Now is the Time for Legislative Reform -- Again

Now is the Time for Legislative Reform -- Again
China Times News (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 17, 2014

Summary: The legislature is of course not the executive branch's "legislative bureau." But neither should it be able to hijack major bills, and make it impossible to implement government policy. We must restore healthy competition between the two branches. The executive branch must improve its decision-making and communications with the outside. The legislative branch must increase its self-discipline and discipline of others. The problem of legislative abuse of power must be solved. Now is the time to demand legislative reform.

Full text below:

Late into the night of the 14th, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng brought down his gavel and adjourned the legislature. Amidst public demands for increased oversight, the legislature passed 146 central government budgets, setting a record for the year. But quantity is not quality. The Executive Yuan called for a referendum on the nuclear power plant number four, for pension reform , for the trade in services agreement, for the food safety bill, and for other high priority bills. These have yet to be reviewed. We must determine precisely where the problem arose, what led to legislative inaction, and what stalled national and social development?

The constitutional separation of powers treats the Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan as "two wings of a bird, or two wheels of a cart." The ruling party enjoys a legislative majority. Legislation ought to pass easily. Policy ought to be easy to implement, enabling it to promote progress and prosperity. But consider the legislative record. The executive has been weak. The legislature has been strong. The balance between the two has been shattered. Power has become concentrated in the Legislative Yuan. As a result, legislation has been delayed, and the performance of the executive has suffered.

Take the referendum on the nuclear power plant number four. Jiang Yi-hua put his job on the line. He vowed that if the referendum on the nuclear power plant number four failed to pass, he would resign. But Blue Camp legislators who sponsored the referendum took advantage of the the September Ma/Wang political struggle to temporary adjourn. Ma Ying-jeou's cherished pension reform bill would have given people 30 years peace of mind. Now it is lies stillborn in the legislature. The trade in services agreement affects Taiwan's regional trade and economic integration. It also failed to receive a Third Reading.

Such is the fate of politically sensitive motions. But public welfare bills have been even less successful. The food safety bill plugs loopholes related to contaminated foodstuffs. The Executive Yuan draft amendment was presented to the Legislative Yuan. Yet 54 days later, it remains adrift, yet to be given a third reading. If this is not legislative inaction, what is legislative inaction?

This highlights a major problem confronting Taiwan: "Populism rules!" Even the legislature cannot avoid populist legislation. Legislators face reelection pressures. Consider the pension bill. Blue Camp legislators fear alienating rank and file level civil service employees and public school teachers. Green Camp legislators fear alienating labor. The result? Sacrifice pension reform. Allow the pension fund to expand until it is forced to declare bankruptcy.

Legislative inaction remains an intractable problem. When the executive branch makes mistakes, officials are given demerits, punishments, or transfers. Political appointees may be forced to resign. Legislative inaction by contrast, is only subject to voter approval every four years. This discrepancy conflicts with the principle of proportionality.

In a democracy, legislators represent the people by passing legislation and overseeing the government. Passing effective legislation is an important part of their job. The legislature must exercise greater self-discipline and improve its performance. But instead, in September, it provoked political struggle. Ker Chien-ming had the chutzpah to spin influence peddling within the criminal justice system as "judicial appeal." He affected the pose of a "fixer" who can "get you whatever you want." The Legislative Disciplinary Committee was utterly useless. As we can see, legislative self-discipline is a dead letter.

Compare the Legislative Yuan Disciplinary Commitee with the Judicial Yuan Disciplinary Committee. External forces must be introduced into the legislature. The Disciplinary Committee need not be limited to legislators. It may include civic groups approved by the legislature. It may include retired judges or legal scholars. This would prevent the Disciplinary Committee from becoming nothing more than cover-up artists. This is the first step in legislative reform.

Currently such groups as the Citizens Congress Watch and the Pocket Congress website oversee the legislature, The Legislature can incorporate these into the Disciplinary Committee. The media can send monitors to increase oversight and encourage the legislature to undergo further reform.

The executive and legislative powers have become imbalanced. This anomaly must be addressed. The executive must do a better job of explaining its policies to outsiders. Before each legislative session, it must determine which bills ought to be given priority. The ruling party must impose party discipline. As soon as talks between the ruling and opposition parties resume, it must send its bills to the legislature for a vote, and take full advantage of its legislative majority.

