Since President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration assumed office, unemployment has continued to set record highs. While government statistics show that unemployment hit 5.94 percent in June, US ratings agency Moody’s pointed out that the figure would be 7.1 percent if the percentage of the population forced to take unpaid leave is included.
A recent survey by Taiwan Thinktank found 12.7 percent of respondents to be either unemployed or seeking work, with approximately 30.6 percent of households suffering from unemployment. But instead of focusing on fundamental problems, the government has pinned its hopes on the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China, saying that the pact will create 270,000 jobs. Can we really believe these statements?
The biggest concern is the potential unemployment an ECFA with China could cause. The survey also suggested that 50.8 percent of respondents did not agree with the government, which has said: “The signing of an ECFA with China would substantially reduce domestic unemployment.”
The survey said that the number of respondents who agreed with what the government has said about an ECFA only accounted for half of those who disagreed.
In addition, Chiu Jiunn-rong (邱俊榮), vice dean of the School of Management at National Central University, said the Global Trade Analysis Project model used in a report published by the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research was based on the assumption that there is full employment in the market. Chiu said the report was therefore incapable of estimating how an ECFA would affect Taiwan’s domestic job market.
However, the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) has repeatedly cited this report when stating that a pact with China would increase employment.
In addition, the government has not explained what an ECFA with China would entail. How can the public be expected to believe it will create jobs? A public opinion poll showed that 90 percent of respondents said they did not understand the proposed agreement’s content and 90 percent of respondents considered it necessary for the MOEA to publicize the details of an ECFA along with an objective assessment to give the public a better understanding of the matter.
The poll also said 80 percent of respondents disagreed with the content of the controversial cartoons the MOEA recently released, which depicted opponents to an ECFA as poorly educated and supporters as intellectually and socially superior.
The government should not push through such a controversial agreement against the will of the public. There have been many examples of economic affairs being put to a referendum in other countries. For instance, Denmark and Sweden made a referendum part of the approval procedure for their participation in European economic integration in 2000 and 2003 respectively.
Now that civic groups have completed the first stage of their application to hold a referendum on an ECFA, the government should not waste public funds promoting an economic pact with China or provide us with “professional assessments” to cover up the potential impact of the agreement. The government should make the contents of an ECFA public and engage the public in detailed discussion on what impact it may have on all aspects of our lives.
Whether to sign an ECFA should be decided by the public. Taiwan Thinktank is ready for a debate on the ECFA with the government, but is the government ready to discuss the matter openly?
Cheng Li-chiun is the chief executive officer of Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
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
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
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS