Pick the Peoples' Brains, Find a Solution for Taiwan

Pick the Peoples' Brains, Find a Solution for Taiwan
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 22, 2013

Summary: We would like to remind the public on Taiwan that blaming every problem, large or small, on "presidential incompetence" is unfair. It does not help. We would also like to remind the president that wielding immense power and resources, but failing to respond to people's aspirations, is an intolerable tragedy.

Full Text below:

President Ma proclaimed that he wanted to be "a president to all the people." But five years have gone by. He has not become "a president to all the people." Instead, his approval rating has hit rock bottom. Let us look back. Let us see if we can better understand why. The cause of Ma Ying-jeou's predicament is not confined to irreconciliable Blue vs. Green differences. He shrank his own leadership role to administrative decision-making. He neglected his party. He almost forgot the existence of the people.

Leave aside for the moment opposition party obstructionism. Government efficiency rests mainly on two pillars, ruling adminstration efficiency, and ruling party fighting spirit. President Ma's administration has offered few solutions to Taiwan's political and social problems. Leave aside his dispirited policy implementation. Under President Ma's leadership for the past five years, the ruling party has undergone a fundamental change in its makeup. Its legislative caucus members frequently sing a different tune from the central government. They frequently obstruct its policy proposals. Given an undisciplined party and a lax administration, the Ma administration has squandered the Blue Camp's supermajority and a golden opportunity for reform. It has dashed the public's hopes for Taiwan's transformation.

The president's character has been a major factor. Consider the systemic roots of the problem. This newspaper's polls show that 74% of the public is dissatisfied with the ruling administration's performance. This is higher than the 69% who are dissatisfied with President Ma's performance. Clearly the ruling administration's weakness and ineptitude is the main reason Ma has lost popularity. The Ma administration has undergone several cabinet reshuffles over the past five years. But these have merely amounted to tinkering around the edges. When President Ma holds forth on national policy, one seldom hears fresh thinking or creative insights. Clearly the decision-making circles in his brain trust have been unable to provide him with any extraordinary advice.

The adminstration's ineptitude, is due in part to the sinister political atmosphere that has prevailed in recent years. Intelligent people have no desire to become involved in politics. But another factor is President Ma's inability to judge character, and his inability to use people. President Ma does everything by the book. He is often obstinate about such matters. This makes it difficult for him to understand the current situation or offer a strong defense of his position. This, coupled with cabinet officials accustomed to following orders, and Blue vs. Green legislative gridlock, the machinery of state has ground to a halt. How can it possibly respond deftly to internal and external developments?

President Ma may say that he often visits the countryside and participates in civic activities. He may say that accusations he has forgotten the people are unfair. But the issue is how he perceives the people. President Ma does indeed often visit the countryside or participate in civic activities. But is he merely engaging in "noblesse oblige?" Is he merely blessing the event with his presence? Is he merely putting on a show of being "close to his constituents." If so, then it is the misuse of a national leader's precious time and power. It matters not whether the two parties enjoy the process. It is not beneficial to overall national policy. Put more bluntly, it is more akin to electioneering. It has nothing to do with soliciting public opinion.

President Ma must draw upon the strength and wisdom of the public. The reasons are clear. First of all, Taiwan's economic hardships must be overcome. But for the past five years the ruling administration has exhausted its programs, all to no effect. It must now draw upon the wisdom of the private sector. Only this can avoid public sector blind spots. Secondly, Blue-Green reconciliation has stalled. President Ma has refused to convene a National Affairs Conference, such as that proposed by the opposition DPP. The government and the opposition have almost no room for negotiation. This deadlock must be broken. The most feasible approach is for non-governmental elements to reestablish a social consensus. Thirdly, President Ma's approval rating is now only 20%. The public is either cynical or dazed. The administration must draw upon the intellect of the private sector. It must have the humility to consult civil society. It must reverse this cynical mindset, Otherwise over the next three years Taiwan will be unable to move.

The Ma administration has no lack of erudition. But these elites lack the ability to inspire men's hearts. They even lack communication skills and the ability to persuade. They may be good at contemplating the issues. But they are often inept at finding solutions and putting them into practice. Compare this to the DPP era. Chen Shui-bian's populism incited public passions. It brimmed over with boastfulness. Its rashness concealed hidden dangers. By contrast, Ma Ying-jeou's populism is motivated by the desire to please, by an overweening desire to be liked. It shifts direction like the wind, according to the likes and dislikes of the outside world. It invariably falls victim to the "Father and Son Ride a Donkey" syndrome, and finds it is unable to please all the people all the time. The Chen administration's populism relied on intuition. It required little knowledge. The Ma administration, on the other hand, has a surfeit of theory, and an excesso fpopulist pretensions. Its implementation cannot keep pace with its aspirations.

