An Unrepresentative Legislature Has Become a Potemkin Village

An Unrepresentative Legislature Has Become a Potemkin Village
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
August 9, 2013

Summary: Ruling and opposition party consultation mechanisms in the legislature must be improved. Legislators must be more capable and experienced. The influence of professional legislators must be increased. Only this can increase the quality of legislation. This includes the role of the Premier. He must maintain procedural harmony. He must demand more from democracy. After all, if a legislature cannot function, the nation has lost one of its mainstays. The legislature has lost its representative role. Such a legislature is nothing more than a Potemkin Village.

Full text below:

The second emergency session of the legislature has hastily adjourned. It addressed the Kuang Ta Hsing case and passed the Fisheries Act. It addressed the Hung Chung-chiu case and amended the Military Justice Act. It also passed a handful of Organizational Acts. The referendum on the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant and TISA attracted much public attention. The opposition DPP forcibly occupied the podium. The ruling KMT chose to leave the battlefield and end the session. The legislature has become nothing more than a "town hall meeting." It has demeaned its own role at the heart of the political process, and relagated itself to the political margins.

The last few sessions of the legislature have left the public with two impressions. One. The legislature remains mire in endless struggle. When the opposition encounters a bill it dislikes, it forcibly occupies the podium or the entire hall. It shuts down any and all legislative business. The ruling party is impotent against such tactics. Two. The legislature has no shortage of "smoke filled backrooms." Legislators achieve nothing during the legislative process. But they achieve plenty during secret negotiations in smoke filled backrooms. Bills are like meat being sold at the wet markets. They are put on the chopping block and sold according to weight.

Ruling and opposition party legislators may be oblivious to all this. But such scenes of willful decadence have reduced the legislature from a starring role to a bit player, from an opinion leader to an opinion follower. The public now despise the legislature. Think about it. In the past, important constitutional amendments, environmental protection bills, and economic development bills were passed within the halls of the legislature. The two sides debated the issues. Together, they formulated policy. But how long has it been since the legislature has led public opinion, set the agenda, or stimulated our imaginations?

The legislature's silence and decline is the result of several factors. One. Legislators are mediocre. Their quality has declined. Changes in the electoral system and Blue vs. Green confrontation have displaced rational politics. Mediocrities and extremists hold sway. A deterioration in the quality of legislation is inevitable. Legislators no longer have the ability to discern right from wrong. The principle of "The minority defers to the majority, the majority respects the minority" is ignored. Instead "The majority defers to the minority, and the minority brings everything to a grinding halt." Because the opposition cannot offer rational arguments, it stops the proceedings. Taiwan's democracy has become an international joke. People's ballots have become pieces of waste paper.

Two. The ruling KMT has lost its will and cohesiveness. The KMT commands an absolute majority in the legislature. Yet on individual issues, the ruling party is unable to control its legislators. Many Blue Camp legislators have personal interests in mind. They are indifferent to central government decision-making. The executive branch must defer to ruling party legislators, but they do not trust them. Ruling KMT legislators lack any sense of participation in policy making. This results in a serious disconnect between policy implementation and legislation. The "ruling party" in the legislature rules in name only.

Three. Ruling and opposition party consultation is subject to abuse. The legalization of consultation mechanisms has led to the settling of ruling and opposition party disputes through interparty negotiations, rather than policy debate. In fact, opposition DPP obstructionism is often merely a ploy to gain an edge during backroom negotiations. As a result, proper procedures are cast aside, and a handful of people settle everything under the table. This is not representative democracy, but oligopoly.

The abuse of consultation mechanisms have another effect. It undermines legislative professionalism. A democratic legislature requires experienced professional legislators. They play an important role in the legislative process. But a system of "consultation on everything" overturns the opinions of professional legislators. Such legislators do not command the same attention as demagogues who engage in histrionics. As a result they retreat from the battlefield and resign themselves to "responding to current events." None of this is surprising.

People accuse the president and executive branch of incompetence. But they must acknowledge that much of the problem originates in the legislative branch of government. Think about it. The legislature rushed through a Military Justice Bill just days after the incident erupted. The National Security Law was amended with inadequate deliberation, and rushed through a Third Reading. The referendum on the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant should have been debated. TISA, pension reform, and the bond bill were all shelved without any debate. How can such a legislature serve the nation? Today's legislature neither debates policy nor authors legislation. It does not even cultivate political leaders. How can such a legislature have any expectations of itself?

