Minister of Health and Welfare Chiu Tai-yuan (邱泰源) on Saturday last week outlined four strategies to address Taiwan’s declining birthrate: reducing the burden of childcare; improving maternal and child health; funding more childcare facilities and public housing for new parents; and encouraging marriage and childbearing. Chiu also floated the idea of promoting matchmaking activities — a proposal that drew swift public criticism.
Separately, Deputy Minister of Health and Welfare Lin Ching-yi (林靜儀) on Wednesday told lawmakers that fostering flexible workplace environments and encouraging men to participate in childcare would help boost the birthrate.
The backlash against Chiu is understandable. The problem is not that people cannot find partners, but that economic pressure and shifting social norms are driving the marriage rate down. For many women, professional success is a more appealing prospect than the traditional role of homemaker.
Careers and children are not mutually exclusive, but raising children inevitably requires time away from work. As Lin said, childcare still falls disproportionately on mothers. Financial costs add another layer of difficulty. The factors that matter most to would-be parents — as Chiu and Lin acknowledged — are housing, daycare and flexible workplaces.
Without affordable housing, young people are unlikely to marry and even less likely to have children. Taiwan’s social housing is already insufficient and prioritizes low-income households, making it difficult for young couples to qualify. Significantly expanding housing for families would require overcoming land shortages, regulatory hurdles, competing government priorities and community resistance. Past administrations have pledged reforms — taxing idle properties, incentivizing landlords — yet housing remains scarce and expensive, especially in major cities.
Even for those who secure housing and have children, finding affordable and accessible daycare is another challenge. The government last year expanded public and quasi-public daycare, but because they operate on a lottery system, many families still cannot get a spot. Private daycare is far costlier and also limited in availability. Compounding the problems is that many couples live far from extended family, having relocated to urban centers for work. With both parents typically employed to meet the high cost of living, access to reliable daycare is essential.
Assuming a family does secure daycare, flexibility at work remains crucial. Children get sick and schools suspend classes, while vaccinations, checkups and school events all demand parents’ time. Without employers who understand, routine interruptions become major obstacles.
The government could encourage flexible workplaces by offering subsidies or tax breaks to companies that allow remote work for parents, create backup staffing systems to cover sudden absences, or provide partially paid leave for either parent to care for their children until affordable daycare is found or the child starts school. Overtime must be strictly voluntary for parents, with an anonymous reporting mechanism — or even surprise audits — to ensure compliance.
The notion that Taiwan’s low birthrate stems from people struggling to meet partners misses the point. It is overwhelmingly a practical issue, driven by housing costs, daycare shortages and rigid workplace norms. Matchmaking events might grab headlines, but they do little to address the real barriers to starting a family.
If the government truly wants to reverse the declining birthrate, its most urgent task is to resolve Taiwan’s housing crisis. Without affordable homes, no amount of policy tinkering — or matchmaking drives — will persuade young couples to take on the financial and personal responsibilities of raising children.
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