Can Tsai Ing-wen Prove that the DPP is not Anti-Business?

Can Tsai Ing-wen Prove that the DPP is not Anti-Business?
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 7, 2015

Executive Summary: DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen is the DPP nominee for the 2016 presidential election. When Tsai met with the National Federation of Industries she solemnly declared, "The DPP will not be anti-business." The media immediate decided this was a major news item. This is strange indeed. Why must a presidential candidate in a democracy solemnly declare that she is "not anti-business"? Why would the media perceive this as newsworthy? Is this not a classic case of “Methinks thou dost protest too much”?

Full Text Below:

DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen is the DPP nominee for the 2016 presidential election. When Tsai met with the National Federation of Industries she solemnly declared, "The DPP will not be anti-business." The media immediate decided this was a major news item. This is strange indeed. Why must a presidential candidate in a democracy solemnly declare that she is "not anti-business"? Why would the media perceive this as newsworthy? Is this not a classic case of “Methinks thou dost protest too much”?

We do not question Tsai Ing-wen's "not anti-business" stance. Business and economic development is Taiwan's lifeblood. The people's livelihood depends on it. It is their hope for the future. Tsai Ing-wen majored in trade law. She cannot be unaware of this. Alas, knowing is not the same as doing. Tsai Ing-wen panders to anti-nuclear groups. She panders to opponents of thermal power. When she wants to discredit BOT projects, she denounces it as government business collusion. When she meets with business groups however, she tries to curry favor with the business community. But can her word be trusted? If Tsai Ing-wen wants to prove that the DPP is not anti-business, she must do at least four things.

First. If Tsai Ing-wen is not anti-business, she must lead the fight against a different Tsai Ing-wen, a leading inciter of anti-business sentiment. During the 2012 presidential election, entrepreneurs criticized Tsai for not accepting the 1992 consensus. They expressed concern that hostile cross-Strait relations would harm Taiwan's economic development. Tsai immediately lashed back. She demanded to know, "Are the interests of conglomerates the same as the interests of most people?" Tsai Ing-wen is the chairperson of the largest opposition party on Taiwan. She is also a presidential candidate. Yet she divided Taiwan into two hostile camps, "conglomerates" and "people". Over the next three years, Taiwan society experienced a gradual rise in anti-business sentiment.

Second. Tsai Ing-wen still refuses to recognize the 1992 consensus. Not recognizing the 1992 consensus will make maintaining the status quo and peaceful cross-Strait development difficult. The loss of peaceful cross-strait development will deliver an intolerable blow to Taiwan's economy. When visiting the National Federation of Industries, Tsai told industry and commerce elders that “The cross-Strait card is not a panacea for Taiwan's ills. The KMT government spends far too much time on cross-Strait issues. We must put the focus back on internal economic problems and social concerns."

When Tsai Ing-wen insists she is "not anti-business", that is the greatest irony of all. She is attempting to divide cross-Strait relations and economics into two independent and unrelated categories. This is a serious mistake. Cross-Strait relations and the economy are hardly unrelated. They go hand in glove. If cross-Strait relations are good, Taiwan's economy will not necessarily be good. But if cross-Strait relations are bad, Taiwan's economy will surely be bad. Can Tsai Ing-wen tell us how she intends to maintain peaceful cross-Strait exchanges while refusing to recognize the 1992 Consensus? If not, it makes no difference whether Tsai Ing-wen is anti-business. Once Tsai Ing-wen is in power, she will probably create an anti-business environment.

Third. Even if cross-Strait relations and economics could be divided into two independent systems, Tsai Ing-wen has other anti-business demons to purge. The Democratic Progressive Party, under Tsai Ing-wen's leadership, betrays an anti-business proclivity and scant regard for economic development. It does this from the legislature at the central level, to counties and municipalities at the local level. 

For example, electrical power is the key to economic development, Without a stable supply of electricity, all talk of economic development is hollow. At the national level, the DPP forced the government to halt construction on the Number 4 Nuclear Power Plan. It opposes continued operation of the Number 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear Power Plants. It is bent on ending nuclear power generation. If nuclear power generation is unacceptable, what about thermal power? The DPP rules six central Taiwan counties and municipalities. Under the strong leadership of Taichung and Yunlin, it is determined to prohibit the burning of bituminous coal and petroleum coke. The affected Taichung power plant accounts for 16.5% of the island's total electricity generation. The Yunlin LINMARK thermal plant accounts for 5.3%. This will shake the foundations of the country. What about "green power"? Last month, the Penghu Wind Energy Company in DPP ruled Penghu went belly up even before it could go into operation. Green power is not easy to come by.

The DPP is anti-nuclear and anti-thermal. Green energy, meanwhile, is not available. As Liang Chi-yuan, Chairman of the Chung Hua Economic Studies Institute put it, the DPP “wants the electricity but it doesn't want the plant”. This sort of energy policy offers only blind opposition, but no constructive solutions. How can the DPP convince people that the DPP is "not anti-business"?

Fourth. The question before us is not merely whether Tsai Ing-wen is personally anti-business. Even if she is not anti-business, how can a non anti-business party chairman lead an anti-business party? This is Tsai's bigger problem. Ever since the National Federation of Industries raised concerns,  Tsai Ing-wen's only reply has been, "We guarantee we will be the most communicative government in history", and that  "once we are in power, we will increase consultation and discussion with business". Such vague answers are no answers at all. Tsai Ing-wen's assurance that she is "not anti-business" and real life practice remain poles apart.

The election campaign is heating up. The political parties and candidates' campaign promises must now be subjected to opponent challenges and voter scrutiny. Do Tsai Ing-wen and the DPP want to prove they are not anti-business? If so, they need to do more than talk.

蔡英文能證明民進黨不反商嗎？
2015年05月07日 中國時報

獲民進黨提名競選2016總統大位的蔡英文主席，在拜會全國工業總會時，鄭重宣示「民進黨絕不反商」，立刻獲得媒體青睞成為重要新聞。弔詭的是，一個民主國家的民主政黨，總統候選人為什麼必須鄭重宣示「不反商」，還被媒體當成重要「新聞」？這不是「此地無銀三百兩」，什麼才是？

不必懷疑蔡英文「絕不反商」的出發點，因為商業與經濟發展是台灣的命脈，是人民生計所賴的根本，更是未來希望之所寄，這一點主攻經貿法的蔡英文不會不知道。問題在於「知道」不等於「做到」，蔡英文要討好反核團體、要討好反火力發電勢力、要抹黑BOT就是官商勾結，在會見工商團體時又想討好工商界，但一句話就能取信他人嗎？蔡英文要證明民進黨不反商，至少有四大功課。

第一，不反商的蔡英文，必須面對帶頭製造反商情結的蔡英文。2012年總統大選，多位企業家站出來表達對蔡英文不接受九二共識的憂心，認為不利兩岸關係，也將傷害台灣的經濟發展。蔡英文立刻反擊，質問發聲的企業家：「財團利益和多數人民一樣嗎？」蔡英文以最大在野黨主席與總統候選人的身分，率先將台灣社會一刀劃分出「財團」與「人民」的對立階級，揭開了接下來3年，台灣社會逐步升高的反商情緒。

第二，蔡英文至今不承認「九二共識」，不承認九二共識就難以維持兩岸和平發展現狀，失去了兩岸和平發展的機會，台灣的經濟不可能不受衝擊。拜訪工總時，蔡英文面對工商大老的質疑，回答是：「『兩岸牌』不能完全解決台灣的問題，國民黨政府真的花太多時間在兩岸牌上面，還是要把重心放回大家關切的內部經濟問題與社會問題。」

蔡英文這段話正是「不反商論」的最大悖論。她企圖把兩岸與經濟切成二個互不關聯的獨立存在，犯了嚴重的邏輯錯誤，因為兩岸與經濟絕非無關，而是相互牽連的關係，兩岸好，台灣經濟不一定好，兩岸壞，台灣經濟一定不會好。因此，如果蔡英文沒有辦法提出否定九二共識下，如何維繫兩岸和平交往的具體方法，不管蔡英文內心是不是反商，蔡英文一旦執政，很可能就會導引出「反商」的現實後果。

第三，就算把兩岸與經濟切成二個獨立系統，蔡英文還有另一個「反商課題」必須面對，那就是在蔡英文領導下的民進黨，從國會到執政縣市，讓大家看到的就是一系列不顧經濟發展的反商作為。

舉例來說，電力供應是經濟發展的動力開關，沒有穩定的電力供應，經濟發展即為空談。在全國層次，民進黨逼停了核四、反對核一核二核三延役，鐵了心要終結核能發電。核電不行，發展火力嗎？民進黨執政的中部六縣市，在台中、雲林的強勢帶領下，要聯合推動禁用生煤與石油焦，受到衝擊的台中火力發電廠，占全國發電的16.5%、雲林麥寮電廠則達5.3%，將動搖國本。「綠電」呢？上個月，民進黨執政的澎湖縣下的澎湖風能公司尚未營運就吹熄燈號，也預告了綠電的艱難。

反核電、反火力，綠電受挫，民進黨呈現的「能源圖譜」幾乎可用中華經濟研究院董事長梁啟源的名言「要電不要廠」來形容。這種對能源政策只能一味反對，卻提不出建設方案的態度，如何說服國人民進黨「不反商」？

第四，擺在眼前的問題，不只是蔡英文個人反不反商的問題，即便她不反商，她要面對的是「一個不反商的黨主席如何領導一個反商的黨」？這才是蔡英文更大的難題。這個難題，從工總提出的憂心八問，蔡英文的回答只是「保證作有史以來最會溝通的政府」、「執政後將加強與企業的諮詢與討論」這類虛無縹緲、有答等於沒答的空洞回應。蔡英文的「不反商」宣示，離實踐恐怕還有一段漫漫長路要走。

選戰慢慢進入深水區，各政黨及候選人要開始面對自己的從政軌跡，一言一行都要接受對手的質疑與選民的檢驗，蔡英文要證明民進黨不反商，不能只憑一張嘴。