Saying the financial memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed with Beijing on Monday was signed “in a surreptitious way,” the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday demanded that the agreement be deliberated at the legislature.
The DPP criticized the government for compromising the nation’s sovereignty as the MOU was signed under Beijing’s “one China” framework, adding that it held the legislature in contempt for keeping the contents of the MOU secret.
It said the MOU would harm the local finance sector and that only Chinese lenders would benefit from the deal.
“How the signing of the MOU was handled proves that Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) lied when he said last week that he would show respect for the legislature,” DPP Policy Division Deputy Executive-Secretary Liu Chien-hsin (劉建忻) said.
Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) Chairman Sean Chen (陳冲) announced unexpectedly at 6:15pm on Monday that the commission had completed the signing of the MOU with its Chinese counterpart at 6pm via a document exchange.
It happened just a few hours after officials discussed the issue with lawmakers at the legislature’s Finance and Economics committees.
The agreement was signed in the name of financial supervision representatives on the Taiwanese and Chinese side to avoid the official title of the two regulators, which carries the phrases “Executive Yuan” and “China” respectively.
Liu said the manner in which the MOU was signed dovetailed with Beijing’s “one China framework.”
DPP caucus whip Chai Trong-rong (蔡同榮) said the manner in which Taiwan was referred to in the agreement suggested an “abandonment of Taiwan’s sovereignty.”
“Mainland [China] is a geographical term, as is Taiwan. Taiwan’s status as a nation was downgraded,” Chai said.
Pan Meng-an (潘孟安), another DPP caucus whip, said the government signed the deal with China “at the pace of a clap of thunder that left no one enough time to cover their ears” and was like “slapping the face of the legislature” as lawmakers were mulling possible safeguard measures to protect local lenders and the public.
“The [lifting of restrictions] on US beef became effective spontaneously, without legislative approval, as did the financial MOU with China. Will [the government’s plan to sign an economic cooperative and framework agreement] be next?” Pan asked.
DPP Legislator Wang Sing-nan (王幸男) criticized the government for paying no attention to lawmakers and people who had doubts over the impact of the MOU.
“We worry that someday we will wake up in the morning and find the [Chinese] flag flying outside the Presidential Office,” Wang said.
Liu asked that the government send the MOU to the legislature for deliberation to ensure that the agreement will not favor Chinese lenders more than local banks and that the personal data of bank customers will not be abused under the deal’s information-sharing mechanism.
Wu, however, dismissed the criticism, saying the government had ensured the country’s dignity in the agreement signed on the basis of equality.
“It would be better if the name of our side had been attached with ‘Executive Yuan’ as it was acceptable to us that ‘China’ was put in front of the other side’s title. However, the other side would rather not mention them. Given which, that both sides call each other ‘Taiwan’ and ‘Mainland’ conforms with the principles of equality and respect,” Wu said.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Lee Ching-hua (李慶華) said the commission had failed to fully respect the legislature.
“[The FSC] should not have concealed the information from the legislature or have been disrespectful to the legislature, because this will cause serious problems afterwards by having a negative impact on trust between the Executive Yuan and the Legislative Yuan,” Lee told reporters. “This will also make it more difficult for the ECFA [economic cooperation framework agreement] to clear the legislative floor.”
KMT caucus secretary-general Lu Hsueh-chang (呂學樟) rebutted the DPP’s criticism, saying that the FSC had briefed the legislature.
“The legislature has held 17 briefings, so basically [the FSC] has shown respect to the legislature [and] everything was ripe for signing the MOU as soon as possible,” Lu said.
‘TAIWAN-FRIENDLY’: The last time the Web site fact sheet removed the lines on the US not supporting Taiwanese independence was during the Biden administration in 2022 The US Department of State has removed a statement on its Web site that it does not support Taiwanese independence, among changes that the Taiwanese government praised yesterday as supporting Taiwan. The Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, produced by the department’s Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, previously stated that the US opposes “any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side; we do not support Taiwan independence; and we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means.” In the updated version published on Thursday, the line stating that the US does not support Taiwanese independence had been removed. The updated
‘CORRECT IDENTIFICATION’: Beginning in May, Taiwanese married to Japanese can register their home country as Taiwan in their spouse’s family record, ‘Nikkei Asia’ said The government yesterday thanked Japan for revising rules that would allow Taiwanese nationals married to Japanese citizens to list their home country as “Taiwan” in the official family record database. At present, Taiwanese have to select “China.” Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) said the new rule, set to be implemented in May, would now “correctly” identify Taiwanese in Japan and help protect their rights, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement. The statement was released after Nikkei Asia reported the new policy earlier yesterday. The name and nationality of a non-Japanese person marrying a Japanese national is added to the
AT RISK: The council reiterated that people should seriously consider the necessity of visiting China, after Beijing passed 22 guidelines to punish ‘die-hard’ separatists The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) has since Jan. 1 last year received 65 petitions regarding Taiwanese who were interrogated or detained in China, MAC Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said yesterday. Fifty-two either went missing or had their personal freedoms restricted, with some put in criminal detention, while 13 were interrogated and temporarily detained, he said in a radio interview. On June 21 last year, China announced 22 guidelines to punish “die-hard Taiwanese independence separatists,” allowing Chinese courts to try people in absentia. The guidelines are uncivilized and inhumane, allowing Beijing to seize assets and issue the death penalty, with no regard for potential
‘UNITED FRONT’ FRONTS: Barring contact with Huaqiao and Jinan universities is needed to stop China targeting Taiwanese students, the education minister said Taiwan has blacklisted two Chinese universities from conducting academic exchange programs in the nation after reports that the institutes are arms of Beijing’s United Front Work Department, Minister of Education Cheng Ying-yao (鄭英耀) said in an exclusive interview with the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper) published yesterday. China’s Huaqiao University in Xiamen and Quanzhou, as well as Jinan University in Guangzhou, which have 600 and 1,500 Taiwanese on their rolls respectively, are under direct control of the Chinese government’s political warfare branch, Cheng said, citing reports by national security officials. A comprehensive ban on Taiwanese institutions collaborating or
RSS