Fubon vs. TaiMed: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing

Fubon vs. TaiMed: A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 22, 2011

Summary: Comparing Fubon and TaiMed is like comparing apples and oranges. Fubon is a cold dish warmed over, The TaiMed corruption scandal on the other hand, is something completely new. It is hot off the grill, Its full nature has yet to be discovered. The DPP persists in equating the two. But its efforts to conflate the two have been in vain. The DPP has succeeded only in turning itself into a sheep in wolf's clothing. The DPP's smokescreen will only obscure the DPP's escape route. The spectacle of the DPP and Tsai Ing-wen destroying their own political party and their own reputations, is truly staggering.

Full Text Below:

Comparing Fubon and TaiMed is like comparing apples and oranges. Fubon is a cold dish warmed over, The TaiMed corruption scandal on the other hand, is something completely new. It is hot off the grill, Its full nature has yet to be discovered. The DPP persists in equating the two. But its efforts to conflate the two have been in vain. The DPP has succeeded only in turning itself into a sheep in wolf's clothing.

The DPP has been trying to make something of the Fubon controversy. It is aggressively playing the "shark fin soup" card. Its goal is to draw attention away from the TaiMed corruption scandal. Its goal is to blacken Ma Ying-jeou's clean image, and to provide a safety hatch through which Tsai Ing-wen can escape the fire caused by her corruption.

But voters want the truth. The Green Camp's smokescreen is a means of sowing confusion. The Green Camp wants to create the impression that "They're both equally corrupt." The DPP's tactics are an admission of guilt. The methods they have adopted are an admission that they are attempting to dupe the voters. But the only result has been the destruction of social justice.

The merger between the Fubon Bank and the Bank of Taipei took place in 2002, during the Chen administration. The machinery of state, including the Executive Yuan, prosecutors, the Control Yuan, all went over the case with a fine tooth comb. They examined the case from the inside out, from top to bottom. They found nothing at all improper. Chen administration Minister of Finance Lin Chuan even heaped praise on it. He said the merger of the Fubon Bank with the Bank of Taipei was a successful example of "one plus one is greater than two."

So why is the Fubon case being dished up again, nearly a decade later, and being characterized as a huge scandal? Mainly because the DPP is finding it impossible to keep a lid on the TaiMed corruption scandal. The DPP has been caught off guard, and in desperation it is using the Fubon case as a smokescreen.

During last Saturday's election debate, Tsai Ing-wen personally accused Ma Ying-jeou of accepting 15 million dollars in campaign contributions from Fubon Bank in 2008. This touched off a firestorm of controversy. The very next day however, her accusations were proven to be completely mistaken. Fubon wanted to make a contribution. But Ma Ying-jeou turned it down, saying he was obligated to avoid conflicts of interest. Contrast this with Tsai Ing-wen's conduct in the TaiMed corruption scandal. Tsai personally approved the TaiMed project. She personally penned the relevant regulations, She personally made herself TaiMed board chairman. She personally established several family enterprises to invest in biotechnology, The Fubon and TaiMed cases are worlds apart. Tsai Ing-wen pointed the finger at the Fubon case. Instead she merely drew attention to her own wrongdoing in the TaiMed corruption scandal. Her handling of the matter was inept. She lost more than she gained.

The DPP's information was false, yet DPP spokesperons were overly eager to claim credit. They made the mistake of leveling slanderous accusations. They should have cut their losses. Instead, their feelings of humiliation made them apoplectic. So they dusted off a discredited old allegation regarding the Fubon case, and tried to ram it down the public's throat. Their methods merely revealed their impotence and lack of scruples.

