Like the more advanced liberal democracies of the West, Taiwan's is an adversarial political system, in which the very nature of an opposition party is to oppose the government.
But where Taiwan's system veers away from the liberal democratic traditions of the West is the pan-blue camp's bitter stubbornness in the role of opposition. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party's (PFP) opposition to bills proposed by President Chen Shui-bian's (
The turf-war like rivalry in the nation's legislature has brought it to a new low. The latest legislative session, which drew to a close on May 31, succeeded in passing an abysmally low number of bills. With just 39 bills made into law, it was the poorest performance ever -- breaking the previous record low of 53.
The opposition, with its numerical majority in the legislature, is to blame for this record. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been in power for more than five years now, and the pan-blue camp has controlled the legislature for the same amount of time. During that time, legislative sessions have brought about the passage of double, and even triple the number of bills passed in the last sitting. In the two sessions in 2003, for example, the turbulent lawmaking body passed 206 bills into law.
Even with the flurry of controversy surrounding last year's presidential election, a similarly combative legislature voted 75 bills into law. Convinced Chen's re-election was illegitimate and unfair, the pan-blue camp refused to review any bills proposed by the Cabinet in the relevant committees, and persisted in stalling them with their majority in the legislature's procedure committee. For a time after March 20 last year, KMT and PFP legislators simply sat on their hands, rejected new legislation and voted down any bill that made it to the legislative floor.
This begs the question: How could a legislature in which the majority of lawmakers are interested only in contesting the presidential election and bringing the government to a standstill be able to pass more bills than the most recent legislative session?
The simple answer is that even though they harbored a bitter hatred for their pan-green rivals, pan-blue camp legislators knew they could not simply write off the two-and-a-half months remaining in that legislative session. There were, after all, important bills to be considered -- and they would have been held responsible if the Political Donations Law (
Despite the record low number of bills passed, the just-completed legislative session is not without some modest success. Lawmakers were able to temporarily set aside their hatred and pass an amendment to the Law on the National Assembly's Exercise of Power (
But the last legislative session will be remembered for what was not passed. Only one of the Cabinet's five priority bills (the National Assembly law) got anywhere. The other four never even made it to a first reading.
On the last day of the session, Premier Frank Hsieh (
The legislative gridlock can, for the most part, be attributed to the usual blue-green political wrangling and boycotts. But other, more unique factors were also at play. For instance, the KMT caucus halted cross-party negotiations last month to protest the investigation into party Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kung's(
Much of the business of crafting legislation also fell by the wayside as a result of the many pan-blue "side jobs," as DPP caucus whip Chen Chin-jun(
The consequences of the continuing legislative impasse could range from minor to far-reaching. But what is alarming is that the virtual paralysis of the lawmaking body has completely halted the functioning of another branch of the government. The Control Yuan -- the government's watchdog -- has literally sat empty for the last five months because the pan-blue camp has repeatedly rejected the list of nominees, primarily out of a dislike of individual candidates.
The legislature's poor performance will have repercussions for Taiwan's strategic military alliance with the US, and could even compromise the nation's security. Retired US air force lieutenant colonel and defense expert Mark Stokes said in an April interview with the Taipei Times that US policymakers might review the way it deals with Taiwan should the special arms procurement budget fail to pass in the legislature. Stokes acknowledged that there was a "very strong likelihood" that the US government will be less willing to approve future requests from Taiwan for the purchase of major weapons systems.
Stokes said that the pan-blue camp's continued boycott of the arms purchase deal and its unwillingness to compromise on the issue signaled "a negative attitude" among the opposition parties with regard to the defense of Taiwan. "Historians are likely to place at least part of the blame on a KMT leadership that sacrificed long-term interests for short-term political gains," he said.
Stokes was correct in asserting that the pan-blue-camp's stonewalling could have serious consequences for the fate of the nation. At times, its complacence and boycotts border on contempt for the legislative process.
It is unfortunate that one of the provisions the National Assembly ratified last week when it passed the package of constitutional amendments was voting itself out of existence. Legislators could learn from the now-defunct decision-making body. Despite the boycotts and media-conscious antics from members of smaller parties, the assembly accomplished its task efficiently and ahead of schedule. At a time when inefficiency is the norm, it's a pity that Taiwan had to lose its second chamber -- a place where things actually get done.
Mark Kennedy is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS