the legislator-at-large nominations for the elections on Jan. 14 included several representatives from disadvantaged groups and non-profit organizations.
At the time, the parties nominating these candidates received praise and perhaps a substantial number of additional votes. Now, however, is the time to see whether these legislators-at-large really are expressing what the public feels.
Regrettably, several of the individuals who were so well received by the public during the election campaign have more recently declined to declare their views on such major issues as whether a zero-tolerance policy should be applied to leanness-enhancing feed additive residue in imported beef.
Others have called press conferences to defend their positions, but only succeeded in raising questions about potential abuses of power. Many of the legislators-at-large who were originally seen as improving the image of their party are now being ridiculed and called “the shame of NGOs.”
Furthermore, legislators-at-large are under no pressure from legislative constituencies, and are therefore in a better position to serve as “public mouthpieces.” This is also the reason why legislators-at-large should display moral strength, courage and independence in their political activities. If they fail to do so, then we could nominate representatives of disadvantaged groups, experts and academics to every single legislative seat and it would still make no difference.
It is time our legislators-at-large began to earn their keep.
Ku Chung-hwa is chairman of Citizen’s Congress Watch.
Translated by Perry Svensson
For three years and three months, Taiwan’s bid to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has remained stalled. On Nov. 29, members meeting in Vancouver agreed to establish a working group for Costa Rica’s entry — the fifth applicant in line — but not for Taiwan. As Taiwan’s prospects for CPTPP membership fade due to “politically sensitive issues,” what strategy should it adopt to overcome this politically motivated economic exclusion? The situation is not entirely dim; these challenges offer an opportunity to reimagine the export-driven country’s international trade strategy. Following the US’ withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Two major Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-People’s Liberation Army (PLA) power demonstrations in November 2024 highlight the urgency for Taiwan to pursue a military buildup and deterrence agenda that can take back control of its destiny. First, the CCP-PLA’s planned future for Taiwan of war, bloody suppression, and use as a base for regional aggression was foreshadowed by the 9th and largest PLA-Russia Joint Bomber Exercise of Nov. 29 and 30. It was double that of previous bomber exercises, with both days featuring combined combat strike groups of PLA Air Force and Russian bombers escorted by PLAAF and Russian fighters, airborne early warning
Since the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation has taken Taiwanese students to visit China and invited Chinese students to Taiwan. Ma calls those activities “cross-strait exchanges,” yet the trips completely avoid topics prohibited by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), such as democracy, freedom and human rights — all of which are universal values. During the foundation’s most recent Chinese student tour group, a Fudan University student used terms such as “China, Taipei” and “the motherland” when discussing Taiwan’s recent baseball victory. The group’s visit to Zhongshan Girls’ High School also received prominent coverage in
India and China have taken a significant step toward disengagement of their military troops after reaching an agreement on the long-standing disputes in the Galwan Valley. For government officials and policy experts, this move is welcome, signaling the potential resolution of the enduring border issues between the two countries. However, it is crucial to consider the potential impact of this disengagement on India’s relationship with Taiwan. Over the past few years, there have been important developments in India-Taiwan relations, including exchanges between heads of state soon after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s third electoral victory. This raises the pressing question:
RSS