To enhance the function of government, the ruling party must increase coordination with the government. It must expand participation in policy making. Party legislators must be made part of the decision-making process. Only this can win their support in the legislature. Ruling and opposition party consultation mechanisms in the legislature must be improved. Legislators must be more capable and experienced. The influence of professional legislators must be increased. Only this can increase the quality of legislation. This includes the role of the Premier. He must maintain procedural harmony. He must demand more from democracy. After all, if a legislature cannot function, the nation has lost one of its mainstays. The legislature has lost its representative role. Such a legislature is nothing more than a Potemkin Village.

失去代議功能，國會已淪為政治花瓶
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.08.09 01:36 am

立法院第二次臨時會草草落幕，除了因應「廣大興案」而通過的漁業法，及因應「洪仲丘案」而翻修的軍事審判法，僅通過了幾個零星的組織法。至於全民關注的「核四公投」及「服貿協議」，則以在野黨霸占議場、而執政黨棄守戰場作收。立法院成為不折不扣的「時事回應院」，也讓自己的角色從政治核心退到邊緣。

從近幾個會期的表現看，立法院留給民眾的印象只有兩個：其一，是永無止盡的議事抗爭。在野黨遇到有意見的法案，就以攻占主席台或霸占議場杯葛，讓議事功能完全停擺；而占國會多數的執政黨，則對此完全無能為力。其二，是「密室分贓」。立委在立法及議事上缺乏表現，卻透過朝野密室協商各取所需；法案有如菜市場的豬肉，被放在砧板上稱斤論兩。

朝野立委或許毫無自覺，但這種自甘墮落的景象，已使國會從過去「政治發動機」的角色不斷自我邊緣化，從過去「領導民意」退化為被「民意推著走」，甚至到了被民意「鄙視」的地步。試想，以往各種修憲、環保、經濟發展等重大議題，都是在國會殿堂發動，經過正反雙方的論戰，才形成為政策；而如今，人們何曾見到立院還有引領風騷、創造議題、激盪想像的能力？

立法院的沉寂和沉淪，可歸結為幾個因素：第一、是立委的平庸化及民主素養的下降。由於選制的變化及藍綠對峙的形成，排擠了理性問政空間，平庸和偏激之士反而勝出，立法品質劣化是必然趨勢。在無法憑論戰一較高低的情況下，「少數服從多數，多數尊重少數」的原則便不再受到尊重，而演成「多數服從少數，少數杯葛一切」。因為無法辯論，所以就杯葛議事，不僅讓台灣的民主變成國際笑話，人民的選票也如同廢紙。

第二、是執政黨意志及凝聚力的散失。國民黨在國會雖占絕對多數，但在個別議題上，主政者卻往往無法號令黨籍立委；許多藍委因個人利益的考量，對中央決策表現得無心無力。行政部門對執政黨立委只有尊重而無信任，執政黨立委對政策缺乏參與感，使得「行政」和「立法」部門嚴重脫節，「執政黨」在立院徒具虛名。

第三、是朝野協商機制被濫用。協商機制的法制化，使得各項朝野爭端都透過協商、而非政策辯論解決。事實上，在野黨發動許多杯葛，都只是為了能在協商密室裡爭得更多籌碼；於是，正當的議事手段被捨棄，卻讓少數人隻手決定一切。這已不是民主代議，而是寡頭壟斷。

協商機制濫用的另一個影響，是對立法專業的斲傷。一個民主國會，各專業委員會和資深、專業型的立委理應在立法過程裡扮演重要角色；但在「事事皆協商」下，往往輕易推翻委員會和專業立委的意見。因專業立委不如表演型立委受到重視，立委退化到以「回應時事」作為主戰場，也就不足為奇了。

在人們指責總統及行政部門失能時，不能不注意到此一現象其實有很大部分是立法部門的失能所造成。試想，立法院在短短數日匆匆決定軍事審判法、國安法的修法方向，來不及深思便火速三讀；而原本應該要討論的核四公投、服貿協議乃至年金改革、公債法等卻被束諸高閣，不容有討論的機會；這樣的立法院，如何有利於國家？今天的國會，既無政策討論的功能，也幾無主動產出法案的作用，甚至連培植政治菁英的功能都已喪失；這樣的立法院，如何自我期待？

要提升政府職能，執政黨必須加強黨政協調，擴大政策參與，把黨籍立委視為決策團隊的一分子，才能爭取他們在立法院的支持。國會的朝野協商機制必須設法改善，加強委員會功能及資深、專業立委的影響力，才能提升議事品質及立法水準。包括立法院長角色的拿捏，在維持「議事和諧」之外，要有更高的民主追求。畢竟，一個連會議都無法進行的國會，已喪失了國家支柱的角色；而失去了代議功能，立法院恐怕也只是裝飾民主的花瓶了！