A Leader of the Nation during a Time of Crisis

A Leader of the Nation during a Time of Crisis
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 1, 2009

Barack Obama's recent Congressional Address was well-received by the American public. One of the most significant comments was, "He looks more and more like the kind of leader a country needs during a crisis."

Obama's example tells us that a national leader during a time of crisis should be more than a mere behind the scenes policy maker. He must also stand on the front lines, and play the role of chief in two ways. First, he must be chief salesman. Second, he must be chief communicator.

For the sake of his 780 billion US economic recovery program, Obama broke with White House tradition. He went to Congress to talk with the opposition party. He followed up by spending a week away from Washington. He promoted his policies to people in small, remote towns, face-to-face. The media said "It was as if he was back on the campaign trail." He gained swift passage of his economic recovery program in Congress. Obama's poll numbers quickly rose. All because he was able to effectively play these two "chief" roles.

Now look at Taiwan. The US has undergone numerous crises brought on by the economic recession. So has Taiwan. The United States has entered an era of crisis. So has Taiwan. The DGBAS forecasts a growth rate of negative 2.97% GDP. This figure represents a 1.1 trillion reduction in exports, a 530 billion reduction in private investment, 100,000 more unemployed, and a 9.6% decline in per capita income, affecting over 500,000 households. Taken together these pieces of the puzzle show us a crisis.

But amidst this crisis, what is our government doing? The ruling administration has trotted out an endless stream of major and minor proposals. Every one of them involves spending tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars. The debt raised is so vast even the Minister of Finance is speechless. Does anyone see the whole picture? Has anyone considered the synergies? Has anyone asked the people how they feel? The administration hardly has enough time to implement emergency measures. The entire island is in an uproar over whether to sign CECA. The ruling and opposition parties have collided head on. President Ma has been forced to go on TV as CECA's chief communicator and chief salesman.

The president deserves affirmation for going on TV to promote his policies. But his move was also a warning sign. It showed that the ruling administration still does not realize Taiwan is already in the middle of a crisis. It has yet to understand the role the government must play at such a time.

Therefore, we suggest that President Ma retreat from the front line and re-position himself as a crisis era president. Only when his role has been redefined as a crisis era president can he effectively fulfill the role of "chief salesman" and "chief communicator." Only then will he be free of concerns that he exceed his authority given the constitutional constraints of the dual leadership system.

He should emulate the example set by Barack Obama. He should demonstrate the same passion he did while campaigning, in order to sell his policies to the masses. The economic recession has not merely undermined people's financial well-being, it has also undermined their emotional well-being. If the public is allowed to communicate with the president face-to-face on a regular basis, it may help defuse public anxiety.

Ma must demand that the ruling administration demonstrate a crisis consciousness. Although his ruling administration boasts many capable technocrats, the Liu cabinet, like government officials in other countries, lack first hand experience in dealing with an economic crisis of such large magnitude. Furthermore a common problem with technocrats is that they are good with theories, but not so good with practice. They are good with numbers, but not so good with feelings. If cabinet members lack a feel for the public mood, if they lack a sense of urgency, even the best policies may provoke public discontent. Obama asked his cabinet members not to cling to "business as usual" ideas and practices. President Ma must also ask his ruling administration not to be peacetime officials in a peacetime administration.

The most serious blunder committed by governments during a state of crisis is waffling over policy. The Ma administration has made this mistake again and again. First it wants to issue Educational Vouchers. Then it wants to change their name. No sooner did it encounter criticism, then it retracted its Generation 1.5 Health Care Program. No sooner did the Pan Green opposition attack CECA, then it decided to use only its Chinese name, not its English name. No sooner did it release its trial balloon on the Luxury Tax, than it met with a public backlash. Such constant waffling causes people to lose confidence in the government's ability to revive the economy. President Ma recently called for a "Policy Implementation Conference" at the Presidential Palace. He should have called for a "Policy Clarification Conference" instead. All correct policies should be implemented no matter which way the winds might blow. Otherwise, a crisis era government will not resolve crises. It will only create more crises.

Experience tells us that a crisis era president and crisis era government can only lead a nation out of the storm by catching "the winds of public opinion." But to catch the winds of public opinion, it must ensure that the public has confidence in the government's leadership. If it is unable to inspire public confidence, the crisis will become a disaster. It will become a lost decade that allows the hard-earned fruits of six decades of economic achievements to be destroyed by a single financial storm.

