Civic groups have launched campaigns to recall legislators after improper legislation proposed mainly by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The preposterous budget cuts and freezes that the KMT has led the way in pushing through have led to difficulties in government functioning and sparked nationwide discontent. Voices calling for recalls have spread far and wide, showing an upwelling in public consensus.
The threshold for a recall is high and passing one requires a strong consensus among voters. For KMT legislators who face the potential loss of their seats, the only means they have to protect themselves is to adjust their political stance and respond to voters’ demands, yet the KMT central leadership is responding to the recall crisis by proposing recalls of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators who have “acted improperly.”
The DPP is a minority in the legislature and is unable to guide its agenda — the KMT is in the driver’s seat. Despite attempts by DPP legislators to stop the budget disaster, they were restricted by their numerical disadvantage.
Seeing this, the electorate is not buying the KMT’s proposals to recall DPP lawmakers.
The central government general budget review process went completely off the rails this year and the Executive Yuan is expected to request a review. The atrocious review quality is one of the reasons for the rise in the number of people calling for a mass recall.
KMT legislators should acquiesce if the Executive Yuan seeks a reconsideration of the budget proposal and review it again, keeping in mind that acceptance of a review does not mean an unconditional acceptance of the Executive Yuan’s version. It would merely be an agreement to carry out a reasonable and rational review.
Through this process, budget cuts or freezes would still be a viable option, but they would be reasonable and well explained, not based on political vendettas or impulses.
The legislature’s duty is to serve as a check on the government’s budget, not to paralyze government operations.
By leveraging the control over the legislature that the opposition parties have, the KMT caucus’ aim would be to go through the motions if a review is conducted, but ultimately stick to its original proposal.
However, it faces increasing pressure from recalls. Every KMT legislator must answer to the voters in their respective districts. When recall groups question them, lawmakers must justify the cancelation or freezing of budget items.
A recall is not the same as a general election. Each recall petition is submitted independently and for a single legislator.
Lawmakers facing a recall must answer for their words and actions in office and articulate why they should not be recalled.
The best course of action would be to draw a line separating themselves from the improper legislation that has been approved and the unpopular budget measures. That would help them to show voters that they do not support irrational or unreasonable legislative decisions.
Voters have keen vision and hearing. If legislators blindly support the KMT caucus’ improper legislation, they would find it difficult to answer their constituencies. While the KMT leadership and caucus do not directly face the voters, individual lawmakers are unable to avoid pressure from them.
If their goal is to protect their political careers, the priority for KMT lawmakers would be to agree to reconsider the budget proposal they helped approve. In doing so, they could give the country another chance by guaranteeing unimpeded government functioning and avoid a shutdown of the legislature.
The KMT leadership has repeatedly said that it promotes legislation that “benefits peoples’ livelihoods,” but the most vital item it has sway over is the central government’s budget proposal.
It would be better for KMT legislators to undo the damage they have done.
The winds churning the great recall wave would only be calmed through the willingness of individual legislators to adjust their stance and not blindly support absurd decisions.
Wang Chih-chien is a distinguished professor in National Taipei University's Graduate Institute of Information Management.
Translated by Tim Smith
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS