Sun, Feb 15, 2004 page3

• Presidential candidates go head-to-head

  • Transcribed by Lin Chieh-yu and Huang Tai-lin / STAFF REPORTERS
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁): Several policies related to Hakka issues have been pushed forward and implemented [by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)]. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), on the other hand, never did much despite its lengthy grip on power in the past. Why?

  Lien Chan (連戰): The Council of Aboriginal Affairs was established during KMT rule, and during my run for the presidency in 2000, I also pledged to establish a Council for Hakka Affairs. Although I failed in my presidential bid, the KMT still pushed for the establishment of the Council for Hakka Affairs as well as other related matters in the legislature. In other words, what the DPP harvested today from its administrative record resulted from seeds that were first sowed by the KMT during our time in office. Except for Yeh Chu-lan (葉菊蘭), the chairwoman of the Council for Hakka Affairs, virtually no other Hakka serve as mem-bers of the Cabinet in this DPP administration.

  In addition, the Examination Yuan's use of the Hoklo language [also known as Taiwanese] in national examinations, which could only be understood by those fluent in Taiwanese, demonstrated a lack of respect for other ethnic groups.

  Lien: The premise of the "defensive referendum" that you have proposed is that the country's sovereignty is threatened with being changed. What makes you so sure that Taiwan's sovereignty faces such a threat?

  Chen: I wish Mr. Lien would read the clause in Article 17 of the Referendum Law, which says, "When there is cause for concern [Chen's emphasis] over the country's sovereignty." It does not say that Taiwan's sovereignty has to have already changed. Taiwan faces a threat posed by 496 Chinese ballistic missiles. China is hardening its "one China" stance even as it continues to proclaim that it won't renounce the use of force against Taiwan. It wants Taiwan to accept "one country, two systems" to turn us into another Hong Kong. The people of Taiwan cannot accept this. Surely we can't wait until they attack us? By then it will be too late. I'm sure Mr. Lien wouldn't accept this either.

  The peace referendum will preserve Taiwan's economic wealth, its peace and stability and its democratic reforms. World leaders will watch from afar. I called Taiwan's first referendum in order to enable the people to understand that we must not turn our enemy into our motherland and we must have no illusions about China. Only by doing this will we be able to strengthen the resolve of the people. Referendums are a popular trend, and are the right choice for Taiwan to protect itself. Please, Mr. Lien, do not obstruct this.

  Chen: Could you clearly state your position on whether you are willing to pass a law governing political donations by the end of this month to resolve the controversy over donations? Will you also agree to reduce the number of seats in the legislature by half?

  Lien: The version which the DPP wants to pass stipulates that political donations can be accepted during the period of the election campaign, but that at other times, such actions require monitoring. The DPP's version of the bill is apparently an attempt to deceive people, because it means that outside the campaign period, they can take on any number of political donations without any regulation.

  The KMT-People First Party (PFP) alliance maintains that political donations should be regulated at all times, regardless of whether it is election time or not.

  On the issue of reducing seats in the legislature, it was the KMT who negotiated to cut the number of legislators to 225 when the DPP insisted on having 250. Put simply, cutting the number of legislative seats has always been the platform of the KMT.

  Lien: Mr. Chen's administration has been unsuccessful in realizing his promise of bringing about direct links. But when I proposed a timetable facilitating direct links within one year, you suggested that I was being manipulated by China. I want to ask Mr. Chen: Do you have any concrete evidence to prove your accusation?

  Chen: A man wanted on suspicion of financial crimes, Chang Yang (張揚), had established a Lien-Soong support organization in Shanghai publicly campaigning for Lien Chan and his running mate James Soong (宋楚瑜) in China. Could he have done so without the support of the Chinese government?

  Mr. Lien also talks of wanting to complete steps toward commen-cing direct flights within one or two years, but that issue depends on the question of whether you would accept the "one China" policy if China required you to do so.

  Four years ago, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) proposed his "special state-to-state" relationship, and you called the proposal a "pragmatic statement." I ask you now, do you still have this view?

  In the year 2000, you proposed the "union theory." In 2001, you advocated "one China with each side having its own interpretation." In 2003, you called for the "one China" issue to be put aside. Which one of these represents your true position?

  Everybody knows that, decades before, when the Communist Party and the KMT held talks, the KMT achieved nothing. That's why it had to come to Taiwan. Of course the Communist Party prefers to talk to the KMT. Now we can see all the contradictions and inconsistencies in Mr. Lien's pronouncements. It is he who has nothing concrete to propose. How can he talk with China? How can the people of Taiwan feel at ease?

  Chen: Mr. Lien spoke about developing Taiwan. Yet why has the KMT-PFP alliance opposed the DPP administration's new 10 Key Infrastructure Projects?

  Lien: Why has the five-year NT$500 billion public construction program not been proposed until now? Some of the ideas within the proposal are good and ones which we would gladly endorse. For instance, the idea of establishing a world-class university and constructing more metropolitan transport services. However, some of the others, such as building a man-made lake as a recreation park and the like are ideas which appear to us to be lacking in detail and planning.

  As the opposition party we have the responsibility to guard taxpayers' money and make sure that every last dollar is well spent and not frittered away on projects that hasty and clumsy.

  Lien: I don't know why Mr. Chang [Yang] held a meeting with Taiwanese businessmen, but I do know that two years ago he received great praise from President Chen. Mr. Chen is always labeling people, accusing people of having relations with China. What concrete evidence does President Chen have that I have any connections with China?

  Chen: Mr Chang is in China on behalf of former Minister of Justice Liao Cheng-hao (廖正豪), organizing Lien and Soong's campaign headquarters in Shanghai. Of course Mr. Lien and Mr. Soong have been told of this, but now that things are turning sour, Mr Lien washes his hands of it. So who will dare to work for you in the future? Of course China hopes that someone other than the Chen-Lu ticket will be elected. This is public knowledge. There is more and more concrete proof that China is helping "Mr. Alliance" to get elected, soliciting votes and talking with Taiwanese businessmen and that doesn't surprise us.

  But this is Taiwan's election, not China's. China doesn't even allow the people of Hong Kong or its own people to participate in elections and yet it wants to interfere in ours. There are many Taiwanese criminals hiding in China, all coming out to criticize A-bian [Chen Shui-bian]. And, of course, this is to help get Lien and Soong get elected.

  Chen: Would you agree to set up a committee to tackle problems relating to the assets of political parties?

  Lien: Many issues can be tackled now by referring to existing laws. There is no need to specially draw up such a law, such as a bill governing disposition of assets improperly obtained by political parties which deliberately targets one person, one party or one issue. This is a way of smearing the KMT.

  There is no juridical logic in making the claim that party assets have been acquired through illegal means and then going on to demand proof that one is innocent.

  Lien: Mr. Chen keeps saying that hard economic times have passed, but the economic growth rate last year was only 3.15 percent. He says this is a great figure, but the average for Asia was 6 percent, and 5 percent in East Asia. Taiwan came last, after even the Philippines. Mr. Chen says his performance has been terrific, but this is not the way the people see it. How can he be satisfied with 3.15 percent?

  Chen: Perhaps Mr. Lien has forgotten that when he was premier, Taiwan's rate of economic growth was second or third among the four "Asian tigers." But we came first among them last year. Although that's not good enough, it's certainly better than during Mr. Lien's time in the administration. Economic growth the year before last was 3.59 percent; better than the US, Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore, and the disparity between rich and poor was the best result of the four Asian tigers.

  This shows that our economic policies and our hard work, as the people do understand, have not been in vain, although some people like to constantly put Taiwan down. Mr Lien wants to restore 5-percent economic growth and 4-percent unemployment within four years. But if you reelect me, I will achieve this in one year.

  Chen: In the 2000 presidential election, James Soong, then a presidential candidate, said that he supported the "one China principle." In 2002 he proposed the idea of a "one China roof" which you lambasted as an act of self-degradation. Now that he has become your running mate in this presidential election, does that mean you now agree with his rhetoric?

  Lien: Mr. Chen himself has been inconsistent, changing his stance on cross-strait policy, from "one China" and the cross-strait integration dictum to the EU model to his most recent rhetoric on "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait and his proposals for a referendum and a new constitution.

  I stand for both sides of the Strait putting aside the controversy over sovereignty to strive for economic prosperity and the well-being of the people.

  My stance is clear, and that is that "one China" means the Republic of China and not the secretive, so-called "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait.

  What country are you referring to when you make your claim?

  Lien: Mr. Chen keeps glorifying the DPP's achievements, including the construction of the second north-south freeway. In fact, this project was planned under the KMT. Construction has nothing to do with the DPP. Mr. Chen, the road was not built by you and the money was not spent by you. How can you glorify yourself like this? There's also the problem of bad debt. The current bad-debt level is 8.4 percent, though it was only 4.8 percent under the KMT.

  Chen: Bad debt is not a problem that develops in the space of a month or a year.

  It's a problem that accumulated over 50 years of KMT rule.

  Also, everybody knows that there were great discrepancies between KMT plans and KMT actions, resulting in overspending of two to three times the estimated cost of infrastructure projects.

  [Lien] should thank us for finishing the second north-south freeway for him and saving the nation NT$2.5 billion.

  The DPP is working on many infrastructure projects, which it is completing at a fraction of the cost that the KMT used to spend on such projects.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Bologna advance to face AC Milan in Coppa final

  • 2

    Bukele proposes prisoner swap with Maduro

  • 3

    Wild’s top line too much for Vegas Golden Knights

  • 4

    HK, Macau residency rules tightened

  • 5

    Eric Chu, 2 others to be questioned for leading illegal assembly last week