Former minister of health and welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) formally received the Democratic Progressive Party nomination as Taipei mayoral candidate and has resigned from the health portfolio to focus his energies on the campaign.
Upon hearing this news, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安), the KMT’s nominee for the coveted position, believed that he had been handed a stick with which to beat Chen, mocking him as a “runaway minister.”
The KMT has its share of “runaways.” Elected officials, such as mayors, legislators and city or county councilors, are accorded a term of four years before they next face the ballot box. Some, such as former Kaohsiung mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), change their minds before their term is up. In Han’s case, he decided to run for president before even serving a year as mayor.
Then you have lawmakers such as Chiang and Taiwan People’s Party Legislator Ann Kao (高虹安), who have jumped into a mayoral race with a year and eight months of their current terms yet to serve.
There is also the case of Kaohsiung City Councilor Jane Lee (李眉蓁), who stood in the by-election to replace the recalled Han not even halfway through her term.
These are all examples of true runaways. One could argue that the speculative nature of elected officials taking time off to run for office is more problematic than resigning to do so.
A government minister is an appointment — there is no fixed term. It is a case of resigning or taking a sabbatical, and has nothing to do with running away from one’s responsibilities — although there is the problem of the optics of their decision.
Chiang is a legislator with a law degree. For him to mock Chen as a runaway minister suggests that he either does not understand the law or that he is simply trying to create mischief.
For the sake of argument, agree with Chiang that Chen is “running away” because he wants to leave the position fearing that his party is about to lose power.
Reading between the lines, this surely means that Chiang would support Chen remaining as minister of health and welfare, rather than running off to greener pastures. Behind Chiang’s mockery lies a resounding endorsement of Chen’s performance.
One would then have to ask: Why had Chiang and his cohorts been clamoring so long for Chen to go?
If Chen had not performed competently as health minister, passing the baton to a more capable person would have been the right thing to do. Having battled the COVID-19 pandemic, he did not have the luxury of waiting until everybody was feting his victory. Leaving without setting off firecrackers was a show of proper decorum, and it is foolish to say that he is running away from his responsibilities.
There is also the small matter of the pot calling the kettle black. As he criticizes Chen for being a runaway minister, he is preparing to be a “runaway legislator.” Perhaps wanting to avoid this accusation was the logic behind his decision not to resign before running for Taipei mayor. He clearly has not thought through what might happen if he is successful in his bid. He would have to resign as legislator if he wins, and he would become the runaway he accuses Chen of being.
As Chiang is such a smart man, he has probably factored in his chances of winning the election, and is confident that he might never have to contend with being accused of running away from his legislative responsibilities.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Paul Cooper
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS