A Caretaker Cabinet must Know Its Place

A Caretaker Cabinet must Know Its Place
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
February 12, 2008

The Executive Yuan made several hasty decisions before the Lunar New Year. We feel compelled to make a heartfelt appeal, and issue a solemn warning. The premier and his cabinet are merely a caretaker government. They must be circumspect in their conduct.

Following Chinese New Year, the government will resume operation. It will remain in operation until the March presidential election, less than 40 days away. After 40 days, regardless of whether or Frank Hsieh or Ma Ying-jeou is elected president, every cabinet member will be reappointed. By then, the heads of the ministries will have radicaly changed. The period between now and May 20, when the new cabinet is formed, will be a "caretaker" period. A caretaker cabinet's responsibility is merely to maintain the status quo for the new cabinet, to allow its successor to implement its own policies. Therefore, a caretaker cabinet should not make too many high-level personnel changes. It should not propose any long-term policies. Still less should it propose any changes to the system itself. This ought to be Political Science 101a.

And yet the Ministry of Education rushed to issue its 2009 senior high school curriculum, just in time for Chinese New Year's Eve. These first-ever high school textbooks will be divided into A and B versions. They will delay the segregating of students until their senior year of high school. Does it make sense to issue two versions of high school textbooks, given existing academic pressures? This is clearly an issue the Ministry of Education Curriculum Group should give long and careful consideration to before implementation. This is radical change. It is also radical change that lacks public approval. It is hardly something that educational heads with only 40 days left in their term ought to promote. After the curriculum was announced, the principals of Jianguo High School, Zhongzhen High School, Dazhi High School, Taichung High School 2, Hualian Girls High School and others voiced strong reservations. Obviously the proposed changes failed to meet with the approval of frontline teachers and adminstrators.

In principle a caretaker ought not to make major changes. In practice its agenda has not met with the approval of most educators. The result will unnecessarily alarm parents. With much fanfare, the Ministry of Education announced these major policy changes during the Chinese New Year. This was not merely irresponsible. This was a means of avoiding debate, an admission they lacked the guts to confront public disapproval. The Ministry of Education is responsible for the nation's educational matters. Its policies impact students and parents. Yet it has acted with reckless haste. Does it want every high school student to "run home crying to mother?"

The Ministry of Education is not the only member of the cabinet that lacks a sense of propriety. The Ministry of Finance also announced its plans on Chinese New Years Eve. It announced that it was moving toward "tax reform." According to reports, future tax reform policy will be "low taxes, simple government." Beginning next year, in exchange for doing away with the Statute for Upgrading Industries, the Ministry of Finance will no longer employ backdoor listings. The Ministry of Finance intends to lower the business tax to 17.5%, and abolish the 10% levy. This is radical change that has a wide-ranging impact on tax policy. It is hardly appropriate for a cabinet whose term is about to run out, and as a general election approaches.

The Statute for Upgrading Industries incorporated sunset clauses limiting the amount of time "infant industries" would be protected. If these industries were still not competitive when these statutes expired, it meant they lacked comparative advantages, and tax cuts were no longer justified. If these industries had competitive advantages, then there was no need for protection. In short, the Statute for Upgrading Industries should be abolished, regardless. Yet in order to protect the beneficiaries of these tax cuts, the Ministry of Finance has offered them lowered business taxes in exchange. Shouldn't these controversial policies have been subjected to public scrutiny?

Take the 10% levy on retained earnings. The reason for levying a 10% tax on undistributed earnings is to comply with the resolutions of the Second Tax Reform Committee, which combined the two taxes. But the real reason for taxing retained earnings is that Taiwan has no capital gains tax. Combining the two taxes permits large scale tax evasion, making it necessary to plug the loopholes with a tax on retained earnings. The Statute for Upgrading Industries is about to expire. Inheritance taxes are about to be cut. Business taxes are to be adjusted. Many different issues are converging. They should be dealt with, along with the capital gains tax, once and for all. They should be turned over to a future Third Tax Reform Committee for a comprehensive solution. That is the only way. Cabinet members at the Ministry of Finance with only 40 days left in their terms have made hasty piecemeal changes to the tax rates. The Statute for Upgrading Industries will not expire for a while yet. We really can't understand why a caretaker cabinet is behaving this way.

Premier Chang and his cabinet should demonstrate self-discipline and self-respect. They must not make radical and reckless changes. The Legislative Yuan must stand firm. During this caretaker period it must not pass any tax cuts, tariff cuts, or other major, far-reaching legislation. The Kuomintang is the majority party. It must act as a strict gatekeeper. It must resist the temptation to pass any election-oriented legislation whose negative consequences cannot be reversed. The ROC has been spinning its wheels for nearly eight years. We have only 40 more days to go. If the executive or legislative branches are unable to resist temptation during this interim, if they are afraid to take the high road, if they endanger the long-term interests of the ROC, then they are truly unfit to govern.

