The nation’s three presidential candidates yesterday clashed at the first platform presentation organized by the Central Election Commission, with each candidate scrapping over various issues.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), was first to speak, followed by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Vice President William Lai (賴清德) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
In the first round, the focus was on foreign policy. In terms of cross-strait issues, Hou reiterated his opposition to Taiwanese independence and “one country, two systems.” Similarly, Ko promised to bring peace and maintain Taiwan’s democratic system, adding that Taiwan’s biggest issue of the past few decades is bipartisan conflict between the DPP and KMT, and the solution is a coalition government.
In contrast, Lai offered the most solid foreign policy by stating he would follow President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) policy and not rely on the enemy’s benevolence for peace. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) made clear that the so-called “1992 consensus” is China’s “one China principle,” Hou and Ko’s policies are downright unfeasible as China only recognizes itself. Adopting Hou’s and Ko’s policies would mean defending the Republic of China with the “one China principle,” or opting for a fake peace built on eventual unification.
In the second round, Hou chose to address the housing problem and to raise the monthly minimum wage to NT$33,000. He proposed a mortgage program for young people to take out a maximum of NT$15 million (US$479,509) with no need for a down payment when buying a home. Even lacking risk control measures, Hou misses the point of young people’s aversion to buying a home, as the issue is not mortgages, but low salaries. Even without a down payment, it is an extreme burden for young people to have a NT$10 million loan, knowing they would have to pay it back in full.
Lai chose to directly address the controversy over his family’s property. As the government has yet to lay out plans for old houses in coal mining areas, he took the initiative to vow to protect the living rights of other miners in the area and would donate his house as a memorial hall to commemorate Taiwan’s mining industry.
Ko proposed pushing for reform in four main areas, including finance, the legal and civil service systems, and digital management, all of which required improvement under DPP governance. He wishes to reform the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) and establish a tax fund redistribution committee to oversee fund allocation. On legal reform, he would also push for legislation on whistle-blowing, judicial peddling and obstruction of justice, all of which have been critiqued as serving the interests of elites and the rich.
In the third round, Hou went for the DPP’s Achilles’ heel by accusing it of promoting green energy out of personal gain and flip-flopping on nuclear energy. On this point, Hou does score a point in that the DPP has yet to propose a solid energy plan to ensure power supply and environmental protection.
From another aspect, Lai questioned the “back seat driver” presence of Hou’s running mate, Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康). Since Jaw has been leading on policies, Lai reminded Hou that presidents do not have babysitters.
Ko chose not to engage by focusing on residential justice. He vowed to promote building social residences and refurbishing old houses for young and elderly people to rent.
In view of the debate, Lai is the one who has the most solid and reassuring plan on foreign policy, yet he still leaves much to be desired in terms of legal, social and governance issues. Only by proposing policies could the public know that the DPP would become better with his leadership and not wallow in corruption for staying in power for too long.
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
RSS