On Friday, the Legislative Assistant Union protested a bill introduced by a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator that would decriminalize certain misconduct involving publicly funded assistant expenses. Ahead of the rally, 252 assistants from 75 offices and two legislative caucuses cosigned a joint statement, making it a rare cross-party action. In parallel, the Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee promptly updated its agenda on Thursday to include amendments related to assistant expenses.
What makes this moment unusual is institutional self-protection: If legal boundaries around public staffing funds are loosened, suspicion will fall on everyone, oversight will weaken and the few who cut corners will end up defining the reputation of the whole legislature.
The legislator behind the bill argues that because some public figures were convicted in cases involving fraudulent assistant-expense claims, the law should be reviewed so the framework becomes “more progressive.”
Yet that logic gets reform backward. When misconduct occurs, we should close loopholes, clarify rules, and strengthen auditing and enforcement, not redraw the legal lines.
The recurring controversies over publicly funded staff are rooted in structural flaws in the legal framework.
First, the overall funding level has not been meaningfully updated. Second, offices often face the same budget ceiling even when their staffing needs differ significantly.
Meanwhile, the workload has not declined. Offices end up trapped between two facts: Staffing cannot be reduced and funding does not increase.
As a result, the system drifts toward poor incentives pushing out professionalism. When experienced assistants leave, legislative capacity suffers; when capacity drops, public trust erodes. Once trust is gone, even reasonable calls to improve pay and protections become politically harder to make.
The legislature does not lack serious ideas for reform and the direction of genuine reform is clear. In the previous legislative term and the current one, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators have proposed bills to establish a dedicated legal framework for publicly funded assistants. DPP Legislator Chen Kuan-ting (陳冠廷) eight years ago said that Taiwan can learn from Japan’s parliamentary staffing system, which treats assistants as professional positions.
If lawmakers truly want to improve the assistant system, the policy direction should aim at one standard: Good-faith offices should not be disadvantaged and bad actors should have no room to operate.
Assistant budgets should be linked to staffing levels. If an office employs 14 assistants, it should not have the same budget cap as an office employing eight. Funding should scale across reasonable tiers so offices are not compelled to suppress wages to maintain personnel levels.
Compensation benchmarks should reference the civil service system and comparable professional roles. A transparent framework would protect lawmakers who already treat assistants well, reduce suspicions about discretionary spending and make it harder to normalize unreasonably low pay.
Turning assistant expenses into a subsidy fully controlled at a legislator’s discretion would not solve these problems; it would reduce transparency and increase the risk that what is reviewable becomes opaque again. A professional legislature depends on capable lawmakers and dedicated assistants — and Taiwan will only get there by improving labor rights, not by weakening accountability in the name of reform.
Gahon Chiang is a congressional staff member, focusing on Taiwan’s national security policy, in the office of Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Chen Kuan-ting.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS