As the public knows, during legislative questioning of government officials, it is not a matter of whose position is “above” or “below,” or who is more important. What matters is whether the exchanges involve genuine questions with genuine answers, genuine questions with evasive answers, evasive questions with evasive answers or evasive questions with genuine answers.
Of course, genuine questions with genuine answers is the best possible outcome. Officials who answer genuine questions with evasive answers deserve criticism.
Evasive questions with evasive answers signal that both sides are shirking their public duties. Evasive questions with genuine answers reveal laziness or guilt on the part of the questioning legislator.
The exchange between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) and Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) on Tuesday last week — as the questioning and responding parties respectively — regarding the Sept. 23 Mataian River (馬太鞍) barrier lake overflow disaster in Hualien County’s Guangfu Township (光復) is a classic example of evasive questions met with genuine answers.
Fu said: “The central government had no proper evacuation plan — this was a human-caused disaster,” to which Cho replied, “The planning and implementation of evacuations are, of course, the responsibility of local governments.”
Disaster response tasks are clearly divided between the central and local authorities. For someone who previously served as Hualien County commissioner, Fu’s ignorance of the fact that evacuation is the duty of local authorities is either shameless posturing or evidence of his utter negligence during his term. That he even dares to shift the responsibility for local evacuation plans onto the central government is absolutely ridiculous.
Fu then asked, “Where is the evacuation plan for 8,600 people?”
Cho, in addition to reiterating that evacutations fall under the responsibilities of local governments, provided further details: “At 8am on the morning of Sept. 22, Mr. Chiu (邱) of the Guangfu Township civil affairs department said that evacuations would start at 1pm and be completed before nightfall.”
Cho’s statement provided evidence of the personnel, time and location. “Mr. Chiu” is presumably a member of Hualien County Commissioner Hsu Chen-wei’s (徐榛蔚) team. Cho used the testimony of a Hualien County Government worker as evidence against Fu. In the end, Fu’s feigned ignorance only exposed his own weakness.
Seeing that he could not gain an advantage on that front, Fu asked, “Who is responsible for disaster relief?”
Cho responded: “The local coordinating authority at the scene is responsible for disaster relief,” which gave Fu an opening to quip, “Thank you, Premier Cho, for finally speaking the truth.”
However, he was immediately shut down by Cho’s sharp retort: “It was due to the local government’s inefficiency that the central government had to take over completely” — a slap in the face for Fu.
In the end, Fu had no choice but to fall back on the Republic of China (ROC) trademark and ask, “Does the ROC no longer have a central government?”
Cho, calm and unperturbed, shot back: “There is a central government, but there is no local government — there is no Hualien County Government.”
The premier’s parting line to Fu, “We are concerned with saving lives — only you are concerned with saving your political career,” was the perfect counter.
As a Confucian-inspired saying goes, “One is humiliated by others always because one has brought humiliation upon oneself first.” The back-and-forth between Cho and Fu in the legislative chamber teaches an important lesson — during questioning, both parties can and should respect each other. They should not attempt to blur the lines of accountability, or they risk neglecting their duties and losing the public’s respect.
Fu and Hsu bungled the disaster relief efforts, failed to acknowledge their mistakes and even tried to shift the blame onto the central government. By contrast, the usually mild-mannered and humble Cho responded to the challenge bravely, using facts and reason, tearing off his opponent’s mask — an example deserving of praise.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Well, sort of. Tomorrow is the seventy-fifth anniversary of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed by forty-nine nations on September 8, 1951. The Republic of China wasn’t one of them. Article 2(b) of the Treaty reads: “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores.” So, tomorrow would be the Diamond Jubilee of Formosa’s freedom from Japanese sovereignty. As my good friend and former Examination Yuan President Yao Chia-wen (姚嘉文) voiced in these pages last year (“San Francisco treaty should be taught: adviser”, Sept. 7, 2025), the Japan peace treaty should be taught in all Taiwan schools to
Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) was under constant fire last month over the city government’s questionable public works projects and child protection issues, and last week he sparked another controversy involving his son. Chiang on Monday last week confirmed that his eldest son, who was recently admitted to Taipei Municipal Chien Kuo Senior High School, would take a leave of absence to participate in a year-long exchange program in the US. The exchange program Chiang’s son was selected for is funded by the Taipei City Government, and is limited to 25 spots for eligible junior-high and high-school students. Chiang was accused
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) has had a tough week on the campaign trail in support of her party’s candidates for November’s local elections. Trouble has been brewing in Changhua County for the past few months over the KMT’s nomination of Wei Ping-cheng (魏平政) for Changhua County commissioner. Incumbent Changhua County Commissioner Wang Hui-mei (王惠美) of the KMT is not eligible for re-election, as she has already served two terms, but she has conspicuously declined to attend campaign events with Wei. On Friday, Wang posted a 2,000-character explanation of the situation on Facebook, writing that Cheng had sought her
For more than a decade, Beijing has described its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a benign program of ports, railways, factories and digital connectivity. That description was never true. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has begun to stage military power behind the commercial geography it has constructed — and its recent air exercise in Egypt is the clearest warning yet. Last month, a Chinese flight of J-16 strike fighters, Y-9LG electronic warfare aircraft, KJ-500 AWACS aircraft, Y-20 transport aircraft, Z-20 utility helicopters and YY-20A in-flight refueling aircraft flew approximately 6,000km to Egypt for the “Eagles of Civilization” exercise with
RSS