The Legislative Yuan began its 11th term on Feb. 1 and its new members have been vying to make a name for themselves. They know they are at an inflection point, which makes for exciting observation.
Of the 113 seats, 54 are held by newcomers voted into office with lofty promises of reform. Their presence alone is enough to make for a volatile first session, but in addition, for the first time since 2004, no party holds an absolute majority.
At best, this would make the legislature a more active marketplace of ideas, as parties need to make a convincing case for their policies to gain traction. At worst, it could lock the legislature into a stalemate.
The three main parties have hit the ground running to set the tone for the first term. Lacking the presidency and grasping legislative power by its fingernails, the main opposition, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), in a strategic move, has chosen to champion oversight reform. Its caucus wants to give lawmakers — read: themselves — the right to conduct investigations, hold hearings and approve appointments to better oversee the Executive Yuan, as well as mandate an annual “state of the nation” address by the president.
Accompanying its calls for procedural reform, the party has continued its trend of oversight through disruption by taking opportunistic advantage of the daily controversy. KMT members were sure to make a scene at the new legislature’s first meeting on Feb. 20 by delaying Premier Chen Chien-jen’s (陳建仁) policy report in protest at his Cabinet’s handling of food safety issues, with reports of heated arguments on the floor between some of the new lawmakers.
Knowing their best shot at influence is through a tepid alliance with the KMT, the Taiwan People’s Party’s (TPP) eight lawmakers have sided with its calls for reform and backed its members for legislative speaker and committee chairs. After a noisy campaign, the party seems content for the moment to be a quiet kingmaker, ready to side with either of the major parties as it sees fit.
On the other side of the aisle, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been amplifying its message of internationalism. A total of 31 interparliamentary friendship groups have been established since the new session began, with the vast majority chaired by DPP members, and features strategic alliances such as with other Austronesian-language and New Southbound Policy countries. Many have been announced through enthusiastic news conferences, with speeches given by DPP lawmakers and foreign representatives, seeking to solidify the party’s status as the internationally savvy choice.
It is astute to do so, as legislature-to-legislature cooperation is an important bedrock of Taiwan’s foreign relations in lieu of formal diplomatic ties. If KMT leadership were paying attention, they would be seeking to wrest that narrative from their opponents. Instead, they seem to have doubled down on the China-friendly stance and the disruptive antics that lost them the past three presidential elections, even sending KMT Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia (夏立言) to China once again for a photo op with Taiwan Affairs Office Director Song Tao (宋濤).
The KMT seems to have realized this particular error, or at least is paying lip service to it.
Parliamentary diplomacy is an important job of the legislature, Deputy Legislative Speaker Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) said earlier this month, vowing to “continue to convey Taiwanese voices” abroad.
Still, the party’s actions seem to indicate that it has not learned any lessons from its latest defeat. Instead of meaningfully engaging in internal reform, it has continued to externalize its problems through flashy antics and a power grab, ignoring strategies that could raise its status as a trusted policymaker and global player.
Even with so many new faces, its voice still sounds the same.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
RSS