The Executive Yuan on Tuesday last week said that “unsolvable” problems and mistakes in the amended Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) have prevented the central government from disbursing NT$34.5 billion (US$1.15 billion) to local governments.
Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) led 14 heads of administrative regions in confronting the Executive Yuan over this issue, according to media reports.
Last year, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) joined hands in the Legislative Yuan, using their majority to forcefully pass the amendment by means inconsistent with procedural justice. Now that things have gone awry, the responsibility should lie with them. In attacking the Executive Yuan, Lu and the other mayors have chosen the wrong target. It was clearly KMT and TPP legislators who pushed the amendment through, so why are the true culprits not being held accountable?
Lu has already played this kind of political theater during the controversy over air pollution caused by the Taichung Power Plant. Prior to taking office, Lu repeatedly attacked the plant, saying that Taichung has the worst air pollution in Taiwan. On her first day in office, she even handed out “Guguan air bottle” gifts to voters as a symbol of her plans to improve the city’s air quality, vowing it would be as clear as the mountain air of Guguan (谷關) — an act that left behind a large amount of plastic waste and cost NT$300,000. Taichung Power Plant, the world’s fourth-largest thermal power plant, began construction in 1986 and started operation in 1992 — all during the KMT’s rule. However, Lu does not criticize the KMT, and is instead shifting the blame onto the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Over the past few years under DPP administrations, the proportion of renewable energy in Taiwan’s energy mix has continued to steadily increase. Solar and wind energy have grown rapidly, fully meeting Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s green energy needs — yet Lu has failed to mention any of this. She once called for emulating the US’ model of “cocktail-style” power generation, but the reality is that she opposes all forms of energy — she is against thermal power, has criticized wind energy subsidies, accused solar farms of destroying farm land, and rejected both restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County and extending the operations of other nuclear plants. She has also criticized the plan to install gas-fired generators at the Taichung plant, citing concerns over pollution and safety. It seems like Lu’s energy “cocktail” is nothing but foam — an empty joke, just like her Guguan air bottles.
Also, does Lu respect the US? In Dec. 2020, former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) director Brent Christensen led a delegation to visit the Taichung City Government. Although both parties had agreed to hold a closed-door meeting, Lu’s administration turned the event into a public briefing. In front of the cameras, she expressed opposition to the importation of US pork with traces of ractopamine and even cited false information to smear US products. That same evening, then-AIT spokeswoman Amanda Mansour issued a statement affirming the unquestionable safety of US products and propagation of disinformation on behalf of politicians, saying it raises “unfounded anxiety among Taiwan consumers” and is “a disservice to everyone.”
How many diplomatic landmines has Lu stepped on? She contravened an agreement and publicly embarrassed an ally — this is just one example of her “mother-style” diplomacy.
Public safety is a vital measure of a city’s governance. Earlier this year, a gas explosion at Shin Kong Mitsukoshi Department Store in Taichung left five dead and 38 injured. In December last year, a factory fire in Taichung’s Dadu District (大肚) claimed nine lives and injured eight others. To this day, the city government has failed to provide detailed explanations and reform plans in light of these incidents. Even pro-KMT media outlets have criticized the city government’s lack of follow-up mechanisms. No matter what political position “Mother Lu” runs for in the future, the public would remember these controversies.
Liou Je-wei is a student at National Taiwan University’s Graduate Institute of Political Science.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS