The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party on July 11 leveraged their legislative majority to pass the third reading of the Special Act for Strengthening Economic, Social and National Security Resilience in Response to International Circumstances (因應國際情勢強化經濟社會及國土安全韌性特別條例). It included a universal NT$10,000 (US$334) cash handout, although the Executive Yuan did not include such a measure in the original budget. That contravenes Article 70 of the Constitution, which stipulates that the legislature cannot make proposals for expenditure increases in a budgetary bill presented by the Cabinet.
Local governments could distribute cash directly to residents, so long as they have approval from the county or city council. Kinmen County, for example, issued NT$6,000 in subsidies and stimulus vouchers to residents in 2021. Other counties, cities and even townships have implemented similar measures in the past without difficulty.
It ultimately comes down to two things — whether the local government has the funds, and whether local government leaders and council members are willing to distribute those funds.
This issue brings to mind how, on the eve of the recall vote on Saturday last week, Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) sent out a barrage of text messages urging voters to brave the wind and rain to vote against the recall, writing: “Lu Shiow-yen needs your help.” She also told citizens that if they did not vote, they would lose out on four things — the NT$10,000 cash handout, five extra national holidays for workers, the death penalty for cases of child abuse resulting in death and the rights and interests of military personnel, police and firefighters.
Lu had said that the central government should “return the money to the people,” and that it should be done “as soon as possible,” ideally in the form of direct cash payments.
After the recall vote, messages spread online that the Taichung City Government has a tax revenue surplus of NT$12 billion, prompting calls for a similar universal cash handout. Lu immediately denounced the reports as false and threatened to take legal action.
Her response gave rise to online ridicule, with some commenting that “she called for cash handouts before the recall vote, but now that it is over, she is calling for lawsuits.” Others questioned her behavior: “We do not even have free speech anymore. Has Taichung declared martial law?”
Since the KMT-led Taichung, Taipei and New Taipei City governments have excess tax revenue, should those not be distributed to residents? Is this not in line with the reasoning and spirit of the Legislative Yuan’s decision?
People commenting online were merely expressing a wish that aligns the KMT’s logic that surplus tax revenue should be “returned to the people.” They were asking Lu to lead by example and follow through on her own words — so why then, were they accused of spreading lies and threatened with lawsuits?
Taiwan has a saying to describe public servants who live off public resources and pocket the funds as their own, unwilling to part with a single cent. I sincerely hope that KMT leaders of local governments would be more generous toward their residents and — following the Legislative Yuan’s example — “return money to the people.”
After all, it is best to avoid double standards.
John Yu is a civil servant in Taipei.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
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
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS