The opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has recently returned to an across-the-board boycott approach, despite temporarily embracing pragmatism during the run-up to the presidential election.
After barring Premier Sean Chen from delivering his policy report to the Legislature June 1, the DPP further blocked nominations for the National Communications Commission June 6. And on June 15, it is expected to launch a no-confidence vote in Chen's Cabinet.
These developments highlight the DPP's disorientation and its failure to find a focus except for boycott.
The DPP might contend that boycott is the duty of an opposition party, but this is not true.
In the United Kingdom, for example, the opposition Labor Party runs a shadow cabinet that presents alternative policies to those of the ruling coalition.
Although the DPP has always talked about a shadow cabinet, it has never actually come to fruition. On major issues such as carbon reduction, U.S. beef imports and a Taiwan-U.S. trade deal, the DPP has never put forth any feasible solutions.
What is hidden under these boycotts is laziness. Working out substantive policies and bargaining with the ruling party involve labor that is not necessarily rewarding.
The DPP knows very well that the upcoming no-confidence vote will not pass and is intended as just another form of boycott and empty political grandstanding. The question is: Can a political party that can do nothing except boycott and put on impotent dog and pony shows win the trust of the people? (Editorial abstract -- June 7, 2012)
(By Y.F. Low)