The Green Camp demagogued non-issues such as Fubon Bank "campaign contributions," the shark fin soup banquet, and confidential documents. These were no different from the non-existent Chen Ying-chu "triad boss" incident. One. First, they attempted to smear Ma Ying-jeou by accusing him of accepting 300 million dollars in campaign contributions, including 15 million from Fubon Bank. This charge proved groundless. Two. They then accused Ma Ying-jeou of meeting with Chen Ying-chu, twice. How many times was he supposed to have met with Fubon? How many meals was he supposed to have eaten? They hurled all sorts of wild charges. Three. Eventually they learned that Chen Ying-chu was in fact a Green Camp sugar daddy. He was similar to Fubon Bank's Daniel Tsai. Wu Shu-cheng accepted at least 30 million dollars from him. She even praised him as the best candidate for finance minister, Now however, to attack Ma Ying-jeou, they are using him as a target.

If we compare and contrast Fubon case and the TaiMed case, we find the two are very different. One. The Fubon case has been subjected to repeated scrutiny. The TaiMed corruption scandal on the other hand, remains shrouded in mystery. It has never seen the light of day. Two. The merger between the Taipei Bank and the Fubon Bank underwent a public bid. The process was totally transparent, from start to finish. The purpose of the "highly confidential" documents was to prevent insider trading. Ma Ying-jeou had no family interests in the merger. By contrast, Tsai Ing-wen's "highly confidential" personal support for TaiMed enabled her to increase the value of Tsai family shares and make herself company chairman. Three. The benefits of the merger between the Fubon Bank and the Taipei Bank benefits are obvious, Every year it earns billons in revenue for the Taipei City Government. TaiMed by contrast, continues to bleed red ink. The government is stuck with the bill. Tsai Ing-wen meanwhile, personally benefits, to the tune of $20 million dollars.

TaiMed and Fubon reflect the difference in the Blue Camp and the Green Camp's way of handling things. One. The DPP relentlessly questions and denounces its opponents. It ignores questions it ought to answer. It never explains itself. It never offers any apologies. It even threatens critics, telling them "enough is enough." Two. The DPP takes cases it thoroughly investigated when it was in power, and rehashes and exploits them when it is in the opposition. Its smokescreen tactics demonstrate its contempt for voters. Does Tsai Ing-wen really think the public is incapable of discriminating between right and wrong? Three. The general election is only 20 days away. If Tsai Ing-wen were to offer a sincere apology, she might be able to clear up suspicions about the TaiMed corruption scandal. But the DPP insists on using the threadbare Fubon case to shift the focus of attention. Alas, it is merely confirming public suspicions regarding its guilt.

It matter not how adept the DPP might be at strategy. Democracy requires distinguishing between right and wrong. It requires calling a spade a spade, It requires honestly facing the public. The Green Camp alleges that the Blue Camp "planted misleading information" and "altered documents," Christina Liu did make honest mistakes for which she must assume political and legal responsibility. But the TaiMed corruption scandal involves dozens of cases of illegal conduct and malfeasance. Don't the DPP and Tsai Ing-wen owe citizens of the nation an honest accounting?

The DPP's smokescreen will only obscure the DPP's escape route. The spectacle of the DPP and Tsai Ing-wen destroying their own political party and their own reputations, is truly staggering.

富邦比宇昌：一隻色厲內荏的烏賊
【聯合報╱社論】 2011.12.22

富邦案和宇昌案是完全無法相提並論的事。富邦案是早已搾乾的菜又被搬出來擠汁，宇昌案則是一坨油滋滋形貌不詳的東西，仍有待剖析和檢驗。民進黨非要把兩者放到同一天平上去品頭論足，結果徒然顯示：自己頓時成了一隻色厲內荏的烏賊。

民進黨近日窮追富邦案，又狂打「魚翅宴」文宣，目的除在轉移宇昌案的焦點，也在抹黑馬英九的清廉形象，為身陷自肥火場的蔡英文衝開一扇逃生門。

但是，站在選民的角度，人們要的是「真相」；綠營的烏賊戰術卻是在混淆事實，想要製造「天下烏鴉一般黑」的假象。從動機看，民進黨的戰術反映的是它自己的心虛；從手段看，這是在欺矇選民；從結果看，這是在破壞社會正義。

其實，發生在二○○二年的富邦併北銀案，在扁政府時代，即歷經行政、檢調、監察等國家機器裡裡外外、四面八方的翻攪與調查，並未發現弊情。扁朝財政部長林全甚至曾誇讚，富邦併北銀是「一加一大於二」的成功典範。

但是，事隔近十年，富邦為何又變成民進黨口中的大弊案，被拿出來再炒一次？主要是因民進黨招架不住宇昌案，慌不擇路地要用富邦的陳年墨汁打煙幕戰。

上周六的大選辯論，由蔡英文親自拋出馬英九二○○八年收了富邦一千五百萬獻金的引爆火線，次日就被證實是個徹底的「烏龍」。事實是，富邦有意捐款，但遭馬英九以「利益迴避」為由，拒絕了那筆捐款。這比起蔡英文自己親批宇昌公文、親寫法案、親自當上宇昌董事長，還成立多個家族企業來投資生技，豈非天壤之別？蔡英文親自披掛掀開富邦之役，卻更反襯出自己缺乏分際、操守可議，真是偷雞不著蝕把米。

民進黨資訊不實卻貪功躁進，犯下這個含血噴人的烏龍，照理說應該「見壞就收」才是；但它竟然惱羞成怒，反將富邦的陳年舊案一古腦重新端出，硬要逼國人吃下這一桌餿飯殘羹。這種做法，只是愈發暴露其虛弱和失德。

綠營從富邦獻金案打到魚翅宴和機密公文，其實和先前的陳盈助「組頭事件」如出一轍：一、先抹黑馬英九收陳盈助三億獻金（收富邦一千五百萬），被證明是空穴來風。二、再咬馬英九為何兩年前與陳盈助見過兩次面（與富邦見過幾面？吃過幾次飯？胡攪一通）。三、最後，卻發現陳盈助是綠營金主的底蘊；這和富邦的蔡明忠一樣，當年吳淑珍至少收了他三千萬，還誇獎他是最佳財長人選，如今為了「打馬」卻把他當成箭靶。

若把富邦案和宇昌案拿來比一比，兩者其實大不相同：一，富邦已經過反覆檢驗；但宇昌卻疑雲重重，未見天日。二，北銀和富邦的合併，經過公開招標，程序一路透明，最後一份「極機密」的公文是為了防止內線交易，更未有馬英九家族私利牽涉其中；但蔡英文以「極機密」隻手扶植TaiMed，自己家族入股，自任董事長。三，富邦併北銀的效益明顯，每年為北市府帶入數十億收益；而宇昌連年虧損，政府被套牢，唯獨蔡英文一人獲利近二千萬元。

宇昌和富邦兩案的比較，正是藍綠兩營處事風格的對照。其一，民進黨不斷地質問、告發對手，對於自己應該答覆的疑問卻置之不理，不說明、也不道歉，還威嚇外界必須「適可而止」。其二，民進黨執政時徹查過的案子，在野時還要拿出來剝削一回，這種烏賊戰術是對選民的藐視，蔡英文真以為台灣人民那麼沒有分斷是非的能力嗎？其三，距離大選還有廿多日，蔡英文若誠懇說明並道歉，足夠她澄清宇昌案疑雲；但民進黨卻用富邦的舊案來轉移焦點，恐怕只是坐實了自己的心虛。

民進黨再長於策略，但民主終需回到政治是非的本質；就事論事，坦誠面對人民。綠營現在緊咬「誤植」與「變造」公文，此事劉憶如確實有錯，其政治及法律責任皆不能逃避；但除此以外，面對宇昌案的至少幾十個涉及違法或失德的疑竇重重，民進黨及蔡英文難道不應向國人坦誠作個交代嗎？

烏賊噴煙，最後恐怕會遮住了自己的出路；民進黨與蔡英文如此自毀黨格和人格，確實令人瞠目結舌。