United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 25, 2016
Executive Summary: The DPP government has taken over General Association of Chinese Culture (GACC). It has scored a major victory. But before it could even celebrate, TransAsia Airways' announcement that it was going out of business plunged it into a black hole. Executive Yuan incompetence has people shaking their heads and sighing in dismay. These two developments offer us a striking contrast. The DPP's lust for power vastly exceeds its ability to govern. The DPP may be able to seize power like an octopus, but it governs like a blind swordsman.
Full Text Below:
The DPP government has taken over General Association of Chinese Culture (GACC). It has scored a major victory. But before it could even celebrate, TransAsia Airways' announcement that it was going out of business plunged it into a black hole. Executive Yuan incompetence has people shaking their heads and sighing in dismay. These two developments offer us a striking contrast. The DPP's lust for power vastly exceeds its ability to govern. The DPP may be able to seize power like an octopus, but it governs like a blind swordsman.
Looking ahead, these two incidents hardly represent the the limits of Taiwan's social chaos. For example, labor protests over working hours continue unabated. Public hearings on the importation of food products from Japan's nuclear disaster areas drag on. Unfortunately another earthquake just struck Fukushima. Differences within the DPP over same-sex marriage remain unresolved. The administration and the legislature each have their own ideas on the matter. A number of green camp legislators are indifferent to public opinion. They would ram the bill through the legislature and precipitate social chaos. Some problems were the result of recklessness, others the result of expedience, and still others were the result of reformist zeal. The problem is that some of them violate the DPP's core values, while others ignore the democratic process. It is only natural that such actions would provoke a backlash.
In the DPP's struggle over the GACC, the winner takes all. That determination has already been made. The ruling administration resorted to all manner of devices to bring the GACC under its control. It offered inducements to dilute and divide the opposition. Politicians, businessmen, and culturati surrendered en masse, forcing Liu Chao-hsuan to withdraw. On such an occasion, Tsai Ing-wen can of course declare victory. But is relying on power to drive one's opponents into a corner, and leaving not quarter, really the kind of victory President Tsai wants?
The DPP may want to look at the matter from another angle. What sort of impression has this victory left in the minds of the people? When people look at how this battle was fought, they are bound to have questions. First, Tsai Ing-wen has created over 600 new members where there was only 200. This may be a shrewd move. But as the saying goes, “Men of principle seek wealth only through honorable means”. Second, the DPP has long despised Chinese culture. Liu Sh-ifang considers Chinese yo-yos and calligraphy Chinese culture, and would slash the budget for the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission in response. So why did the DPP fight a major battle to seize control of the GACC in the first place? For the sake of culture? Which culture? Third, in recent years the GACC has morphed into a civic organization. The DPP government acquired enormous power from the change in ruling parties. But was it really necessary for it to abuse this power to take over the GACC? Furthermore, did President Tsai really need to lead the charge? Fourth, party and government sources say that gaining control over the GACC would transform it into a cross-Strait communication channel. President Tsai refuses to take the 1992 Consensus superhighway, yet would wend her way down the GACC footpath in order to connect with the Mainland? Who's kidding whom?
The Presidential Office seized control of GACC with unseemly haste. The Executive Yuan dealt with the TransAsia Airways company closing with complete cluelessness. Both actions showed that the ruling administration's lust for power far exceeds its ability to govern. An airline announcing that it is closing up shop is a serious matter, not just for passengers and employees, but for financial institutions and the stock market. Yet government agencies remained utterly clueless, and passed the buck onto the Civil Aviation Authority. Nor was that all. The next day the Lin Chuan cabinet misspoke and flip-flopped repeatedly. It announced that the airline would undergo "reorganization". Then just as abruptly, it announced that the government would "take it over completely". Spokesman Hsu Kuo-jung was even slapped in the face by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications, which said China Airlines would only take two routes, and would not take over completely. These developments show that although the Tsai government is in power, it has no clue how to govern, let alone solve the problems of the nation and society.
The question one must ask is this. During ruling party changes, government agencies replace only the top one-tenth of all political appointees. The rest of the administrative structure remains unchanged. Why has the TransAsia Airways incident caused the entire government to malfunction? There are roughly three reasons. First, the Tsai government has relentlessly concentrated power at the top. All major policy decisions require her personal approval. This prevents middle-level officials from exercising their initiative and professional judgment. Second, the DPP is characterized by “political colors above all”. It considers only ideological orientation and ignores right and wrong. As a result, middle and lower echelon officials and officials who are not "our people" dare not express their views. Third, no professional information and advice is available to inform its decision-making. Naturally, like a blind swordsman, it can only hack away at the air.
