The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has always stood firmly behind the welfare of our military personnel. Since taking office in 2016, the DPP administration has invested more than NT$25 billion (US$842.7 million) in improving military benefits through the national budget. It has also raised salaries for public servants, including military personnel, four times, with a cumulative increase of 14 percent.
In March, President William Lai (賴清德) announced a NT$12,000 raise for volunteer soldiers. Last week, the Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Transportation and Communications jointly introduced a priority boarding program for active-duty troops, reflecting a broader effort by the government to enhance respect, dignity and convenience for military personnel in everyday life. These are concrete measures backed by policy planning and financial responsibility, not rushed proposals meant to create headlines.
What the DPP cannot support, however, is the opposition’s reckless push to override constitutional limits in the name of so-called support. On Tuesday, the legislature passed amendments to the Pay Act of the Armed Forces (軍人待遇條例), adding a new NT$30,000 monthly allowance for volunteer soldiers, effective from January next year. At first glance, this might seem like a generous show of support for the military.
The political strategy is clear: The opposition is setting a trap. If the Executive Yuan refuses to implement these amendments on constitutional grounds, they would seize the opportunity to paint the government as unsupportive of the military. The same tactic was used earlier this year when the government sought a constitutional review of the Police Personnel Management Act (警察人員人事條例) and the DPP was promptly accused of being anti-police and anti-firefighter. Their strategy is not about helping soldiers and service personnel, but about using them as a shield for populist theatrics.
In reality, it is the third major spending bill passed in just a few months without proper budgeting or consultation with the Executive Yuan. This is less about national defense and more about political posturing. In October last year, opposition legislators amended the Logging Ban Compensation for Lands Reserved for Indigenous Peoples Act (原住民保留地禁伐補償條例), increasing subsidies by NT$2.6 billion. In January, they passed a new police retirement package, raising the monthly pension ceiling to more than NT$74,000 and pushing government expenditures higher by at least NT$60 billion. Now, another proposal is on the table: a NT$10,000 universal cash handout to all citizens, which would raise overall public spending by at least NT$233.5 billion.
These actions contravene Article 70 of the Constitution, which bars the legislature from increasing spending in budget bills submitted by the Executive Yuan. They also go against Article 91 of the Budget Act (預算法) and Article 5 of the Fiscal Discipline Act (財政紀律法), which require legislators to consult with the Executive Yuan and identify funding sources before proposing laws that involve large public spending.
Saying no to unconstitutional legislation is not a sign of neglect. It is a commitment to doing things the right way. Military and other social welfare should be built on a sustainable foundation, not inflated promises passed on impulse. The NT$30,000 salary increase package was proposed without prudent deliberation or any fiscal evidence-based justification. If everything becomes a political bidding war, there would be no room left for serious reform or long-term planning.
Soldiers deserve respect, not manipulation. The people deserve honesty, not theatrics. Taiwan deserves a legislature that puts principle ahead of politics.
Gahon Chiang is a staff member of DPP Legislator Chen Kuan-ting, focusing on national security policy.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
More than a week after Hondurans voted, the country still does not know who will be its next president. The Honduran National Electoral Council has not declared a winner, and the transmission of results has experienced repeated malfunctions that interrupted updates for almost 24 hours at times. The delay has become the second-longest post-electoral silence since the election of former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernandez of the National Party in 2017, which was tainted by accusations of fraud. Once again, this has raised concerns among observers, civil society groups and the international community. The preliminary results remain close, but both
Beijing’s diplomatic tightening with Jakarta is not an isolated episode; it is a piece of a long-term strategy that realigns the prices of choices across the Indo-Pacific. The principle is simple. There is no need to impose an alliance if one can make a given trajectory convenient and the alternative costly. By tying Indonesia’s modernization to capital, technology and logistics corridors, and by obtaining in public the reaffirmation of the “one China” principle, Beijing builds a constraint that can be activated tomorrow on sensitive issues. The most sensitive is Taiwan. If we look at systemic constraints, the question is not whether
RSS