During an era of peace, Ma Ying-jeou might have been an ideal president. Today, faced with thorny problems such as stagnant growth, a lack of competitiveness, youth unemployment, and social discontent. a strong helmsman is needed to lead the country. The administration lacks the necessary dynamism. President Ma must draw upon the intellect of the private sector. This includes members of his brain trust whom he has forgotten about, his national policy advisers and other elites. He must rally the people to action. He must break the pattern of "the government is working overtime, but the public experiences no benefits" phenomenon.

We would like to remind the public on Taiwan that blaming every problem, large or small, on "presidential incompetence" is unfair. It does not help. We would also like to remind the president that wielding immense power and resources, but failing to respond to people's aspirations, is an intolerable tragedy.

向民間借腦，尋找台灣突圍重振之路
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.05.22 04:15 am

馬總統曾宣示要當「全民總統」，但倏忽五年過去，他未變成全民總統，聲望卻跌至谷底。回首檢視，馬英九的困局，不只在他無法調和藍綠歧見，更在他將自己的領導角色限縮在行政決策的枝節，疏忽了黨，更幾乎遺忘了「民間」的存在。

撇開在野的杯葛不談，政府效能主要由「行政團隊的效率」與「執政黨的士氣」兩大支柱支撐。馬總統領導的行政團隊，對台灣政經社會問題常端不出有效的對策，遑論其泄沓的執行力；而馬主席領導的執政黨，五年來亦未見體質結構的根本改造，立院黨團成員甚至不時與中央大唱反調，杯葛施政。在「黨散漫、政鬆弛」的情勢下，馬政府蹉跎了坐擁藍營優勢進行改革的機會，也使人民對台灣轉型提升的期待落空。

總統的性格因素自是一大原因，若再從體制去探尋源頭，本報民調顯示，七成四民眾不滿意行政團隊表現，高於不滿意馬總統的六成九；可見，行政團隊荏弱失能更是他失去人氣的主因。五年來馬政府幾次改組內閣，皆僅在小圈圈進行微調；包括馬總統談論國政，亦罕聞令人耳目一新的思維及創見，顯示其決策圈之智囊策士已無法提供他卓越的建言。

行政團隊的失能，與近年政治氛圍險惡致才智之士不願涉入政壇有關；但另一因素，則恐是由於馬總統拙於識人。馬總統行事循規蹈矩，時而膠柱鼓瑟，這不利他在巨變中體察時勢或奮力抗搏；再加上內閣官員習於聽命行事，又頻遭藍綠立委喧譁掣肘，這部國家機器連正常運作都有困難，豈有可能靈敏因應各種內外形勢？

馬總統或許會辯稱，他經常下鄉探訪，也不時參與民間活動，說他「遺忘民間」並不公允。但這裡所談論的「民間」，是一個思維層次的問題。馬總統確實經常下鄉或參加民間活動，然而，若只是以「君臨」之姿為活動演講加持添光，或只是為表現「親民」，那是徒將國家領導人的寶貴時光和權力拿來作低度利用，無論賓主歡或不歡，對整體國政並無裨益。說露骨些，那比較接近競選活動，與廣納民意無關。

馬總統何以需要向民間借力和借腦，原因非常清楚：第一，台灣經濟的困頓亟待突破，但五年來行政團隊已窮盡各種方案依然罔效，唯有引入民間智慧，才能突破公部門的盲點；第二，藍綠的和解停滯不前，馬總統拒絕召開在野黨所提的國是會議，朝野幾無對話空間；要解除這種癱瘓狀態，透過民間力量來重建社會共識是最可行途徑；第三，馬總統的支持度僅剩兩成，民間飄浮著冷嘲熱諷又茫然失措的氣味；若不能藉助各界才智之士的力量撐開社會思考格局，扭轉這種憤世嫉俗的心理，台灣未來三年恐寸步難行。

馬政府團隊當然不乏博學之士，但這些菁英普遍缺乏激勵人心的能耐，甚至缺乏溝通說服的技巧；他們或許長於思考問題，卻拙於解決與實踐。與民進黨執政時代相比，陳水扁的民粹是「煽惑式」的，充滿誇大的能量，卻存在盲動的危險；相對的，馬英九的民粹是「取悅式」的，常隨著外界的好惡載沉載浮，掉入父子騎驢的處境。扁政府的民粹靠的是直覺，不需要太多知識；而馬政府的民粹則充斥過多理論和虛矯，而行動卻追不上理想。

在太平年代，馬英九也許會是理想的總統；但台灣今天面對成長停滯、競爭力不足、青年失業、社會怨氣沖天等棘手難題，在在需要一個強有力的舵手來領導國家。那麼，在行政機器動能不足的情況下，馬總統必須向民間借腦借力──包括那些被他遺忘的資政、國策顧問以及各界賢能，同時也須著意喚起人民行動，打破「政府窮忙、人民無感」的空轉現象。

我們要提醒台灣民眾，不論大小問題皆歸咎於總統無能軟弱，有欠公允，也無濟於事。同樣的，我們也要提醒總統，擁有莫大的權力和資源卻無法回應人民的期待，是不可承受的悲哀。