Brian Hioeby Brian Hioe
語言:
English
Photo Credit: KMT/Facebook
ONE YEAR AFTER the KMT stoked controversy over pushing through the largest set of budget cuts in Taiwanese history–freezing or cutting 1/3rd of the government’s operation expenses–it appears that the party intends to continue efforts to drastically reduce government funding.
For one, the KMT has proposed slashing 300 million NT from funding for the Control Yuan, taking away wages and benefits from Control Yuan members. The National Human Rights Commission would also have its budget cut.
This occurs as the KMT has refused to confirm any of the Lai administration’s Control Yuan appointments, claiming that they slant too close to the DPP. For its part, the KMT claims that the Control Yuan simply serves as a sinecure position for senior figures close to the DPP and that the impact of the regulatory body, which is one of Taiwan’s five branches of government, is limited.
Both the DPP and KMT have called for the abolition of the Control Yuan in the past, so as to streamline Taiwan’s unique fivefold division of powers in the ROC government system to the three primary branches of government of the judiciary, executive, and legislature. But the Control Yuan has oversight functions that would not be taken up by the judiciary if it is abolished; however, raising questions about what would occur if it is abolished.
The National Human Rights Commission, for example, frequently raises criticisms of the government as a whole and provides oversight on the basis of human rights conventions that Taiwan has ratified. International human rights groups such as FORUM ASIA have called for the preservation of the National Human Rights Commission.
More generally, the KMT’s tactics prove similar to what it previously carried out with the Council of Indigenous Peoples–defunding the institution by cutting all salaries for members and, in this way, weakening the ability of the Council to carry out its work. This seemed to be retribution for the DPP influencing the direction of an institution that was previously dominated by the KMT.
Similarly, the KMT aims to cut one billion in funding from the Ministry of Culture. Personnel, administration, equipment, and other expenses would be drastically slashed, as would programs to boost the visibility of Taiwan on the international stage when it comes to cultural exports as literature, television, film, performing arts, publishing, museums, and etc. 47.38 million NT meant for publicity would be cut altogether.
This continues the KMT’s animus toward cultural institutions in Taiwan, then, with the view that if cultural institutions are not controlled by the KMT, they should not exist. Cuts to cultural funding also occurred during the 2025 budget cuts pushed for by the KMT.
At the time, legislator Jessica Chen criticized artists, illustrators, writers, and other creatives as “beggars”. When criticized as a “killer of culture,” Chen further stoked controversy through retorting that she had memorized the Three Hundred Tang Poems–suggesting that she viewed contemporary culture as worthless compared to ancient Chinese classics. Funding for events that promote Taiwanese books on the world stage, such as the Taipei International Book Exhibition, was among what was cut.
As such, it may not be surprising that creatives were among those to criticize the KMT. When the Great Recall Movement broke out in response to the budget crisis, seeking to recall all KMT legislators in the first attempt of its kind, there were a number of petitions against the KMT.
One petition, signed by 1,043 authors, expressed support for recalling the KMT. Lee Chiao, the great of Taiwanese Hakka literature, himself took a leading role in the recall campaign in his native Miaoli–this despite the fact that Lee was 90 years old at the time. Yang was herself a supporter of the Great Recall Movement, taking a more proactive public role after her partner was assaulted by a 73-year-old woman while campaigning for recall signatures. Another petition against the KMT was signed by over 6,500 comic artists and readers. A group of prominent directors, too, criticized the cuts.
To this extent, even as defense concerns continue to take center stage, the KMT has continued to block funding for key programs that would be vital for Taiwan’s defense, such as drones. Experts have warned that drones would be critical to defending against a Chinese invasion, as part of asymmetric capabilities to counter a much-larger adversary. But though claiming not to oppose funding for drones outright, the KMT has attempted to freeze the Executive Yuan’s 44.2 billion NT plan to develop the drone industry, claiming that it is a money pit and is a “rubber stamp” process. The KMT has instead sought to propose passing drone funding by means that would result in significant legislative control over what gets funded.
The KMT’s attempts to block drone funding lend weight to allegations that it is seeking to sabotage Taiwan’s defense, so as to make it easier for China to conduct an invasion. But, either way, more broadly, one sees that the KMT intends to pursue similar tactics in the legislature as it did last year, through expansive budget cuts.
It is to be seen if this again sparks pushback. Last year’s budget cuts resulted in the rise of the Great Recall Movement, the historic first attempt to recall all KMT legislators. Even if ultimately unsuccessful, it seems probable that there will be further pushback from the electorate against the KMT.