Ma Administration Decision-Making: How to Lose Friends and Alienate People

Ma Administration Decision-Making:
How to Lose Friends and Alienate People
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 3, 2012

Summary: The controversy over rate hikes, left the impression that "Ma Ying-jeou wants rate hikes." Ma Ying-jeou brought this upon himself. He acted as if he could prevent electricity rates from rising. But electricity is not a free lunch. One either hikes rates, or provides tax subsidizes. If Ma Ying-jeou insists on going down the wrong path, he might as well provide subsidies. Why make such a fuss, only to lose friends and alienate people?

Full Text below:

As President Ma said, any decision has pros and cons. Should electricity rates be hiked to the market level in a single stage? Or should they be hiked incrementally in several stages? That may be a matter of opinion. In any event, the situation is a mess. This was not because the Ma administration arrived at a decision and stuck to it. This was because the Ma administration flip-flopped repeatedly. The Ma administration's confusion and chaos was, in a word, "frightening."

Who in the world adopts such an absurd decision-making process? The electricity rate hike controversy raged for months. Three weeks ago the Ma administration decided to increase electricity rates to their true market level in a single stage, on May 15. The new rates were announced, while electricity rates remained unchanged. Prices on everything else meanwhile, climbed. Controversy raged. The countdown to May 15 began. The public was psychologically prepared for the single stage rate hike. But suddenly word emerged from the central government. Someone on the "five man committee" changed his mind. The next day the president held a press conference and announced a three-stage rate hike.

As mentioned in yesterday's "In Black and White" editorial column, the Ma administration originally announced a May 15 "single stage rate hike." But a multi-stage rate hike was already under consideraton. When the Ma administration adopted the single stage rate hike, it held forth on carbon reduction, It urged businesses to enhance competitiveness. It adopted user fees. It eschewed tax subsidies. It insisted Taipower would go belly up. It advanced all sorts of high-minded justifications for what it was doing. It presented a clear and logical case. President Ma even said he "had his helmet ready." He appeared determined to bite the bullet and not drag things out.

In times like these, the public is in pain and society is in chaos. But leaders with vision know that even three feet of ice will melt, sooner if not later. Since those in office have the courage and determination to slice through the Gordian Knot, the ruling and opposition parties should ride out the storm together. The Ma administration offered all sorts of justifications for the "single stage rate hike." His words were still ringing in our ears. But as expected, he did a complete about face. He suddenly introduced a "multi-stage rate hike." President Ma changed his tune. He said he was "absolutely concerned about public opinion trends." He said he was "not arrogant in the face of the public." But what was he doing, other than spitting in his own face? What was he doing, other than confessing that the day before his own administration was supremely arrogant in the face of the public?

This 180 degree about face intensified an already divisive rate hike controversy. It deepened both government and private sector divisiveness, Even members of the government's "five man team" held differing views on the issue. Eventually even hard-core supporters of the government's "courage amidst adversity" felt like fools. This sort of decision-making can only lose friends and alienate people.

The Ma administration has always tried to please everyone, only to wind up pleasing no one. This has been the Ma administration's chronic ailment. Last year's subsidies for elderly farmers was a good example. The Ma administration initially claimed it would only increase official rates 316 NT. It referred to it as "systematization." Soon however, they removed their helmets and placed them on the ground. They changed their tune, saying they would increase rates 1000 NT. During this period it repeatedly flip-flopped. Elderly farmers felt the subsides were well deserved. As a result those who championed making them part of the system, felt as if the Ma Ying-jeou administration had slapped them in the face. The government failed to persuade its opponents. It failed to respond to its supporters. How could it not lose friends? How could it not alienate people?

Electricity rates will be hiked in three stages. Will the first two stages touch off a public firestorm? That remains to be seen. The so-called "third stage" is merely a euphemism for "reducing the rate hike 20%." Taipower estimates it will suffer a 70 billion NT loss as a result of the new rate hike scheme. It will continue receiving tax subsidies. We want to ask President Ma a question. Were you "arrogant" before, when you adopted the single stage rate hike? Or are you "afraid of accusations of arrogance" now while you are adopting the multi-stage rate hike? You sat and watched as uncompetitive industries made profits on the backs of taxpayers. They made profits not on merit, but on electricity subsidies. Is this what the self-proclaimed "reformist" Ma administration wants?

Step back for a moment. Assume this is what the Ma administration wants. One may champion a gradual rate hike, a multi-stage rate hike, or even a rate freeze. One need merely delay the final reckoning to 2016. If one can do that, one can determine in advance whether to reduce the rate hikes, or impose multi-stage rate hikes. One need hardly do what is being done now. One need hardly turn decision-making into a social cost borne by the public. The public need not suffer the consequences of the policy makers' internal dissension and policy flip-flops. All the flip-flopping could make heroes out of Vincent Siew and Wang Jin-pyng. But it would also make a zero out of Ma Ying-jeou. Is there no way to avoid making the administration look bad?

The controversy over rate hikes left the impression that "Ma Ying-jeou wants rate hikes." Ma Ying-jeou brought this upon himself. He acted as if he could prevent electricity rates from rising. But electricity is not a free lunch. One either hikes rates, or provides tax subsidizes. If Ma Ying-jeou insists on going down the wrong path, he might as well provide subsidies. Why make such a fuss, only to lose friends and alienate people?

眾叛親離的決策過程
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.05.03 01:53 am

正如馬總統所說，任何決策都是利弊互見；因而，電價「一次漲足」或「分段調漲」，亦可見仁見智。現在問題鬧到這步田地，其實不在最後選擇了何種方案，而是馬政府的整個決策過程，太過搖擺反覆，亂無章法，簡直可用恐怖二字形容。

天下豈容有如此荒唐的決策過程？電價上漲一案，天翻地覆地鬧了幾個月，甚至在三星期前已決定五月十五日為啟動日，新的電價表也已公布；在此期間，電價未漲，百物已漲，議論沸騰。而正當啟動日已進入倒數計時之際，社會似已亦有「伸頭一刀／縮頭一刀」的心理準備，竟爾突然傳出中樞「五人小組」中有人翻案，次日即由總統連夜召開記者會宣布「分三階段調漲」。

正如昨日黑白集所論，馬政府宣布五月十五日「一次漲足」之時，其實「分段調漲」的另案業已經過評比；當時採定「一次漲足」，對社會說什麼節能減碳、激勵企業提升競爭力、使用者付費、不可用稅金補貼、台電會破產，種種大道理說得天花亂墜、頭頭是道；馬總統甚至說「鋼盔準備好了」，儼然展現了「長痛不如短痛」的決心。

當此之際，社會固然深感痛苦、陷入混亂，但亦有瞻顧深遠者認為，這畢竟是三尺之冰，早晚皆須解凍，既然主政者有「魄力」，決定闖過這個生死門，那麼朝野就當共體時艱、共度難關吧！然而，馬政府為「一次漲足」所作種種辯解言猶在耳之際，詎料他自己卻翻了盤，隨著端出「分段調漲」的新案，話鋒一轉，馬總統改口說「絕對會關心民意走向」、「不會以傲慢面對人民！」這豈不是自批其頰？彷彿承認一天以前整個政府是「以傲慢面對人民」！

這個一百八十度的轉彎，除了留下早已哄抬亂漲的物價，政府與民間廣泛對立的傷害亦已造成，而政府內部五人小組也各持異志，最後連認為應當支持政府「魄力」共體時艱的鐵桿支持者亦覺得受到愚弄。這樣的決策，豈不是眾叛親離？

馬政府這種「父子騎驢」的決策樣態幾乎已經成為宿疾沉痾。去年在大選前的老農津貼風潮即是顯例，馬政府原本堅持依公式調加三一六元，謂為制度化；後來，鋼盔落地，又改口稱加一千元。在這個反覆變化期間，「老農」覺得這些皆是應得，卻使支持「制度化」者，形同被馬英九狠狠地洗臉。這種既無能說服反對者，又無力回應支持者的政府，如何不使「眾叛」？又如何不令「親離」？

電價新案，三階段調漲，前兩階段會不會引爆兩次漲風，尚未可知，而所謂的「第三階段」則恐怕其實只是「減漲二○％」的飾詞；台電估計依新案今年虧損將達七百億，照樣將由稅金補貼；試問：馬總統原先究竟是因「傲慢」而採定「一次漲足」？抑或如今只是「怕被指為傲慢」而改採「分段調漲」？而既採「分段調漲」，即不啻坐視那些不具競爭力的企業，仰賴全民支撐的幾趴電費補貼來維持其「微利」及生存，他們不是憑本事賺利潤，而是賺了補貼的電費，這難道是矢口宣示改革的馬政府的本意？

退一步言，如果馬政府的本意如此，其實自始即可主張緩漲、分段漲，甚至凍漲，只須將事態的最後爆炸點拖過二○一六即可。倘係如此，至少即可早早做出「降低漲幅／分段調漲」的決策，大可不必像如今這樣，將決策過程的顢頇反覆變成加諸國人的社會成本，亦不必讓社會來承擔決策體制內部歧見的顛倒與反覆。畢竟，此次顛倒反覆如果捧紅了蕭萬長與王金平，卻是弄灰了馬英九，難道沒有其他的方法能教政府不出這種醜？

如今，整個議論似乎造成了「是馬英九要漲價」的印象，而馬英九也好像往自己身上攬，彷彿他可以對電力漲價叫停。其實，電價不是白吃的午餐，不漲價，就一定要用稅金補貼；如果馬英九仍然要走回這條老路，補貼就是了，又何必鬧出「眾叛親離」這麼大的動靜？