To the Powers that Be

To the Powers that Be
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 15, 2007

The media has a duty to oversee the government. Unfortunately in the eyes of the government, members of the media who fulfill their duty are agents bought and paid for by the political opposition. According to this logic, are members of the media who willingly act as government mouthpieces, who persecute dissenters, not bought and paid for by the government? Do members of the media bought and paid for by the government have any credibility whatsoever?

Since the China Times began publishing its special column, entitled "Taiwan's Hope 2008," the ruling regime has continually attempted to vilify this paper. It has evaded questions this paper has raised and attempted to change the subject. Review our column and ask yourself: Did any topics fail to accord with the facts? Did any statistics not originate from the government's own agencies? Frank Hsieh is the Democratic Progressive Party's own presidential candidate. To quote Frank Hsieh, no matter how good a job the government does, it is never going to score 100. Even if it scores 80, that still means that it has fallen short by 20. That means it will have to do better. This is how public servants whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers should be thinking. Your salary, your wealth, is the sweat and blood of the people. The government does not exist to serve either political parties or individual politicians. The government exists to serve the peoples' needs.

In our column, we raised the issue of government waste. This is not merely the current administration's problem. It was the previous administration's problem. It is a problem for anyone in current or past administrations. Shouldn't it be a problem for which those struggling mightily to ascend to the imperial throne and wield political power, ought to be seeking solutions?

Sad to say, the Democratic Progressive Party government, which has been in power for over seven years, has nothing to say in its own defense. All it can do is attempt to discredit its critics using political labels. Concerned only about its election prospects, it denies responsibility altogether. Forget the unusable and unoccupied public buildings constructed at enormous public expense. A single, year long national conference of civil servants cost 1.8 billion dollars. Is this normal? Even the Control Yuan Ministry of Audit has urged that such excesses be corrected. Can the Executive Yuan really look us straight in the eye and claim that government officials are right to spend so much money on junkets at luxury vacation spots?

The gap between rich and poor has widened. Taiwan has become an "M-Shaped Society." "The rich get rich and the poor get poorer" sums up our next generation. We see children growing up in two different worlds, starting out from very different stations in society. The wealthy lavish enormous resources on their children, allowing them to develop their innate talents and acquire valuable skills. The poor can't even afford 3000 dollars a month to enroll their children in tutoring classes. Their children bring their school lunches home, to be served as the entire family's dinner.

How can anyone learning of such hardships in our society, not feel a twinge of pain in his heart? Yet our government spokesman have the temerity to say "The China Times is unqualified to report that life is hard." Apparently they weren't aware that the Ministry of Interior is already preparing to revise the poverty line downward, enabling more people to obtain relief, to prevent them from committing suicide. Apparently they weren't aware that the Child Welfare League has confirmed that 3.5% of all children cannot afford to buy school lunches. Of this 3.5%, approximately 30,000 are elementary school children in the fourth to sixth grades. If we include elementary school children in the first through third grades, as well as junior high and high school students, the numbers are staggering.

Those in office refer to 3000cc vehicles on Taiwan as small cars. They tell us "Since produce is expensive, why are you buying them at traditional farmer's markets?" They ask us "If you can't afford to live, what are you doing at a hi fi exhibit?" They obviously have no conception of how hard life is for the poor. They lack first hand experience. Seeing living examples of such suffering, most peoples' response would be, "How can I help them?" Not our government. Its reaction is to point an accusing finger at the media, insisting that the media is unqualified to report that life is hard under its misrule. High ranking political appointees lives are indeed good. Ordinary citizens must work hard and pay taxes. Their taxes become these political appointees' salaries, special allowances, and per diem. We must ask in response: What right do political appointees who live off the people's tax money, have to pass judgment on ordinary people struggling to get by, let alone forbid them to speak the truth?

The ruling DPP regime has accused the Jungli Investment Co and the Kuomintang of making a "Three Chinas" deal, involving the Broadcasting Corporation of China, the Central Motion Picture Corporation, and the China Television Company. It says the China Times has sacrificed its journalistic ethics, therefore it is unqualified to comment on the government's record. Excuse me, but the withdrawal of the government and the military from the media is government policy. The Jungli Investment Company's transactions were carried out under government oversight, in accordance with government regulation. What do they have to do with the China Times' journalistic ethics? The only reason the ruling DPP regime is using the "Three Chinas" deal to smear the China Times, is that it hasn't knuckled under to the ruling regime, but instead embarrassed it by reporting the truth. The real issue is the upcoming elections. The Democratic Progressive Party has decided that its election strategy will be to demand that the KMT account for its party assets. That is why the DPP is treating privately owned and operated businesses as expendable "collateral damage" in its election campaign.