Tsai and members of her administration harbor a delusion. They think the purpose of governing is to implement reforms. They are mistaken. A ruling administration that cannot even ensure political stability, that cannot even uphold the rule of law and ensure economic security, has no business running about shouting “Reform! Reform!” as political cover.
抓權如八爪章魚，施政卻像盲劍客
2016-11-25 聯合報
民進黨政府剛在「中華文化總會」的戰場大獲全勝，但還來不及慶祝，隨即陷入了復興航空宣布停飛的黑洞，行政院的表現只能讓人搖頭嘆氣。前後二事對照，留給社會大眾鮮明的對比：權力欲望和行政能力完全不成正比，爭權攬權如同八爪章魚，施政作為卻像盲劍客。
放眼望去，台灣社會的紛紛擾擾，又豈止這兩樁？比方說，吵嚷多時的一例一休之爭，勞工的抗爭仍未止息；日本核虞食品是否解禁，公聽會尚未開完，不幸又遇上福島再次地震；同性婚姻的問題，黨內的歧見尚未解決，政院版也另有主張，卻有少數綠委不顧社會溝通要強行偷渡民法條文，引起偌大風波。這些紛擾，有的是出於輕率，有的是便宜行事，或許也有改革心切。問題在，其中有的違背了民進黨原來主張的價值，有的跳過了必要的民主程序，想要蠻幹，當然會引起反彈。
在「中華文化總會」的主導權之爭中，以勝負論英雄，顯然高下已判。執政者極盡稀釋、拉攏、分化之手段，必欲將文化總會納入自己麾下，隨即有政客、企業界、文化人接受招降納叛，逼得劉兆玄棄甲曳兵而去；此刻，蔡英文當然可以昂首高呼勝利。然而，仗恃權勢在每個角落把對手殺到寸草不留，就是蔡總統想要展示的勝利嗎？
民進黨不妨換個角度想想，這場勝利在民間留下的是什麼印象？民眾看這場爭奪戰，勢必有幾個質疑：一，操作蔡英文為首的六百多名新會員，去灌爆原來只有兩百多會員的文總，雖是致命狠招，但不符「君子愛財，取之有道」的原則。二，民進黨一向切割中華文化，劉世芳還以「扯鈴」和「書法」是中華文化為由要刪除僑委會預算，然則民進黨如此大陣仗去搶奪文總，又為了什麼文化？三，文化總會近年已轉型為民間社團，政府有必要以政黨輪替為由強以政治力量去染指、征服嗎？何況竟由蔡總統帶頭發動。四，黨政人士稱，拿下文化總會，是要以文化為橋梁作為兩岸溝通管道；然而，蔡總統放著「九二共識」的大道不走，卻侈言要用文總的小橋來打通兩岸經脈，豈不是天方夜譚？
無論如何，從總統府對奪取文總的用心之深，操作之急，對照近日行政院處理復興航空事件的茫無頭緒，徹底暴露了政府團隊的權力與能力顯不相稱。航空公司宣告停飛是一件嚴重的事，牽動的不只是旅客和員工權益，還可以引起金融機構及股票市場的連鎖效應；然而，政府部門對此事一問三不知，交通部更退避三舍，把責任全推給民航局。不僅如此，在隔日的處理，林全內閣的應對也顯得言不及義，顛三倒四，忽而說要改提「重整」，忽而說要政府「全面接手」，皆未能切中要害；發言人徐國勇甚至遭交通部打臉，說華航只接兩條航線，而非全面接手。這些現象都顯示，蔡政府雖然大權在握，卻不知道如何運用手中權力來平順行政，遑論解決國家社會的問題。
要問的是：一次政黨輪替，政府部門充其量更換了上層十分之一的政務官人事，其他的行政架構都維持不變；為何一次興航事件，就讓政府整個周轉失靈？粗略分析，原因大致有三：第一，蔡政府的執政特質，是不斷地把權力向上收攏，由總統一人對所有大政拍板定案，如此一來便大大壓抑了中層官員的專業判斷。第二，民進黨的政治特質，往往只問顏色而不問是非，這使得中下層官員乃至「非我族類」的政務官不敢表達主張。第三，沒有專業資訊及意見支撐的政治決策，當然就像盲劍客，只能對空亂砍。
蔡英文和她的團隊有一個迷思，以為執政的目的就是為了改革。她錯了！一個執政團隊如果連什麼叫「穩健行政」都不知道，如果連給人民一個安定的生活與法治都做不到，卻不斷用改革為幌子四處攬權，那就太遜了！
No comments:
Post a Comment