Cross-caucus negotiations, which are usually held on the final days of a legislative session, have become a political vice that plagues the nation’s legislative system and need to be removed.
Carried out behind closed doors, where all kinds of dubious exchanges of benefits can take place, the negotiations are free from any form of scrutiny and might safely be branded “bureaucracy of the highest order.”
One of the debilitating effects that such negotiations have had on the nation is turning the public interest into a political bargaining chip.
They have also allowed some politicians to turn the time allotted for standard legislative meetings into political shows, in which they create all kinds of drama to attract attention in the hopes of winning over voters and bolstering their re-election chances.
Consequently, key bills are often delayed until the end of a legislative session and then brought to cross-caucus negotiations, where they are arbitrarily defeated or passed.
One infamous example is the passage of an amendment to Article 99, Clause 1 of the Accounting Act (會計法), which was passed shortly before midnight on May 31, 2013. The amendment would have acquitted all government officials and legislators who were imprisoned or facing charges for having misappropriated their stipends.
Although the legislation was later nullified after President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) seconded proposals to abolish the amendment, the incident forced Ma, then-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) and several DPP lawmakers to publicly apologize for having allowed such an amendment to pass — something that could not have happened without the consent of all the political parties involved in the discussions.
Another reason for abolishing cross-caucus negotiations is that it would help motivate people to approach social issues in a more sensible manner.
For example, a budget proposal submitted by Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) to reprocess spent nuclear rods in France is set to be reviewed in the present legislative session. So far, opinions on how to handle nuclear waste have been polarized in an “all-or-nothing” manner: either stick to the plan or scrap it altogether.
The lack of a middle ground has brought the discussions to a standstill and little has been said about how to respond to a lack of domestic space for nuclear waste storage, which is a pressing matter that must be faced.
Imagine what would happen if the proposal were brought to the cross-caucus negotiations.
A possible scenario is that legislators who have on so many public occasions voiced their objections to the project would agree to it once they are hidden from the public eye, saying nuclear waste storage is a national security issue, and processing the waste overseas seems the only viable option.
Much of the clamor around the Taipower plan has to do with it choosing French company AREVA to undertake the project, as the firm is reportedly on the verge of bankruptcy.
The agitation over the plan has clouded the judgements of most people, preventing them from seeing an alternative to Taipower’s proposal — for example, finding another firm to carry out the reprocessing. Moreover, it has provided politicians a platform for politicking, one that created conflict and confused the public.
The nation has too much to lose with cross-caucus negotiations and any young political party taking a stand against such deal-making deserves a chance in January’s elections to push for reform in the legislature.
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
RSS