Jennifer Wang and Wang Ching-feng: Government Policy vs. Social Movements

Jennifer Wang and Wang Ching-feng: Government Policy vs. Social Movements
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 10, 2010

Premier Wu recently made reference to free trade zones. He said he was considering delinking wages for foreign workers inside free trade zones with the minimum wage for local workers. Jennifer Wang, Chairman of the Council for Labor Affairs expressed opposition. She said that if the administration delinked the two, she would resign. Jennifer Wang's tough stance echoes that of former Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng, who stepped down rather than execute prisoners on death row. The two are mirror images of each other.
President Ma is approaching the middle of his four year term. The arguments advanced by Jennifer Wang, Wang Ching-feng, and Director of Health Yang Chi-hong, who attempted to resign over the issue of health insurance premiums, have captured public attention. Viewed in a positive light, political appointees sticking to their guns is impressive. Viewed in a negative light, the situation reveals problems of compatibility within the Ma administration. It also underscores the difficulty of reaching compromises on policy.

When the Ma administration was formed, it consisted of three categories of people. The first was political appointees with governing experience. The second was social activists such as Jennifer Wang and Wang Ching-feng. A third was intellectuals from academia. It is not difficult to understand how this situation came about. One group has cool heads and technocratic expertise. Another group has the ambition and desire to return to power. But when one reviews the actual record for the past two years, one finds the veteran bureaucrats' performance is often mediocre and out of synch. Political appointees with backgrounds in various social movements introduced a breath of fresh air. But they could not tolerate bureaucratic rigidity, became weary, and one by one left the administration. Political appointees from academia offered a variety of public and private reasons for their departure.

To be fair, Jennifer Wang and Wang Ching-feng's performance in the cabinet won them public respect. Their private conduct and public images were exceptional. Their job performance was considered praiseworthy. Wang Ching-feng resigned over the death penalty. The public did not agree with her. But she held firm to her own convictions. Such resolve is indeed rare. Jennifer Wang fought for jobs for workers during the economic downturn. Yet she was booed at labor gatherings. She wept silently when questioned in the legislature, revealing the depth of her feelings. Yet she was blasted for defending the 22K policy. She found herself caught in the middle, attacked by both sides. For her delinking the minimum wage may be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Jennifer Wang and Wang Ching-feng each have a final arbiter in their own minds. Each considers it their non-\negotiable bottom line. The problem is that a government seldom operates in such a clearcut, straightline fashion. Decision-making often involves difficult back and forth compromises between harsh reality and one's moral bottom line. Only then can one make a breakthrough. Take the minimum wage for example. Suppose the issue of exploitation by employment agencies can be addressed, and workers receive their original level of real income? Is delinking wages really a sacred cow that cannot be touched? Not necessarily.

A properly functioning government apparatus must strike a balance between the considerations of bureaucracies and the ideals of social movements. It must adopt a professional posture and relentlessly seek breakthroughs and improvements. Over-reliance on bureaucracy makes one susceptible to conservative thinking and complacency. Excessive ideological zeal in pursuit of quantum jumps, as demanded by social reformers, may lead to zero-sum confrontation between reality and idealism.

Wang Ching-feng insisted on abolishing the death penalty. Her resignation may have preserved the purity of her personal convictions. But from a larger perspective, her hardline stance provoked public resentment and paradoxically compelled the Ministry of Justice to step up executions. She not only provoked social divisions, she undermined the Republic of China's human rights image. Under the circumstances, Wang Ching-feng's insistence on her own ideals was not necessarily a plus.

Jennifer Wang insists on linking the minimum wage with wages for foreign workers. Her position is the result of her long term involvement in and commitment to the labor movement. She now occupies an important post, one that enables her to delink wages without harming labor rights and to reach a win/win result. She need not sacrifice herself on the altar of her conscience. On this point, labor groups may wish to share their views. They should not be in such hurry to confront this former comrade and ally. After all, if a political appointee who weeps over the plight of labor is driven out of office, what is the likelihood her replacement will be better?

President Ma's approval ratings have risen and fallen over the past two years, allowing us to witness the tug of war between bureaucrats and social reformers within the Ma administration. Governing is not social reform. Nor is governing allowing bureaucrats to govern by the book. Governing requires finding a middle ground that enables progress. Wang Ching-feng's resignation has made the death penalty even more intractable. A solution for the minimum wage issue can be found. Jennifer Wang must not make the same mistake as Wang Ching-feng.

If on the second anniversary of the Ma administration, all those who have resigned from the cabinet are social reformers, the public will find itself speechless.

王如玄和王清峰：政策與社運之間的平衡
【聯合報╱社論】
2010.05.10 02:27 am

吳揆日前談自由貿易港區，提到將考慮在區內使外勞與本勞的基本工資脫鉤；勞委會主委王如玄公開表示反對，並稱若果真決定脫鉤，她立刻下台。王如玄的強硬態度，讓人想起前法務部長王清峰堅持寧可下台，也不願執行一件死刑；兩人就像一面鏡子裡外的同一身形與映像。

在馬總統執政即將屆滿兩年之際，王如玄和王清峰的論調，包括稍早衛生署長楊志良為健保費一度求去，皆讓人矚目。從正面看，政務官懷有獨特的堅持，風格不俗；從反面看，這些狀況實反映了馬政府內部的磨合問題，也凸顯了決策主張不易達成妥協的困境。

當初馬政府成立，主要由三股人馬組成，一類是有過執政經驗的行政官僚，一股是像王如玄、王清峰這樣活躍於社運界的人士，另一股則是來自學術界的知識菁英。這樣的布局不難理解：一則可以固守技術官僚的專業和沉穩，一則是能表現重新執政的理想與追求。但從過去兩年的實際運作看，舊官僚一脈表現平平，有時走調；出身社運界的政務官雖帶來清新氣象，卻也因不耐官場的刻板、磨人，接連損兵折將。學界出身者則因各種公私因素求去，更不在話下。

持平而論，王如玄和王清峰在內閣的表現都受到民意信任，除了個人操守及形象不俗，工作積極也受到肯定。王清峰因「廢死」爭議下台，即使國人不同意她的觀點，但她盡力維護個人信仰的堅持，誠屬不可多得。而王如玄在景氣寒冬極力爭取勞工就業機會，卻在勞運場合遭到噓聲，在國會備詢時真情流露而泣不成聲，乃至為22Ｋ政策辯護卻遭到砲轟，說明她面對左右夾擊仍不畏難。如今，基本工資脫鉤的問題，卻可能成為壓垮她的最後一根稻草。

在王如玄和王清峰心中，各有一把「最後的戒尺」，那是她們認為必須捍衛的底線。問題是，一個政府的運作模式，卻往往不是如此一刀兩斷的直線切法，決策往往是要在現實困境和道德底線間往返折衝，尋求一個終極的平衡點或突破口。以基本工資問題為例，如果能夠在解決仲介剝削的前提下，使外勞的實質所得不低於原有水準；那麼，本外勞基本工資脫鉤，真是一頭絕對不可碰觸的聖牛嗎？恐怕未必盡然。

一部優良的國家機器，應該是在官僚思維和社運理想之間求取最佳平衡，站穩專業的立場，並不斷追求突破與提升。如果過度倚賴官僚，很容易陷於保守思維，而故步自封；但如果過度執著意識形態，追逐跳躍式的社運願景，則可能陷於現實與理想零和對立的狀態。

以王清峰對廢除死刑的堅持為例，她的辭官，雖然保住了個人信仰的純度；但整體觀之，因為她的態度過於強烈，卻激起了民眾強大的反感，反而迫使法務部不得不加速死刑的執行，不僅讓社會的分歧擴大，甚至危及台灣力圖保持的人權形象。如此看來，王清峰的堅持對她個人的理想而言，也未必稱得上是「得」了。

王如玄之所以堅持基本工資不可脫鉤，當然是源自長期以來從事勞運的信仰和承諾。她今天居此要職，也許能在不損害勞工權益的原則下，找出讓脫鉤可達到雙贏的辦法，而不必在良心與現實決策之間，把自己推上祭壇。這點，其實勞運團體也不妨共同貢獻意見，而不須對這位昔之戰友和今之同盟者相煎太急。試想，今天若逼走一個肯為勞工垂淚的政務官，下一位主委會更好嗎？

對照馬總統兩年來聲望的起起伏伏，可窺知馬政府決策在官僚和社運之間的拉扯與擺盪，仍未找到最佳的自我定位。執政不是搞社運，執政更不是任官僚照本宣科，而是要在迂迴進退之間找到上升的螺旋。王清峰掛冠，讓台灣的死刑問題變成一件更棘手的難題；今天基本工資的問題並非無解，不能再使王如玄重蹈覆轍。

馬政府兩周年，如果告退的閣員盡是社運界菁英，那真讓人無言以對！