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 teacher.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS