Stop Refuting Opponents, Start Solving Problems

Stop Refuting Opponents, Start Solving Problems
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 20, 2015

Executive Summary: Taiwan's political culture is highly polarized. This helps ensure oversight and avoid corruption. But it also leads to hard-line policies, volatility, and public works being shelved or delayed. This is how it is following the nine in one elections. Many newly elected leaders are throwing out works projects and governance plans begun by previous administrations, merely to demonstrate that “There's a new sheriff in town.” We would like to remind them that refuting opponents without solving problems hardly qualifies as progress.

Full Text Below;

Taiwan's political culture is highly polarized. This helps ensure oversight and avoid corruption. But it also leads to hard-line policies, volatility, and public works being shelved or delayed. This is how it is following the nine in one elections. Many newly elected leaders are throwing out works projects and governance plans begun by previous administrations, merely to demonstrate that “There's a new sheriff in town.” We would like to remind them that refuting opponents without solving problems hardly qualifies as progress.

For example, over the past few days Wen-Je Ko has blasted several Taipei City BOT projects. They include the Songshan Cultural and Creative Park. Ko accused the Fubon Group of "leaving a negative public perception." They include the Taipei Dome. Ko accused the Far Glory Group of "lawlessness." They include the Taipei Chiu Yeh Construction Project. Ko accused the Hon Hai Group of "selling too low." Some consortia have indeed been unscrupulous and mercenary. Someone should blow the whistle on them. Whoever does will deserve public applause. But these projects involve public works. The city government is the primary client. It has access to all the information. Wen-Je Ko should review these cases carefully, then seeks solutions. The city government can impose fines or sanctions. It can ensure a project free of defects. But Ko must not abuse his authority by defaming others.

When Wen-Je Ko throws temper tantrums, some consortia are afraid to confront him directly. They avert their eyes and chalk up their plight to bad luck. But if nothing changes once the tantrum is over, then it was “all for show.” What good is that? When Ko runs into an entrepreneur such as Terry Gou, who is refuses to take insuts lying down, he can expect a powerful backlash. Guo demanded that Wen-Je Ko take back his allegations within 48 hours. Alas, such verbal volleys will not tell us who was right and who was wrong. They will only increase social anxiety.

Wen-Je Ko removed the Zhong Xiao West Raod bus lanes. He demolished the Kunyang Bridge. He resolved the health care debt repayment problem. These moves demonstrated his courage. They merit public approval. But policy includes both long-term and short-term policy. Policy implementation includes eliminating defects and providing benefits. Short-term policy and eliminating defects alone are not enough. One must formulate both long-term policies and provide benefits. Only that will create real value for Taipei. Take the Shetzu Island development plan, for example. Does one wish to adopt the "Manhattan model" or the "Amsterdam model"? Either way, an accurate assessment must be made. One cannot simply proceed according to one's first impressions, sweeping aside any and all previous plans. In any event, Wen-Je Ko must admit that many municipal issues are complex and require knowledge and experience far beyond that of a physician, Ko must remain humble and learn from others.

Speaking of political obstructionism, the DPP has long shined. Take the STA and Cross-Strait Agreement Oversight Regulations for example. As a result of Green Camp obstructionism, they have remained stalled in the legislature for over a year. They have neither been reviewed nor voted on. Must we wait until the DPP is in power before it can be passed? Another example is fiscal improvements to the high-speed rail system. The Democratic Progressive Party opposes the Ministry of Transportation's plans. It blindly obstructs passage, but cannot offer a better alternative. Once the Department of Transportation abandoned its fiscal reform program however, and adopted a "take-over" approach, the DPP suddenly did an about face and obstructed the amendment affecting participation and awards. It refused to allow the government to take over the high-speed rail system. Such an opposition party need not consider or offer solutions. All it has to do is sit there, shake its head and say "No!” All it has to do is obstruct every proposal its opponent makes. Yet lo and behold, it is rewarded handsomely for doing so by the public come election day. When politics has degenerated to this level, what hope is there for Taiwan?

Admittedly, the contracts for the Taipei Cultural and Creative Park, or the Farglory Taipei Dome BOT project, should have been reviewed more carefully before they were signed. All sorts of complications may now arise. The impression is that the city government was "taken advantage of" or that "the consortia got sweetheart deals." If Wen-Je Ko is truly sharp, he will uncover the other side's pressure points, and enable the city government to impose fines and right wrongs. Ko should make the “unequal treaties” public, ensuring that future generations will not repeat the same mistakes. That is what he should do, rather than invoke "conspiracy theories" to tar everyone with the same broad brush, to treat all officials as corrupt, and to repudiate earnest efforts by other business owners.

The degree to which Taiwan has regressed over the past 20 years is shocking. GDP has fallen. Youth unemployment has risen. Educational quality has fallen. Even more seriously, the government has almost no ability to establish consensus. Long-term and large-scale construction plans remain frozen. People are bewildered and concerned about the nation's future. Their greatest disappointment is ruling and opposition party politicians who constantly engage in mutual recriminations, whose goal never seems to be problem solving. These politicians compete to refute each other in order to enhance their own prestige. This sort of refutation of opponents may feel good in the short term. It may enable one to vent one's spleen. But it will help society progress.

If Taiwan is not to become a mentally challenged society, people must demand that politicians think. They must refuse to take no for an answer. Voters must ask the politicians, "Do you have a better solution?" and "Why is it better?" They must force them to think things through. Politicians must cease refuting their opponents and start solving problems. Only then can Taiwan progress, both politically and economically.

Does Professor Ko's election victory count as a breakthrough or a retrogression? Ma Ying-jeou must give Eric Chu a helping hand. 

期待「否決模式」向「解決模式」進化
2015-01-20 01:24:40 聯合報 社論

台灣政治具有很強的對立文化，這一方面具有監督作用，可以避免腐化；另一方面卻也導致施政的窒礙難行及反覆不定，計畫動輒擱置延宕。九合一選後的局勢便是如此，不少新任首長不斷推翻前任的建設和施政計畫，以示自己的「新政」作風。我們要提醒的是，如果只有「否決」，而不能提出「解決」，其實沒有進步的意義。

舉例而言，柯文哲連日來針對台北市多項ＢＯＴ案力槓財團，包括就松山文創園區責備富邦集團「社會觀感不佳」，為大巨蛋建案怒罵遠雄集團「無法無天」，並痛批由鴻海集團承包的台北秋葉原建案「賣得太便宜」云云。有些財團唯利是圖不擇手段，不妨鳴鼓而攻之，也能贏得民眾掌聲。然而，這些案件均涉及公共建設，市府是計畫的主要當事人，掌握有全部的資料；柯文哲應該逐案檢視，就其中問題找出解決之道，或加重罰責，或從市政權責中找出制裁之道，使計畫更臻完美，而不能只是憑著權威任意貶損他人。

柯文哲正值盛氣凌人之際，有些財團不敢直接和他對槓，只能摸摸鼻子，自認倒楣了事。但怒罵一通之後，如果一切都沒改變，終歸是作秀及發洩罷了，於事無補。而碰上郭台銘這種不願忍氣吞聲的企業家，大張旗鼓反擊，要柯文哲四十八小時內還他清白；如此相互叫陣，而其間是非黑白依舊不明，除了徒然擾亂社會人心，又有何用？

柯文哲拆忠孝西路公車專用道、拆除昆陽陸橋、償還若干健保欠款，都顯示他的魄力，贏得市民叫好。然而政策有長期／短期之分，施政有除弊／興利之別，只做短期或只會除弊，其實都不夠；要有長期的興利作為，才能為台北市創造真正的價值。以社子島的開發為例，不論要選擇「曼哈頓模式」或「阿姆斯特丹模式」，都必須提出可靠的評估，而不是憑自己的第一印象率爾全盤否決前人計畫。無論如何，柯文哲必須承認，許多市政議題的專業度和複雜度遠超乎其醫師的知識及經驗範疇，他必須虛心學習。

談到政治上的杯葛，民進黨更是此中翹楚。以《兩岸服貿協議》與《兩岸協議監督條例》為例，由於綠營的抵制，在立法院已經躺了一年多，既不審理，也不表決；難道是要等到民進黨執政，才肯放它過關？再如高鐵的財務改善案，民進黨反對交通部的計畫，自己卻又提不出更佳的解決途徑，只是一味杯葛；俟交通部放棄財改方案打算改走「接管」一途，民進黨卻又去阻擋獎參條例的修法，不許政府接管高鐵。像這樣的反對黨，不必動腦出任何主意，只需坐在那裡搖頭說「不」，擋住對手的每一條路，居然也在選舉中大獲人民的選票獎勵；政治落到如此簡單、弱智的地步，台灣怎麼有進步的希望？

不可否認，台北文創園區或遠雄巨蛋的ＢＯＴ可能都因當初簽約不夠謹慎，才會留下各種後遺症，讓外界覺得市府「吃了虧」或「圖利財團」。柯文哲如果厲害，應該設法抓住對方要害，設法在權利金或罰款上扳回一城，或者將不平等條約之癥結公諸社會，讓後人不致重蹈覆轍，那才是高明的解決。而不是利用「陰謀論」一竿子打翻一船人，把所有官員都當成貪庸之輩，並抹殺企業經營者在其間付出的努力。

台灣近廿年來的倒退，已到了令人驚心的地步。除了國民所得降低、年輕族群失業率高、教育品質下滑外，更嚴重的是，政府幾乎沒有凝聚共識的能力，長期及大型的建設規劃完全停滯，人民對國家前途感到迷茫失措。最令人失望的是，朝野政治人物每天在那裡叫陣互鬥，從來不是以「解決問題」為目標，而是競以「相互否決」為手段，目的只在彰顯自己的聲威。這種「否決模式」，也許能逞一時之快，也許能抒心頭之怒，卻不可能為社會帶來進步的推力。

台灣如果不想淪為弱智社會，民眾必須鞭策政治人物思考，大家拒絕接受「不」作為答案。選民要追問政治人物：「你有什麼更好方案？」「你的理由是什麼？」這樣才能逼他們把問題想清楚。政治人物只有從「否定模式」向「解決模式」進化，台灣的政治與經濟才有進化的可能。

柯Ｐ是突破口或倒退點 馬應以餘力為朱加把勁