DPP Still Not Ready for Pragmatic Cross-Strait Exchanges

DPP Still Not Ready for Pragmatic Cross-Strait Exchanges
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 16, 2012

Summary: Democratic Progressive Party Su faction legislator Wu Ping-jui recently proposed an amendment making students from the Mainland eligible for National Health Insurance (NHI) coverage. Alas, this provoked a intense backlash within the DPP. Less than three days later, his proposal was withdrawn. Party Chairman Su Tseng-chang came forward and called a halt to the proceedings. Wu Ping-jui was forced to offer a public apology for his "reckless behavior." The controversy over NHI coverage amounted to a trial balloon, in reverse. It enabled everyone to see that the DPP, for all its lip service, is simply not ready to adopt a pragmatic approach to cross-Strait policy.

Full Text below:

Democratic Progressive Party Su faction legislator Wu Ping-jui recently proposed an amendment making students from the Mainland eligible for National Health Insurance (NHI) coverage. Alas, this provoked a intense backlash within the DPP. Less than three days later, his proposal was withdrawn. Party Chairman Su Tseng-chang came forward and called a halt to the proceedings. Wu Ping-jui was forced to offer a public apology for his "reckless behavior." The controversy over NHI coverage amounted to a trial balloon, in reverse. It enabled everyone to see that the DPP, for all its lip service, is simply not ready to adopt a pragmatic approach to cross-Strait policy.

Since DPP Chairman Su Tseng-chang came to power, the DPP has shown signs of wanting better cross-Strait relations. First, Chairman Su Tseng-chang restored the China Affairs Office. Trusted Tsai Ing-wen aide Lo Chih-Cheng visited the Mainland early this year. Key DPP aide Hsiao Bi-khim visited Shanghai in her capacity as a Director of the Foundation for Democracy. She participated in a seminar organized by the Shanghai East Asian Institute.

Hsiao Bi-khim was called into service separately, first by Tsai Ing-wen, then by Su Tseng-chang. This indicates the direction the DPP is headed. Hsiao Bi-khim visited the Mainland. Nominally she was participating in a seminar. In fact she was engaging in exchanges. Hsiao Bi-khim said the CCP did not understand the DPP. Mainland scholars say the CCP must understand the DPP. The DPP and CCP lack trust and understanding. But the DPP does not reject efforts to promote mutual understanding.

To be sure, exchanges between the DPP and the Mainland are better than no exchanges. Strengthening communications is the first step toward defusing hostilities. But talking about exchanges without a pragmatic cross-Strait policy merely reveals the ugly truth. It merely highlights the DPP's close-minded attitude of hatred for Mainland China. The attempt to make students from the Mainland eligible for NHI coverage is a perfect example.

Wu Ping-jui's proposal provoked a strong backlash. DPP leaders objected to "taking taxes to protect the human rights of [Mainland] Chinese." They said "The health insurance program is already in debt, yet we are proposing to provide services to them?" NHI has long been a sensitive issue on Taiwan. Such reactions are not surprising. What is truly incredible is that in the face of such challenges, the DPP has no argument to offer. All it can do is change its tune.

In fact, students from foreign countries must pay to be included in the NHI program. Students from the Mainland would have to do the same. Also, the seriously ill and senior citizens account for the lion's share of health care expenditures. Students from the Mainland are mostly younger folk. Common sense tells us they would make little use of health insurance. Therefore merely in terms of who pays and who benefits, making students from the Mainland eligible would have little effect on the NHI system. This would be the real world result of making students from the Mainland eligible for NHI coverage.

Wu Ping-jui proposed making students from the Mainland eligible for NHI coverage out of concern for human rights. After all, students from foreign countries can pay for and receive NHI coverage. But students from the Mainland cannot. This is discrimination. This is a violation of human rights. When the DPP treats students from the Mainland worse than it treats students from foreign countries, how can it avoid the suspicion that it harbors a deep-seated hatred of everything Chinese?

Over the past two months, the DPP has been laying the groundwork for reconciliation with the Mainland. But the moment it encountered a substantive policy issue, its real feelings emerged. The DPP still does not understand. In the past, they could get away with pro forma lip service. The authorities on the Mainland and voters on Taiwan were still giving them the benefit of the doubt. But ten years have elapsed. The DPP's populist demagoguery has totally destroyed the last vestiges of trust people had in the party. After the Ma administration took office, the two sides engaged in substantive exchanges, including direct links, ECFA, and investment protection agreements. These were brass tacks policy negotiations. Every policy impacted real world interests. These developments leave the DPP no room for obfuscation. Health insurance coverage for students from the Mainland is a minor concession. The DPP cannot even tolerate that. So how can anyone trust them to deal with major cross-Strait issues?

In fact, everyone was looking forward to the DPP's newfound pragmatism. For the ruling and opposition parties on Taiwan to converge on cross-Strait policy would defuse political opposition on Taiwan. It would reduce political friction. The people would benefit.

