Cabinet Reshuffling: Expectations and Admonitions

Cabinet Reshuffling: Expectations and Admonitions
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 9, 2009

Liu Chao-hsuan has stepped down. Wu Dun-yi and Chu Li-lun Jin have stepped up. This carries with it several implications. First, the cabinet was once an "administrative cabinet." It is now a "political cabinet." Two, the Executive Yuan was once "management oriented." It is now "service oriented." Third, the cabinet reshuffling will accelerate the generational transfer of power within the KMT.
These three implications deserve to be viewed in a positive light. Society is changing faster and faster. Operating exclusively by the book within a rigid bureaucracy can prevent one from keeping up with pubic expectations. Poor communications may also invite public discontent. Appointing members of the legislature and local political elites to head up the cabinet may compensate for the political tone-deafness endemic among administrative elites. It may bridge the gap between the central and local governments. The opposition has long cited a "gap between the north and south," and accused high-ranking ruling administration officials of "not feeling the people's pain." At the very least such charges will lose their power to persuade.

Natural disasters and public discontent have exerted immense pressure on President Ma. He has been forced to reshuffle the cabinet. But the turnover of personnel within the KMT is actually helpful. The Blue Camp has long been the victim of a rigid pecking order dominated by seniority and authority. Newcomers often find themselves at the back of a long waiting line. Now however, the cabinet has been reshuffled ahead of schedule due to public pressure. Internal resistance will be lessened. Middle-aged, new generation party leaders now have a chance to flex their muscles. This is a positive development for the future of partisan competition.

So far public response to the Wu and Chu has been postive. But once the final roster for the new cabinet is announced, the public may feel differently. Therefore, we would like to remind Wu and Chu that their cabinet nominations must be subject to exhaustive evaluations. They must not allow a recurrence of the "green card crisis." They must not allow the first impression of the new cabinet to be tainted. Cabinet members must demonstrate an ability to think anew. Even more importantly, they must understand what it takes to govern the nation, in breadth and in depth. They must consider the issue of balance. They must not hastily fill empty cabinet posts merely so they can be done with it.

We offer this reminder because reorganizing a cabinet is extremely difficult, and even though time may be limited. People are sometimes misled by their intuition. Take the Liu cabinet for example. Individually, each of the cabinet members represented an elite. But when they were organized into a team, a problem arose. They were too much alike. This "Cabinet of Professors" was incapable of coping with a string of emergencies, and had to be replaced. The Liu cabinet was politically tone-deaf and emotionally remote from the public. Wu Den-yih and Chu Li-lun, given their backgrounds, may be able to make up for these deficiencies in the Liu cabinet. But from another angle, Wu and Chu have rather similar backgrounds. Birds of a feather, as they say, flock together. If one searches for talent among the same peer group, it is hard to avoid falling into the same trap, and diminishing the creativitive potential of any newly-formed cabinet.

The success or failure of the cabinet rests on two pillars. The first is administrative professionalism. The second is a capacity for swift response. The former is the cornerstone of stable national development. The latter is essential when responding to public opinion. The Liu cabinet may have been lacking in the latter, but it exhibited professionalism in the former. The Wu Zhu cabinet may be more politically responsive. But if lacks depth, breadth, and administrative synergies, it will eventually lose public support. It will undermine our economic strength. Lest we forget, Taiwan's economic miracle was created by a team of selfless, hard-working administrative officials. During the Chen Shui-bian era these administrative officials were turned into political scapegoats. This dealt a lethal blow to the professionalism and loyalty of the administrative system, from which it has yet to recover. This is real work. This is not the same as "virtual work," i.e., dealing with public opinion. The Wu Chu cabinet must not take this issue lightly.

We have high expectations for the Wu Chu cabinet. We also have a few words of admonition. The Blue Camp found itself out of power for eight years. Many people then in the prime of their life are now seniors. Wu Den-yih is over 60 years old. But it is the first time he has ever been a member of the cabinet. Chu Li-lun is approaching the age where his destiny is no longer in doubt. And yet some still consider him "too young." Recruiting capable cabinet members is a matter of urgency. But ideal candidates may be hard to find. The government faces a serious shortage of talent. Wu and Chu must create a cabinet with breadth and depth. The appointment of second line personnel such as vice ministers must also be treated seriously. They must allow new talent the opportunity to gain experience. Only then can they avoid squandering the opportunity offered by the current cabinet reshuffling.

