National Development Council (NDC) Minister Chen Mei-ling (陳美伶) on Thursday said that she has made deregulation one of her priorities to nurture start-ups and stimulate investment.
At a news conference after taking office, Chen said that the council would consider drawing up an exit mechanism for poorly implemented public construction projects to avoid wasting tax dollars while allowing the government to better utilize its limited funds. Chen is showing her determination to tackle problems and make tough decisions.
It is a good start for the newly appointed minister, but she will need to take action, or her pledges will be just empty talk. After all, the naming of Chen — who has a doctorate in law and served as a Cabinet secretary-general under former premier Lin Chuan (林全) — to lead a government agency charged with comprehensive planning, administrative coordination, resource distribution and managerial control, raised a few eyebrows during the latest Cabinet reshuffle, as she is not an expert in economics or finance.
Chen has been a civil servant for more than three decades and is thought to easily adjust to any bureaucratic organization. However, her appointment still begs the question of whether it was more about the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s short-term strategy or whether it reflects the government’s new ambition for the economic bureaucracy.
People are aware that the Cabinet-level council has been the victim of a multiyear degradation that has seen it lose power in planning the nation’s economic development due to changes in the external environment and personnel, as well as tensions among government agencies. Some senior citizens remember the council’s past glory, dating back to 1948, and the authority it wielded as it played an important role in drafting economic policies and advising the Cabinet on economic issues. Today, the council has clearly degenerated into a mere bureaucratic organ reduced to researching and evaluating policies.
On Thursday, Chen said the council aims to reposition itself as an agency that is visionary, good at policy implementation and able to respond to the public’s needs.
She said the council would improve the coordination and integration of economic policies among ministries, adding that it aims to reverse the government’s image of being ineffective.
That is good news, but the bigger question remains: Should the council continue in its capacity as a planner on a grand economic and social scale?
There is little doubt that a trusted subordinate like Chen is crucial to Premier William Lai (賴清德). Chen — who served as the Tainan City Government secretary-general from 2010 to last year under then-mayor Lai — is crucial to implementing the DPP government’s ongoing economic development projects, including the four-year Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program.
Unfortunately, there is considerable doubt about whether the council can be tasked to address the convergence of an aging population, a digital economy and technological innovation, which is transforming the future of work and the life of Taiwanese.
In recent years, the council has outsourced many of its economic studies and policy initiatives to other research institutes. Therefore, it is reasonable to wonder how much of a difference Chen will make as the head of the council in today’s political climate, and to wonder if this will be a watershed moment for the council, which traditionally has been led by either premiers, vice premiers or economists, in terms of its status in the government hierarchy.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS