Heartless Politics and the Rape of Flowers

Heartless Politics and the Rape of Flowers
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 21, 2010

On the 19th of this month, this newspaper's "Issues in Black and White" column published an editorial entitled, "Naivete is not a Virtue." It criticized the Hau Lung-ping administration's tardy response to the Flora Expo controversy, which needlessly allowed the Flora Expo's image to be slandered. But the real guilt belongs to DPP councilmembers, who hurled false, out-of-context accusations. The Flora Expo has yet to open, but it is has already been viciously maligned as one huge pork barrel. The DPP perpetrated this "rape of the flowers." It is the real culprit. The DPP hypocritically proclaimed that it was "providing checks and balances" for the Taipei City Government. Can political parties consider only partisan advantage, and ignore the harm they inflict upon the nation and society?

Opposition parties must oversee the party in power. A democracy requires anti-corruption measures. No one objects to this. Oversight must protect the public interest. It must prevent those in office from abusing their power by engaging in corruption. Oversight however, is not a license to engage in irrational demagoguery. Oversight must be reasonable. It must help the public discern the truth. Oversight is not a license to turn facts on their head in an effort to bamboozle the public. DPP councilmembers tried to fabricate a Flora Expo scandal by demagoguing water spinach, basil, and bamboo pavilions. Examine the DPP councilmembers' ends and means, and one finds that the DPP councilmembers' actions were neither in the public interest nor consistent with reason.

Consider the rule of reason. The Flora Expo will display nearly 3000 varieties of fruits and vegetables. Over 30 million transplants will be on display. Out of this entire range, only four plants were priced above the norm. In other words, 99.9 percent of the plants were problem free. When an exhibit of such complexity conforms this closely to specifications, it is evidence of extraordinary administrative efficiency. If anything, it deserves public affirmation and warrants public pride. The average family probably overpays by a larger percentage in its domestic budget than the Hau administration.

The DPP is milking the 0.1 percent for all it is worth. It has locked its jaws around the issue and refuses to let go. One has to hand it to them. The DPP is playing the role of opposition party to the hilt. The only problem is that when Green Camp councilmembers level accusations of excessively high flower prices, they insinuate and embellish. They relentlessly attempt to mislead the public into believing that the procurement process was rife with pork. They characterize the entire Flora Expo as a hotbed of corruption, manipulated by Hau Lung-ping and the Taipei City Government. Do they care that their smear campaign has nothing to do with the truth? Hardly. For them the Flora Expo controversy is nothing more than an election strategy for the five cities elections. The Flora Expo controversy may well sabotage Hau Lung-bin's re-election efforts. But it hardly qualifies as "oversight." Such "whistleblowing" hardly conforms to the "principle of proportionality." It hardly meets the criteria of rationality, and still less morality.

The Green Camp has attempted to make a major issue out of water spinach. Green Camp councilmembers displayed a bunch of water spinach purchased from the local supermarket. They compared it with what they asserted was a sickly, withered specimen of water spinach, and asserted that the 20 NT per pot water spinach must have involved major pork. But they concealed certain facts. One. Out of the entire Flora Expo water spinach zone, they picked out the single ugliest specimen of water spinach. Two. A live plant is hardly the same as a harvested item from the supermarket. Three. Flora Expo water spinach specimens must be 20 centimeters wide by 20 centimeters high. Any given water spinach plant may have five or more stems. Therefore such comparisons are incorrect. Four. The overhead for flower growers include freight costs, display costs, and six months of guaranteed live maintenance costs. The DPP councilmembers were fully aware of the situation. Yet they deliberately distorted the facts in order to mislead the public. Clearly Green Camp claims that they were merely engaged in oversight on behalf of the public, were an inversion of the truth. In fact they were up to their usual dirty tricks.

Consider the public interest. If the construction of the Flower Expo venues and the procurement of plants involved inflated prices, fraud, or the squandering of public funds, of course any wrongdoing would have to be exposed. But the Flora Expo is not merely a venue for domestic flower growers and the domestic horticultural industry. It is an international event. It is a rare opportunity for landscape architects, technology and creative cultural industry entrepreneurs to showcase their masterpieces. This combined floral exhibit, tourism exhibit, and cultural exhibit, is exactly the world stage we need to showcase Taiwan's soft power. Naturally everyone involved must take extra care to maximize its chance of success. The Flora Expo has opened some of its venues to the public. Based on these, the Flora Expo has nothing to apologize for. The DPP hopes to use water spinach to destroy the Flora Expo. Are they really so heartless?

Consider the bamboo pavilion. Architects attempted to provide Taiwan's bamboo craft industry with a green stage at the Flora Expo. They extended a special invitation to elderly bamboo craft masters. They invited architecture students to participate in a hands-on student project. This thoughtful attempt to encourage creativity, created an elegant pavilion, and a valuable attraction within the Flora Expo. How did DPP councilmembers spin this success story? They characterized it as the "exploitation of students by their professors." In one fell swoop, they smeared the designer's heartfelt intentions, and the participants' laborious efforts. They indiscriminately hurled wild accusation, all under the mantle of "oversight." What difference is there between the DPP's "oversight" and outright sabotage?

The Republic of China government implemented democracy in the Taiwan Region for several decades ago. But "oversight" continues to be a synonym for sabotage. That is sad indeed. A prosperous Taiwan requires collective concern for the public good. it requires a collective appreciation for things of value. We urge the ruling and opposition parties to collectively consider how they can make the Flora Expo a success.

空心政治 辣手摧花
【聯合報╱社論】
2010.09.21 11:22 am

本報19日黑白集「憨慢不是美德」，批評郝市府對花風暴因應遲緩，使花博形象受到不必要的汙蔑。但追根究柢，民進黨議員以偏頗的取樣和不實的指控，把尚未開展的花博打成黑幕重重的公共工程，才是辣手摧花的罪魁禍首。在野黨假制衡之名監督市政，可以只問政黨收益而不計國家社會的損失嗎？

在野黨監督執政者，是民主政治必要的防腐機制，沒有人會反對這點。關鍵在，監督的目的是在維護公眾利益，防止掌權者濫權貪腐，而非無端興風作浪；監督的手段亦應符合理性原則，協助民眾辨識事實，而非一味顛倒黑白、混淆視聽。從目的和手段兩項標準看，民進黨議員藉空心菜、九層塔、竹涼亭等議題，猛烈炒作出一場「花風暴」，恐怕禁不起「公共利益」及「理性原則」的檢驗。

先談理性原則。這次花博展出的花卉、果蔬等園藝作物近三千多種，計三千萬株植栽；在這麼浩大的工程中，僅發現四種植物價格明顯偏高，應是意味百分之九十九點九的作物是沒有問題的。如此繁複的展覽而有這麼高的妥適比率，若從積極的角度看，其實也很是值得市民肯定與驕傲的治理能力，不是嗎？一般家庭採購的誤失率恐怕尚高於此。

當然，民進黨擴大指控那百分之零點一的問題，其絲毫不肯放過的精神，確實值得敬佩，亦是反對黨的角色所在。問題在，綠營議員指控花價偏高時，卻不斷含沙射影、加油添醋，企圖誘導民眾誤信以為各種花卉採購都弊端重重，進而渲染整個花博就是郝市府團隊上下其手、藏汙納垢的淵藪。作為五都的選戰策略，花風暴或許成功地打壓了郝龍斌的選情；但就在野的「監督」角色而言，這樣的「揭弊」手法不僅完全不符合「比例原則」，當然更不符合理性原則，甚至是根本不道德的。

以製造出最強烈話題的空心菜為例，綠營議員拿出一把市場買來的空心菜，與其聲稱從現場拍攝的一株病態蔫蔫的空心菜對比，即斷言廿元一盆的花博空心菜必有大弊端。但他隱而未言的事實卻是：一，在花博空心菜區，他只選最醜的一盆拍攝；二，活生生的植栽和採下的葉菜不能等量齊觀；三，花博的空心菜要符合廿公分乘廿公分的寬高，一「棵」空心菜可能有五「株」以上的莖，這是單位不對等的錯誤類比。四，花卉業者的成本，還包括了運費、布置費及六個月「保活期」的養護等費用；這些狀況，皆是議員所明知，卻故意扭曲誤導。由此可見，綠營民代表面上聲稱在監督市政，其實卻在混淆社會大眾視聽，使出慣用的烏賊戰術來打選戰。

再談「公眾利益原則」。花博的場館工程和園藝作物採購，若有浮報作假或浪費公帑情事，當然必須揭發；但花博本身不僅是國內花農、園藝業者衝上國際浪頭的舞台，更是建築景觀乃至科技、文創業者一顯身手的好機會。這樣兼具花卉、觀光、文化功能的展覽，也正是我們向世界展現台灣軟實力的舞台，當然需要各界更加細心呵護，以取得最大的成功。以花博近日公開的部分場館看，確實較世博任何頂級場館亦不遜色；想用一株空心菜的「空心政治」來毀了眾人心血營造的花博，真是於心何忍？

再以這次遭到波及的竹編涼亭為例，建築師為了讓台灣固有的竹編工藝能在花博的綠色舞台揚眉吐氣，特別請來竹編老師傅出馬，並邀建築科系學生一同動手見習建造。如此用心的創意，也成功打造出雅致的古典涼亭，成為花博珍貴的一景，結果竟被形容為「教授剝削學生」，一筆抹煞了設計者的用心及參與者的汗水。不分青紅皂白的粗暴指控，若都能美其名為「監督」，那在野黨跟體制內的絆腳石有何兩樣？

台灣實施民主政治數十年，「監督」若仍然只是「扯後腿」的同義詞，那就太可悲了。美好的台灣，需要大家懷有共同成全之心；美好的事物，也需要大家共同珍惜。現在，請朝野共同想想如何能把花博辦得更好吧！