The DPP is actively attempting to establish a consensus with the Mainland. But a major obstacle remains, a lack of consensus within the DPP. Party leaders avoid cross-Strait policy discussions. As a result the Deep Green mentality of unrelenting hatred for Mainland China becomes the mainstream view within the party. Therefore, the DPP leadership is only willing to engage in ambiguous exchanges. The moment they encounter a Deep Green backlash, they immediately raise the white flag. This sort of flip-flopping merely underscores the discrepancy between DPP words and deeds. It is hardly enough to establish mutual trust with the Mainland.

The controversy over health insurance coverage for students from the Mainland may turn out to be a good thing for the DPP. Letting the cat out of the bag now is better than letting it out three years from now, after the presidential election. This at least allows DPP leaders to stop and ask themselves what they really want. Do you really want a pragmatic cross-Strait policy? If so, what's the problem? The pressure is on. The DPP must formulate a coherent cross-Strait policy. It must establish an intraparty consensus. Only then will it have a basis for communication with the Mainland. Otherwise no matter how many cross-Strait exchanges it engages in, they will all be for naught.

兩岸務實交流？民進黨還沒準備好
    2012-08-16
    中國時報

　民進黨蘇系立委吳秉叡日前有意提案修法，讓陸生納入健保，卻引發民進黨強烈反彈，不到三天就破功，黨主席蘇貞昌出面喊卡，吳秉叡更為自己的魯莽公開道歉。這一次納保風波果然成了反向的風向球，讓大家看到，口口聲聲要在兩岸政策採取務實作法的民進黨，根本還沒準備好。

　民進黨黨主席蘇貞昌上台以來，民進黨與對岸關係，有融冰跡象，先是黨主席蘇貞昌恢復中國事務部；另外，繼蔡英文親信幕僚羅致政年初赴陸交流之後，另一位民進黨核心幕僚蕭美琴，也以民主基金會董事身分赴上海，參加上海東亞研究所舉辦的研討會。

　蕭美琴分別受到蔡英文、蘇貞昌重用，更能精確掌握民進黨走向，因此，蕭美琴赴陸，名為參加研討會，但實際上絕對有交流溝通的意涵。即使蕭美琴都不諱言，中共太不了解民進黨，對岸學者也認為有必要多了解民進黨，因此民共之間雖然缺乏互信及了解，但有相互了解的意願，民進黨不會排斥。

　確實，以當前民進黨與對岸隔閡的情況，交流一定比不交流好，加強溝通是化解敵意的第一步，但是若只空談交流，背後卻沒有一套務實的兩岸政策支撐，就會馬上露餡，反而凸顯民進黨仇中的封閉心態，這次的陸生納入健保就是絕佳的例子。

　吳秉叡的主張引發強烈反彈，有人說，「拿台灣稅收去保障中國人權」、「健保預算都負債了還去供應他們」；坦白說，健保在台灣本來就是敏感議題，這些反應並不令人意外，真正不可思議的是，面對質疑，民進黨居然毫無辯護能力，只能立即改弦更張。

　事實上，外籍生目前必須繳費才能納保，陸生納保當然也該比照，其次，使用台灣健保支出比重最多者，都屬重大疾病或老年人口，陸生多屬年輕族群，依常理，使用健保的比例偏低；因此，就利害的角度而言，陸生納保，對健保財政影響不大，這是陸生納保的實質政策面向。

　再則，吳秉叡之所以提議將陸生納入健保，完全是著眼於人權；畢竟，如果外籍生可以繳健保費納保，陸生卻不能比照，就有歧視、違反人權之虞；而當陸生的待遇甚至都不如外籍生時，民進黨又何能迴避「仇中」的質疑？

　民進黨這兩個月來鋪陳與對岸和解的氛圍，但一遇到實質的政策就馬上破功；該黨沒有想清楚的是，過去，他們還可以靠著口頭的善意，讓對岸及選民保留「觀其言察其行」的空間，但這十年來，民進黨的民粹操作已將僅存的信任感破壞殆盡；而馬政府上台後兩岸進入實質交流階段，從直航、ＥＣＦＡ到日前簽訂投保協定，無一不是真槍實彈的政策談判，每一項政策都牽動實質的利害。這些趨勢的發展，都讓民進黨沒有模楜的空間，但民進黨現在連小小的陸生納保都搞不定，大家如何信任他們有能力處力複雜的兩岸議題？

　其實，各界對於民進黨之前的務實調整，都是樂觀其成的，台灣朝野政黨如果能在兩岸政策趨同，有助於化解台灣政黨對立、政治虛耗，人民同獲其利。

　但是，民進黨積極要與對岸建立共識時，最大的癓結卻在於民進黨內部毫無共識，該黨領導人迴避兩岸政策討論，結果是深綠的仇中心態成為黨的主流意見，因此，民進黨高層只敢曖昧交流，但一遇到深綠陣營反彈，就立刻豎白旗。這樣的反反覆覆，反而凸顯民進黨言行不一，別說與對岸建立互信。

　這次的陸生納保風波，對民進黨而言未嘗不是一件好事，現在出包，總比三年後的總統大選時出包好，至少，這可讓民進黨停下來想一想，自己要什麼？如果真心要推動務實的兩岸政策，問題出在哪裡？當務之急，民進黨內必須先凝聚出一套完整的兩岸政策論述，一來建立黨內共識；二來，與對岸交流時也才有所依據。否則，再多的兩岸交流也只是虛耗！