The nation’s three presidential candidates yesterday clashed at the first platform presentation organized by the Central Election Commission, with each candidate scrapping over various issues.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), was first to speak, followed by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Vice President William Lai (賴清德) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
In the first round, the focus was on foreign policy. In terms of cross-strait issues, Hou reiterated his opposition to Taiwanese independence and “one country, two systems.” Similarly, Ko promised to bring peace and maintain Taiwan’s democratic system, adding that Taiwan’s biggest issue of the past few decades is bipartisan conflict between the DPP and KMT, and the solution is a coalition government.
In contrast, Lai offered the most solid foreign policy by stating he would follow President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) policy and not rely on the enemy’s benevolence for peace. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) made clear that the so-called “1992 consensus” is China’s “one China principle,” Hou and Ko’s policies are downright unfeasible as China only recognizes itself. Adopting Hou’s and Ko’s policies would mean defending the Republic of China with the “one China principle,” or opting for a fake peace built on eventual unification.
In the second round, Hou chose to address the housing problem and to raise the monthly minimum wage to NT$33,000. He proposed a mortgage program for young people to take out a maximum of NT$15 million (US$479,509) with no need for a down payment when buying a home. Even lacking risk control measures, Hou misses the point of young people’s aversion to buying a home, as the issue is not mortgages, but low salaries. Even without a down payment, it is an extreme burden for young people to have a NT$10 million loan, knowing they would have to pay it back in full.
Lai chose to directly address the controversy over his family’s property. As the government has yet to lay out plans for old houses in coal mining areas, he took the initiative to vow to protect the living rights of other miners in the area and would donate his house as a memorial hall to commemorate Taiwan’s mining industry.
Ko proposed pushing for reform in four main areas, including finance, the legal and civil service systems, and digital management, all of which required improvement under DPP governance. He wishes to reform the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) and establish a tax fund redistribution committee to oversee fund allocation. On legal reform, he would also push for legislation on whistle-blowing, judicial peddling and obstruction of justice, all of which have been critiqued as serving the interests of elites and the rich.
In the third round, Hou went for the DPP’s Achilles’ heel by accusing it of promoting green energy out of personal gain and flip-flopping on nuclear energy. On this point, Hou does score a point in that the DPP has yet to propose a solid energy plan to ensure power supply and environmental protection.
From another aspect, Lai questioned the “back seat driver” presence of Hou’s running mate, Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康). Since Jaw has been leading on policies, Lai reminded Hou that presidents do not have babysitters.
Ko chose not to engage by focusing on residential justice. He vowed to promote building social residences and refurbishing old houses for young and elderly people to rent.
In view of the debate, Lai is the one who has the most solid and reassuring plan on foreign policy, yet he still leaves much to be desired in terms of legal, social and governance issues. Only by proposing policies could the public know that the DPP would become better with his leadership and not wallow in corruption for staying in power for too long.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS