The rate of public satisfaction with legislators is low, and reducing the number of seats in the legislature by half has become the consensus of the people. On Jan. 14, key staff from the Northern Taiwan Society, the Central Tai-wan Society, the Southern Taiwan Society, the Eastern Taiwan Society and the PEN Taiwan visited the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) headquarters, requesting that the KMT sign a commitment to halve the legislature, complete legislative negotiations on the issue and announce a concrete agreement by March 15.
The KMT only sent a low-level official, Wang Tan-ping (汪誕平), the head of its policy research department, to receive us. Wang said that halving the legislature involves constitutional amendments and should not be done recklessly without complete planning. He refused to sign our appeal. But we were unwilling to give up on our mission, and sent the appeal to both presidential candidates by registered mail.
President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) signed the commitment before the deadline we proposed, but KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) has not yet responded. In the presidential debate on Feb. 21, Lien merely said that the issue involves other complementary measures, and that "it's necessary to propose concrete plans regarding legislators elected from the nationwide constituency, and the division of electoral districts." But he was unwilling to make a sincere response to any of these "concrete plans."
Thus, we can be sure that the blue camp's announcement to halve the legislature was merely a smokescreen to mask issues such as the legislature's right to approve the premier , a seniority system, the establishment of legislative professionalism, the redrawing of electoral districts that have been adopted to block the halving of the legislature. In light of this development, let us examine the blue camp's various excuses for blocking legislative reforms over the past three years.
In July 2001, the People First Party (PFP) and the New Party legislative caucuses said that "the number of legislators is not absolutely related to the chaos in the legislature, and that it's necessary to amend the legislative regulations to rebuild legislative order at the same time" in order to block legislative downsizing.
In April 2002, then KMT legislative caucus whip Lin Yi-shih (林益世) said that "reducing or halving the legislative seats is not very urgent, and that it's OK if a proposal is made before the election." He also said that "legislative reform involves the redrawing of electoral districts and reorganization of legislative committees," so as to block the proposal through these related issues.
Then PFP legislative caucus whip Diane Lee (李慶安) said that "it's necessary to adjust the portion of legislators elected from the nationwide constituency, clarify the position of the national security system and the conflict over whether the president has to brief the legislature regarding national security issues."
If halving the legislature is linked to countless other reform issues, it might take several decades for the issue to be resolved.
Last March, in response to a proposal to downsize the legislature, PFP legislative caucus deputy whip Chin Hui-chu (秦慧珠) said, "there are many urgent bills that need to be reviewed, and it's not urgent to handle this proposal since the legislative election is still two years away."
Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) later said that it was very difficult to reach a consensus on a constitutional amendment about the number of legislative seats, making it impossible to reduce the seats by the end of the year due to the pan-blue camp's obstruction.
From 2001 to last year, the blue camp was unwilling to halve the legislature, and its proposal to cut the legislative seats from 225 to 113 was a blatant lie used to attract votes.
In response to former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Lin I-hsiung's (林義雄) demand for legislative reform, Lien said in late December that "since there's already a consensus to cut the legislative seats to 113, it should be carried out right away without further delay."
Why, then, has Lien delayed in accomplishing this, and refused to sign a commitment saying that the reform is urgent?
Due to restrictions on amending the Constitution, the Legislative Yuan can only submit an amendment "upon the proposal of one-fourth of all legislators and by a resolution of three-fourths of the members present at a meeting with a quorum of three-fourths of all legislators." Thus the reform project may be stopped forever by a handful of people.
To be honest, the goal of downsizing the legislature can only succeed by using the opportunity of the presidential election. If voters lose this bargaining chip, no matter who becomes president on March 20, it will be impossible for him to demand selfish legislators cut the number of seats. We can say that after March 20, the legislature will not be halved within the next four-year term. In the 2008 presidential election, if parties or candidates boycott the proposal again, downsizing the legislature will again be a hopeless cause.
We hereby sincerely appeal to the public to wake up:
First, the legislature should make the issue of halving the legislature its priority during legislative review. Other issues that are not directly related to it should all be considered minor. Those who violate this principle should be treated as traitors and be condemned by all.
Second, the pan-blue camp should integrate its opinions immediately. It should also send authorized representatives to negotiate with the pan-green camp on concrete plans.
Three, both camps should hold a press briefing every day to report their progress, in order to ensure the success of the issue.
Italy was known to the world as "the home of gangsters" before it reduced the number of its parliamentary seats and carried out the "single-member district, two-vote system." But it has gradually cleaned up its act following its legislative reforms.
Where Taiwan will head depends on whether the downsizing proposal is agreed upon before March 20. We hope that the people can show their concern over this.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
RSS