中時電子報
中國時報 　2008.02.12
看守期間的內閣請守好最起碼的分寸
中時社論

　看到看農曆年前的行政院相關部會倉卒做成的幾樁決策，讓我們不得不在此提出嚴肅的呼籲與警告：請看守閣揆與閣員務必自制、自重。

　農曆年後政府開始上班至三月總統大選，還不到四十天。四十天之後，不論是馬英九或謝長廷當選總統，他們都會重新任命閣揆、布局內閣人事。屆時，各部會首長應該會有極大的變動。在政治上從現在起到五月廿日新內閣產生期間，大致都是「看守」時期。所謂看守，意指為下一任的閣員維持局面，以預留足夠之政策空間，讓後繼者能有充分施展之餘地。因此，看守內閣不宜做太多高階事務官調動、不該提任何有長遠影響之政策、更不可提出牽動制度的法案。這應是政治學上基本的ＡＢＣ了。

　但趕在農曆年前的小年夜，教育部頒布了新的高中九八課綱，有史以來第一次將高中教材分為Ａ、Ｂ兩種版本，並且延後高中分流至高三。高中課本分為兩版在現有的升學壓力下是否妥當，顯然是個值得探討的問題；教育部的課綱小組或許做過相當長時間的討論。但無論如何，這是一項極大的變革，也是一項欠缺社會共識的重大改變，實在不適合由任期只剩數十天的教育首長提出。更何況，新課綱提出之後，包括建國中學、中正高中、大直高中、台中二中、花蓮女中等校的校長受訪時均提出相當明顯的保留意見，可見這項變革甚至尚未取得第一線授課教師與行政主管的共識。

　既然在概念上看守者不宜大做更動、在客觀上未獲多數教育工作者的認同、在後果上又會激起所有學生家長的緊張，教育部在媒體過年偃旗息鼓之際公布這麼大的政策改變，這不僅是不負責任，簡直是刻意迴避討論，也不敢面對社會人民的回應。教育部主管全國教育事項，其政策影響全國學生與家長甚鉅，卻於看守期間如此草率行事，難道是希望每一位高中生都「哭著回去找媽媽」？

　內閣中不只教育部不知看守分寸，財政部也趕在小年夜前，公布其未來之「稅改」方向。據報載，將來的稅改是要「輕稅簡政」。為了要換取促產條例今年年底期滿後不再換殼上市，財政部打算將營所稅稅率下降至百分之十七點五，再將保留盈餘加徵百分之十的規定取消。很顯然的，這又是一項變動極大、影響極廣的租稅政策改變，更不適合在大選在即的當口，由任期將屆的內閣提出。

　就概念而言，促產條例當初之所以有「落日」期間，主要就是基於保護產業的「幼稚工業論」原本即有其年限。年限到期後，若是產業仍未有競爭力則表示不具相對優勢，減稅已無意義；若是產業已具競爭優勢，則保護亦無必要。總之，期限到了促產條例無論如何皆應廢止。如今，財政部為了滿足已獲租稅保護好處的業者，竟欲以營所稅全面下降為糖果以為交換，這樣的政策難道沒有爭議嗎？

　再以保留盈餘加徵百分之十的政策為例：當初之所以要開徵百分之十的未分配盈餘稅，當然是為了搭配二次賦改會的兩稅合一之議。但追根究柢，之所以要對保留盈餘做課稅規定，又是因為台灣的資本利得不必課稅，以致讓兩稅合一存有大幅的避稅管道，不得不以保留盈餘課稅予以防堵。如今，既然促產條例到期、遺產稅要降、營所稅想調，諸多雜議匯集，就應標本兼治，連資本利得課稅一併考量，交給將來的第三次賦改會通盤研議，如此才是正辦。財政部倉卒在只剩數十天任期時提稅率稅制的片面調整，只是為了還有好一陣子才屆滿的促產條例，實在也是不了解「看守內閣」屬性的突兀表現。

　在此，我們不但呼籲張內閣及其閣員節制、自重，不要亂提重大變革議案，也要求立法院堅守立場，千萬不要在此看守期間通過任何免稅案、降稅案、或其他影響深遠的重大提案。國民黨是國會最大黨，更應嚴格把關，峻拒任何選舉導向的、覆水難收的各種法案。台灣已經原地踏步了八年，不差這四、五十天。行政或立法當局如果在看守期間擋不住誘惑而自失立場，不敢開大門、走大路，危害到台灣的長期利益，那就太沒有格調了。