We must solemnly advise the powers that be: The China Times, in contrast with certain other media organizations, will never allow itself to become a government mouthpiece, let alone a government attack dog. The China Times will forever stand with the people and speak for the people. This is the China Times' raison d'etre. As for trading insults in public, we refuse to play that game. Such individuals, who have forfeited their humanity, are unqualified to discuss journalistic ethics.

中時電子報
中國時報 　2007.11.15
我們必須嚴正告訴那些掌權的人
中時社論

　媒體的天職就是監督政府，很遺憾，在政府眼中，盡職的媒體竟遭汙蔑為被政敵收買的第三者；照這個邏輯，我們不得不反問：甘為政府傳聲筒，並以此遂行打壓異己工具的媒體，是不是早被政府收買？我們更要問一句：被政府收買的媒體，還有任何公信力可言？

　中國時報自從進行〈台灣希望二○○八〉系列專題以來，執政者就不斷以扣帽子的方式，迴避問題，轉移焦點。重新檢視這一系列的專題，有哪一樁不是事實？有哪個數據不是出自政府公部門的統計？持平而論，套用民進黨總統參選人謝長廷的話，政府做再好，做不到百分之百，只做到百分之八十，就還是有百分之廿的不滿意，不滿意？沒關係，我們就要再改進。這才是領納稅人薪俸的公僕所應為之事，爾俸爾祿，民脂民膏，政府的存在，不是為了政黨的勝選，更不是為了個人的成敗，政府的存在是為了服務人民的需要。

　系列專題中，我們提到了政府財政浪費的問題，這不只是現政府的問題，還有前政府的問題，但是，不論前後，任何曾為或現為政府一員者，不該思考解決之道嗎？而那些卯足全力競逐大位，準備接掌政權者，不是更應該思索提出解決方案嗎？

　遺憾的是，民進黨政府已執政七年多，面對這樣的檢討無詞以對，只會以抹黑式的政治語言栽贓，甚至因為擔心影響選情而全面否定。不要說全台各地蚊子館充斥的建設浪費，僅僅全國公務員開會一年就花了十八億，這個數字是正常的嗎？監察院審計部都提出糾正的事，行政院能如此臉不紅氣不喘認為公務員就該花這麼多錢到風景區開會嗎？

　我們還提到貧富差距擴大，這使得台灣的社會愈趨向Ｍ型，貧者愈貧而富者愈富，歸結到我們的下一代，看到的就是兩個世界的孩子，他們從一開始就站在不公平的起跑點上，富者耗盡資源讓孩子學習各種才藝，貧者不但繳不起孩子一個月三千元的補習費，甚至還需要孩子從學校帶營養午餐回家，當一家人的晚飯。

　這樣的社會現實，聞者莫不心酸以對，但是，我們的政府發言人卻說「中國時報有什麼資格評論日子不好過」，他們卻沒看到內政部已經準備向下調修貧窮線，讓多一點人能夠得到救濟，避免走上絕路，他們更不會看到兒福聯盟做的調查，證實百分之三點五的孩子，繳不起營養午餐費，這百分之三約三萬多人還只是小學四到六年級的學童，如果加計小學一到三年級，和國、高中生，弱勢學生的人數更超乎想像。

　坦白講，當政者講得出「三千ＣＣ是小車」、「菜貴就不要到傳統市場去買」、「生活不下去還有閒情逸致逛音響展」，他們就看不到窮鄉僻壤的人到底怎麼應付這艱鉅的生活，但是，人同此心，即使你無法親身走訪，看到這樣活生生的案例和數字，絕大多數人的反應應該是：我要如何幫助他們？結果我們的政務官卻大剌剌地諷刺媒體沒有資格說生活過得不好！居上位的政務官確實沒有生活好不好的問題，小民再辛苦都得繳稅，人民繳的稅，成為政務官的薪水、特支費和油貼，我們同樣要反問一句：拿人民稅金的政務官，有什麼臉評論辛勤奮鬥的人們，還不讓人民講真話？

　民進黨政府指責榮麗公司與國民黨進行三中交易案，說這讓中國時報失去報格，中國時報就沒有資格評論政府作為，很抱歉，黨政軍退出媒體是政府的政策，榮麗公司所有交易行為都在政府法令之下進行，這和中國時報有何干係？民進黨政府只是因為中國時報報導真相，不順其意，就假借三中交易之名栽贓抹黑，理由很簡單：一切為選舉，只因為民進黨設定了討黨產為其選戰策略，就任意把民營企業當做選舉戰場上的犧牲品。

　我們必須嚴正告訴掌權者：中國時報一向不甘於、更不屑像某些媒體一樣，淪為政府的傳聲筒，甚至成為政客打擊政敵的工具，中國時報永遠站在人民的一邊，為小民發聲─這就是中國時報的報格！至於每日以尖刻言詞罵街者，我們不屑與之為伍，這種人沒有資格討論報格，因為他們連基本人格都扭曲了！