危機年代的國家領導人
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.03.01

歐巴馬日前的國會演說贏得美國輿論普遍肯定，其中最具意義的評論是：「他愈來愈有危機年代國家領導人的樣子。」

歐巴馬的例子告訴我們：危機年代的國家領導人不能只當幕後運籌帷幄的政策總設計師，他還必須親上火線，扮演執政團隊的兩種「首席」角色：一是首席推銷員，二是首席溝通者。

為了七千八百多億美元的經濟復甦方案，歐巴馬不但打破白宮慣例，親赴國會與反對黨溝通，更連續一周遠離華府，面對面向偏遠小城小鎮的民眾推銷他的政策，輿論形容他「好像又回到了競選跑道」；復甦方案最後能在國會快速過關，歐巴馬的民調聲望能快速攀升，都與他能有效扮演這兩種「首席」角色有關。

反觀台灣，經濟蕭條帶來的多重危機，美國有的，台灣一樣不少；美國既已進入危機年代，台灣當然並非例外。以主計處預估今年負二點九七的ＧＤＰ為例，這個數字代表的是：一兆一千多億出口的減少、五千三百億民間投資的減少、十多萬失業人口的增加，及百分之九點六平均國民所得的下降，受影響的家庭計約五十多萬戶，把這些數字圖塊一一拼湊起來，呈現的就是一幅危機年代的圖像。

但在這樣的危機年代中，我們的政府做了什麼？執政團隊雖然三天一大案，兩天一小案，案案動輒百億千億，舉債數額多到連財政部長都答不出來，但誰瞭解全貌？誰檢驗過綜效？誰問過人民感受？更離譜的是，救急救危已唯恐不及，舉國上下竟為了該不該簽訂ＣＥＣＡ，鬧得滿城風雨，朝野嚴重對立，最後逼得馬總統不得不親上電視，當ＣＥＣＡ的溝通者與推銷員。

總統上電視推銷政策，雖值得肯定，但此一案例也是一大警訊，顯示執政團隊迄今仍未體認台灣已身處危機年代，仍未掌握危機政府應有的角色與作為。因此，我們建議馬總統：

酖酖他必須要改變退守第二線的角色，重新定位自己是危機年代的危機總統；只有在角色重新定位後，他才能有效扮演「首席推銷員」與「首席溝通者」的角色，而不會有逾越雙首長制憲政分際的疑慮。

酖酖他應該仿效歐巴馬，拿出當候選人時推銷政見那樣的熱情，再次面對群眾推銷政策。而且，經濟蕭條除了對民眾生活有實質影響外，社會也出現集體焦慮現象，民眾若能常與總統面對面溝通，當有助於焦慮的化解。

酖酖他必須要求執政團隊要有危機政府的認知。他的執政團隊雖然多是專業技術官僚，但一則劉內閣跟其他國家政府官員一樣，都缺乏處理此等大規模經濟危機的第一手經驗；再則技術官僚的通病是重理論、輕個案，重數字、輕感受，如果閣員缺乏與民意脈搏相通的急迫感，再好的政策也可能引發民怨。歐巴馬要求他的閣員不能再有「一切如常」的想法和作法，馬總統也應要求他的執政團隊，不能再當太平政府的太平官。

酖酖危機政府的大忌是政策搖擺，馬團隊至今已犯過多次這類錯誤：教育券忽而要發又忽而更名，一‧五代健保提出後遭到批評又收回擱置；ＣＥＣＡ被在野黨大肆抨擊後，又決定名稱「只說中文，不講英文」；課徵奢侈稅才放出風向球，就因民意反彈而收手等等。這些反覆讓民眾對政府救經濟的能力失去信心。馬總統與其在府內召開所謂的「政見落實會議」，不如改成「政策整合會議」，凡是對的政策，就該「咬定青山不放鬆，任爾東西南北風」；否則危機政府非但未解除危機，反而製造更多危機。

經驗告訴我們：危機年代的危機總統與危機政府，只有靠「民意之風」才能帶領國家航行過驚濤駭浪；而要民意成風，自然必須要使人民對政府的危機領導有絕對信心。一個無法讓人民產生信心的政府，會讓危機變成災難，讓危機的年代變成失落的年代，更可能讓台灣一甲子辛苦累積的成果在這場風暴危機中逐漸流失。