The joint resignation of the Liu cabinet amply illustrates the heartlessness of the public. Chen Shui-bian changed premiers six times during his term of office, but he failed to his adminstration's effectiveness. Cabinet reshuffling is sometimes merely a channel for the venting of public discontent. It may not boost the government's effectiveness. During the hustle and bustle of a cabinet reshuffling, the public must remain clear-headed. It must maintain its political autonomy. It must not fall into the trap of parroting cliches. Only then can it truly discern the difference between right and wrong, and between political benefits and political costs.

對組閣工程的期許和提醒
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.09.09 04:10 am

劉兆玄退，吳敦義、朱立倫進，凸顯了幾項意義：一，內閣的定位由「行政內閣」變成「政治內閣」；二，行政院將由「管理取向」向「服務取向」轉型；三，國民黨內的世代交替，將因新閣布局而加速推動。

這三個意義，都值得正面看待。在變動越來越快的社會，一切按部就班行事的官僚體系，有時難免跟不上社會節拍，或因溝通不良而招致民怨。由具有立法委員及地方執政資歷的政治菁英出掌內閣，除可彌補行政菁英社會感應的不足，也更能跨越中央與地方的認知差異。至少，在野黨動輒以「南北差距」指控政府高層「不知民間疾苦」，這樣的批評將逐漸失去作用。

馬總統在天災和民怨的強大壓力下，不得不提前進行內閣改組，對國民黨內的人才更替其實頗有助益。藍營一向存在牢不可破的資歷倫理和勢力順位，新人往往陷於漫長的排班等待；如今，在社會壓力下提前改組，內部的反彈可以降低，中生代新人則獲得一展身手的機會。這在未來的政黨競爭中，應當是一個正面因素。

儘管外界對吳、朱兩人出線的反應不錯，但在整體內閣改組名單出爐後，民意可能還有另一番評價。因此，我們要提醒吳朱二人，此次籌組新閣一定要竭思殫慮，不可再發生類似「綠卡風波」等倒胃口的意外，以免新閣的第一印象留下汙點。內閣團隊除了要展現新意，更重要的是，用人要著眼治國的縱深，並思考格局的平衡，不能以把閣員職位草率填滿為既足。

之所以要提出這項提醒，是因為改組的工程極端艱鉅，但時間卻是極其迫促，人有時難免被自己的直觀蒙蔽。以劉內閣為例，個別而言，閣員個個都是菁英之士；但組成團隊後，卻出現「同質性太高」的問題，終而因「博士內閣」無法因應接二連三的緊急事件，而必須改組。吳敦義和朱立倫的背景，或許可以彌補劉內閣政治因應遲緩及社會介面不足的問題，但從某個角度看，吳、朱二人的背景也相當雷同，如果皆在左近的同儕圈中尋才，難免又陷入另一種「物以類聚」的極端，窄化了內閣開創性。

內閣的成敗，基本上繫乎兩大支柱：一是行政專業的能力，二是敏於因應的能力。前者是維持國家穩健發展的基石，後者則是民意政治的要件。劉內閣雖後者較為不足，但專業表現卻有其長處；吳朱內閣或者更敏於因應，但若疏忽內閣配置的縱深和整體行政綜效，終會耗蝕民意，進而耗損國家元氣。別忘了，台灣經濟奇蹟是一批幹練、無私的行政官員打造出來的，但扁政府時代「代罪羔羊」式的用人手法，大大斲喪了行政體系的專業和忠誠，至今尚未復原。這部分要做的是「實功」，跟對付民意的「虛功」不同，吳朱內閣絕不可輕忽以對。

對於吳朱內閣，我們抱持期待，也寄予叮嚀。試想，在失去政權的八年，藍軍中多少人由中壯年等成白頭：吳敦義已踰六十歲，方才首次入閣；朱立倫已近「知天命」之齡，還有人嫌他「太少年」。從內閣改組求才孔急、卻未必能獲理想人選看，整個政府的人才斷層其實相當嚴重。吳朱兩人在組閣時除了考慮執政格局和縱深，對第二線的次長級人事也應著力經營，安排新人增加歷練的機會。那才不枉這次組閣除舊布新的契機。

劉內閣總辭，說明了民意的殘酷。但從阿扁任內六易閣揆卻終未能提升施政成效看，內閣改組有時只是一個民意的宣洩口，卻對實際政務未必有提振作用。在眾聲喧譁的內閣改組之際，民眾如何保持自己的清明判斷，乃至保持自主的政治參與，不要落入人云亦云的俗套，才能真正洞悉政治的是非利害。