The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has entered the presidential primary stage. Unlike the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the DPP is the ruling party and is responsible for administering the central government and must fulfill its contract with voters until May 19 next year.
At the moment, significant responsibility falls on Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌), who should demand that the entire administrative team stop acting like bystanders.
Starting from today, they should change their mindset and treat the coming year as their last year in power. The administration should make every effort to do what it wants to and should do, and concentrate on policy implementation.
If it does not seize this opportunity, things will not be the same next time around.
So where should the party begin? Perhaps with its attitude.
In the past, it had a high-spirited and vigorous attitude and could handle pressing affairs slowly and calmly. Given the limited time available now, it would have to work hard day and night to review its policies, and complete all urgent tasks within a year.
Why is that? Since the beginning of its primary process, the party has faced the battle between President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and former premier William Lai (賴清德).
Some top officials privately complain that they do not know what they are fighting over and it seems as if they have become victims of the logic of power.
They do not seem to understand that in this democratic era, top officials in modern countries should devote themselves to the nation. They are paid by taxpayers, and are not anyone’s personal counselors who have nothing to do with the outcome of the primary.
It is the premier’s responsibility to change this atmosphere, and Su should take an iron-fist approach by telling his Cabinet members to do their best for the public until May 20 next year.
Officials are not men or women of leisure and they should keep busy doing things that matter. If they remain idle, they are a waste of money and should be sent packing.
Saying that would help Su score a few points with voters.
As the main force of stability, Su’s Cabinet has a lot to do in the coming year. One task is to ease the public anger that has been accumulating over the past three years.
How could Vice Premier Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) lose the Kaohsiung mayoral election in last year’s local elections?
One could easily come up with a long list of policies that ran against the public’s wishes. Surely this is something the experienced Su knows well.
Another task relates to Taiwan’s future, including issues that must be handled promptly and without political interference, regardless of whether the DPP remains in power.
These issues include pushing for legislation such as the establishment of a monitoring mechanism for cross-strait political negotiations, constant reform and streamlining of policies to offer greater convenience to the public and improving national competitiveness.
One of many examples is the creation of a single window for foreign investment in Taiwan.
It is only by realizing that time is running out and working harder that the government will be able to reshape expectations. If it does not, what does it matter who wins the DPP’s primary?
Besides, judging from the rapid political shifts nowadays, voters will have to be prepared for one-term presidencies becoming the norm. Anyone hoping to serve two four-year terms will have their work cut out for them.
Tzou Jiing-wen is editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper).
Translated by Eddy Chang
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily