Late last month, the Cabinet approved a proposed subsidy plan and complementary measures to narrow the tuition gap between public and private universities. It was one of the quickest and most positive decisions made by the government in recent years to address the difficulty of getting higher education in Taiwan.
Since its announcement, the subsidy has been welcomed by schools, students and parents in general.
However, Taiwan People’s Party Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) seems to have a different view on this. He said that if the subsidy was really necessary, why not launch it at the start of the school year in September? Questioning the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s intention, he asked if its implementation was being delayed to February next year, after the presidential election in January, to imply that there would be no subsidy unless the public voted for the DPP.
The truth is, there are rules regarding budgeting and execution.
Article 46 of the Budget Act (預算法) states: “The general budget proposal of the central government, subordinate unit budget and its consolidated table shall, after a decision is made by the Executive Council of the Executive Yuan, be turned over to the central budget accounting and statistics agency for compilation and, along with the policy implementation plan, submitted by the Executive Yuan to the Legislative Yuan for its review four (4) months before the beginning of the fiscal year.”
The subsidy plan, which aims to help disadvantaged students, is a new plan that requires an annual budget of NT$21.9 billion (US$703 million). Naturally, it should follow budgeting procedures, and be included in the government’s budget plan for the next fiscal year. If it is passed in the legislature at the end of this year, the earliest time for its implementation is February next year, when a new semester begins.
Ko’s comments that the plan should be launched in September when the next semester begins are just absurd in terms of budgeting. After serving as Taipei mayor for eight years, it is surprising that the presidential hopeful is so unfamiliar with budgeting.
As for his claim that there would be no subsidy if the public does not vote for the DPP, we should not waste our time on such political drivel. As long as a university student meets the requirements for the subsidy, they should benefit from the policy, which has nothing to do with party or voting preference. Ko does not need to fret about this.
Lo Cheng-chung is a professor and director of Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology’s Institute of Financial and Economic Law.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS