On Sept. 23, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) said, "The Ministry of Finance is trying to destroy the farmers' and fishermen's associations by having commercial banks take over their credit units. If it acts recklessly on policy affecting the farmers' and fishermen's associations, the DPP will have to be careful of losing power." Presi-dent Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) responded by saying that "reform will continue even if it risks costing us power."
Chen's statement was inspiring and people from all walks of life sought to generate ideas on how the NT$1.05 trillion Financial Restructuring Fund should be used. Eventually, however, under pressure from a series of planned marches and protests by farmers and fishermen, the government decided to suspend the implementation of risk-management measures aimed at regulating the associations' credit units. That decision has brought a halt to the financial reform of the units.
In 1996, non-performing loans (NPL) extended by farmers' and fishermen's credit units totaled NT$72.3 billion. After six years, this has increased to NT$137 billion as of June this year. The NPL ratio was 8.57 percent in 1996, as opposed to 21.53 percent in June this year.
We will come to regret postponing grassroots financial reform if no action is taken soon.
The problem of financial reform was caused by the KMT administration's laissez-faire approach and procrastination, which it found beneficial in controlling local party factions.
The administration's decision to suspend the implementation of risk-management measures has halted some reforms that had already been set in motion.
The difficulty of grassroots financial reform lies in the complex ties between the farmers' and fishermen's associations and political factions, not from the implementation of financial measures. We believe that it is impossible to reform every aspect of the system; trying to make everyone happy will result in hypocrisy. We can only try our best to allay the opposition of vested interests. In the face of opposition from the "targeted groups," we should neither hesitate nor flinch from our mission.
Grassroots financial reform is irrelevant to politics. The grass-roots financial institutions are a timebomb that could trigger a financial crisis at any time. Their senior officials do not belong to any particular party or faction; they care only about pursuing their own interests.
In 2000, the people's disappointment with KMT reforms led to a change in government. Today, that same sense of disappointment has re-emerged. It is obvious that simple, vigorous reform does not necessarily result in loss of power. But the administration certainly risks losing power by advocating reform and then caving in to anti-reform protests.
Since the 2000 election, we, as founding members of the DPP, have felt increasingly powerless about the party's apparent abandonment of its past ideals and resolve.
Hong Chi-chang and Tuan Yi-kang are DPP legislators.
Translated by Grace Shaw
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS