The Cabinet has offered a number of explanations for its appalling approval ratings. Officials have cited their failure to clarify new policies and government flip-flops on key issues.
Government officials “constantly change their minds” and fumble when asked to defend policy decisions, according to Research, Development and Evaluation Commission Minister Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺). The commission’s analysis showed this had fed skepticism over government policies, Jiang said.
The government would do well to heed its own advice. As though on cue, it groped for a response this weekend when it came under fire over plans to create onshore work areas for Chinese fishermen at several ports.
A civic group drew attention to the policy on Saturday, protesting the construction of a fenced-off section in Nanfangao (南方澳), Ilan County, for Chinese fishermen to carry out tasks such as unloading cargo. With at least four other ports set to create similar work areas, protesters accused President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) of breaking his campaign promise not to give jobs to Chinese workers.
Soon the clarifications began. The Fisheries Agency said the Chinese workers would be able to earn extra money doing odd jobs at the areas, though the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) swiftly rebutted that notion. The head of the Fisheries Agency said fishermen would only be ashore during the day, while the council said they would be housed there. The council said the Chinese fishermen would not be taking up a greater workload, while the Fisheries Agency said there was a need for the foreign workers to fill gaps in manpower.
Since the incentive for creating onshore work areas for Chinese fishermen remains unclear, such contradictions vindicate the questions posed by critics. The latter are concerned that the areas will gradually grow to accommodate more foreign labor for a wider variety of tasks, such as preparing fish for market.
If the reasoning behind a policy — especially one concerning a topic as sensitive as cross-strait labor regulations — is not clear, the plan will be open to any number of interpretations.
But this policy should arouse skepticism for another reason. The work areas being created would be a no man’s land, which should ring a warning bell in a country with a record of little respect for migrant workers’ rights. It would appear that the plan is to cage off hundreds of Chinese workers who will be able to work on Taiwanese soil without officially entering the country — no passing through immigration, no visas.
This is not the only labor twilight zone Ma’s administration has proposed. As part of its i-Taiwan 12 projects, the government hopes to create an “air city” and economic zone at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport that critics say would fall neatly beyond the reach of the country’s labor laws — a recipe for exploitation. Any form of “special” area where foreign workers can work without being covered by labor laws deserves particular scrutiny.
The Cabinet must follow sound advice and not let this issue drop from view in a muddled state. It should clearly address discrepancies and explain its motivation for dreaming up such a confusing plan. Failure to do so would be just another example of the poor style of administration that has eroded Ma’s once stellar approval ratings.
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