During the 2010 Review of the "Local Government Act," the KMT held a majority. It guided the bill to its third reading. Ma Ying-jeou was a Kuomintang Central Standing Committee member. His rallying cry was, "The majority party in the legislature is unable set the legislative agenda. If this situation is not changed, we do not deserve to be called the ruling party!" The KMT must reestablish the decisiveness and self-confidence it had back then.

Thirdly, we must enable the major and minor party whips to do their job. They must ensure that the government, the executive, and the party act in unison. The trade in services agreement has encountered obstacles to its passage. This is the result of KMT party whip Ling Hung-chi's agreeing to 16 public hearings. The "Communications Protection and Surveillance Act" swiftly passed its third reading. The Ministry of Justice, the National Police Agency complained that it would be "difficult to implement, and tie law enforcement's hands." This shows that the ruling party has serious problems with internal communications and coordination.

Ma Ying-jeou's term is nearing its end. He is about to become a lame duck. But President Ma Ying-jeou is also party chairman. This gives him certain political advantages. He has the power to nominate legislators without portfolio and regional legislators. He has many political tools at his disposal. In 2010, the government, the executive, and the party were unified under one leader. This could happen again. It all depends on how well President Ma and Chairman Ma make use of the tools at their disposal.

Backroom deals between the ruling and opposition parties have long plagued the legislature. In June of last year, the "Accounting Law" fiasco erupted. It forced the government and the executive to pass emergency legislative as corrective. The ruling and opposition party consultation system was faulty. A transparent mechanism for future negotiations must be established. The threshold for legislative caucuses may need to be raised. This would prevent obstructionism by splinter parties. A committee leader system must be established. All of the above measures must be considered.

Finally, we have the role of Wang Jin-pying. Ma and Wang, as well as the ruling and opposition parties, relate to each other in certain ways. This is the political reality. Wang Jin-pyng must choose between being a neutral Legislative Speaker and a loyal KMT member. Only then can legislative efficiency be restored. Wang Jin-pyng recently proposed the establishment of a "Legislative Yuan cross-strait affairs countermeasures team" to increase legislative oversight. This proposal would deprive the executive branch of control over cross-strait policy. Wang Jin-pying could resign from the KMT Central Standing Committee. He could assume a neutral role as legislative speaker, and mediate between the ruling and opposition parties. Perhaps then the ruling and opposition parties could develop a consensus on cross-strait policy. This could be a blessing for cross-strait relations. But given the the political realities. the odds are against it.

The legislature is of course not the executive branch's "legislative bureau." But neither should it be able to hijack major bills, and make it impossible to implement government policy. We must restore healthy competition between the two branches. The executive branch must improve its decision-making and communications with the outside. The legislative branch must increase its self-discipline and discipline of others. The problem of legislative abuse of power must be solved. Now is the time to demand legislative reform.

社論－是立法院再改革的時候了
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年01月16日 04:09

14日深夜，立法院長王金平敲槌宣布散會。在輿論強化對立法效能監督壓力下，本會期共通過中央政府總預算等146項議案，創下本屆最高紀錄。然而，量多不代表質精，核四公投、年金改革、《服貿協議》、《食管法》等政院設定的優先法案，仍跨不出立院大門。我們必須檢討，究竟哪個環節出了問題，造成立法怠惰、國家社會發展呆滯現象？

依憲法權力分立原則，行政、立法兩院應是「鳥之雙翼、車之兩輪」，加上執政黨擁有國會多數，本應有效掌握立法節奏，順利推動政務，帶動國家進步繁榮。但攤開立法成績單，由於行政弱勢、立法強勢，兩權均勢已被打破，權力向立法院集中，結果立法延宕、行政效能不彰。

以核四公投為例，當江宜樺賭上烏紗帽，宣稱核四公投不過就下台，提案藍委卻趁著9月馬王政爭，臨時撤案；馬英九念茲在茲的年金改革，可讓民眾安心30年，如今法案還躺在立法院；攸關台灣參與區域經貿整合的《服貿協議》，也未能三讀。

政治議案如此，民生法案更是命運坎坷。《食管法》要補起黑心食品的漏洞，政院把修正草案送到立法院後，「漂流」54天仍無法完成三讀。試問：這不是立法怠惰，什麼才叫立法怠惰？

這也凸顯台灣當前一大問題，就是民粹當道，國會也擺脫不了民粹立法。立委有連任壓力，諸如年金法案，藍委不願意得罪公教基本盤、綠委也要顧勞工選票，最後就是犧牲年金改革，放任年金破產危機繼續擴大。

立法怠惰問題難解，行政部門犯錯，還有記過、懲處或調職的處分機制，政務官也有下台的風險；立法怠惰則只能交4年一次選票檢驗，不符權責比例原則。

民主國家，國會代表人民制訂法律、監督政府，立法效能是國家效能重要環節，應靠國會自律與他律來提升效能。然而，9月政爭鬧得沸沸揚揚，當事人柯建銘竟能把「司法關說」硬拗成「司法訴苦」，發揮一皮天下無難事的功夫，立法院紀律委員會形同虛設，毫無功能，可以看出國會自律已淪為表面文章。

立法院可比照司法院檢評會，引進外部力量進入國會體制，未來紀律委員會不必由立委組成，可改由國會同意的社會公正獨立人士如卸任大法官、學者來擔任，避免紀委會淪為護航委員會，這是國會改革的第一步。

目前有公督盟、口袋國會網站等公民團體監督立法院，立法院可將其納入紀律委員會運作。此外媒體要發會監督鞭策力量，鼓動風潮，推動國會再改革工程。

導正行政與立法兩權傾斜怪現象，行政部門除了要加強對各界的政策溝通、每會期也要檢視優先法案的立法進度，執政黨更要貫徹黨紀，一過朝野協商冷凍期，就要排案送到全院院會進行表決，有效發揮國會多數優勢。

2010年審查《地方制度法》時，國民黨挾著多數席次，讓《地制法》完成三讀，馬英九當時在國民黨中常會振臂高呼，「如果沒辦法改變多數黨無法主導立法院議事運作的現象，就不配叫執政黨！」國民黨需要重建當年的決斷力與自信心。

第三，要充分發揮大小黨鞭的角色，貫徹府院黨一條鞭的領導模式。《服貿協議》至今難產，是大黨鞭林鴻池簽字同意在野黨舉辦16場公聽會的結果，這次《通保法》火速完成三讀，法務部，警政署抱怨「窒礙難行、打擊犯罪的手被束縛」，顯示執政黨內部溝通整合出了嚴重問題。

即使馬英九任期進入倒數，跛腳危機開始浮現，但馬英九仍然擁有總統兼任黨主席的政治優勢，至少握有不分區與區域立委的提名權，還有不少政治工具可用，再現2010年府院黨一條鞭領導，不是不可能，就看馬總統兼主席如何運用工具。

朝野密室協商屢被詬病，去年6月《會計法》甚至爆發烏龍修法，迫使政院必須緊急提出覆議案補正。朝野協商制度弊端叢生，未來如何建立協商透明化機制，包括是否提高黨團組成門檻、避免小黨杯葛，建立委員會領袖制度等，都是可考慮方向。

最後談到王金平的角色，以目前馬王關係及朝野關係的政治現實，王金平必須在中立的國會議長與忠誠國民黨員間做出明確選擇，立法院才能恢復應有的效率。王金平日前拋出設立「立法院兩岸事務因應對策小組」，藉此強化國會的監督機制，此議絕對會造成行政部門喪失兩岸主導權的結果，但如果王金平退出國民黨中常會，以中立的國會議長角色在朝野間調和鼎鼐，如能發展出朝野兩岸共識，也許反而是兩岸關係的好事，但政治現實上可能性不高。

立法院絕非行政部門的「立法局」，卻也不能綁架重大法案，讓政府施政窒礙難行。要恢復兩院的良性競爭，除了行政部門強化決策品質與加強對外溝通，恐怕還得加強國會的自律與他律。解決立法濫權問題，推動國會再次改革，此其時也。