Taiwan's President Ma Ying-jeou said at the weekend that the island's controversial trade pact with China will be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny before it is ratified.
Taipei insists that the proposed pact will boost the island's annual economic growth by more than one percentage point, but opposition leaders fear it will compromise Taiwan's de facto independence.
In a speech on Saturday after he was formally sworn in as chairman of the ruling Kuomintang party, Ma gave an assurance that all negotiations with Beijing on the "Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement" would be transparent.
"I promise all these things will be stated clearly. And once it is signed, it will be submitted to parliament for ratification," Ma said.
He also gave an assurance that the trade pact "must be what the country needs, supported by the people and placed under supervision of parliament.
"Therefore, I hereby guarantee that in the future, the government will report to parliament the contents of the pact before it is signed," Ma said.
He said Taiwan's people will be given an idea of what the pact's benefits will be, as well as "what negative impacts it may bring to Taiwan."One thing to remember here is that the ECFA will be negotiated and signed and THEN sent to the legislature for ratification. This does not imply oversight. It implies a formal rubber stamping. Notice the contradiction in Ma's statements? First he says ECFA will be submitted to the legislature AFTER it is signed and then he says that the Government will report the contents to the legislature BEFORE it is signed. Maybe there is no contradiction. Perhaps he means that first the contents will be discussed in the legislature and then the ECFA will be signed, after which it will return to the legislature for the stamp of approval.
Here's the rub. If, in an alternative universe, the KMT led legislature rejects some of the ECFA agreements before it is signed, will the government then take those amendments back to the negotiating table and refuse to sign if the Chinese insist on the original conditions?
Finally, with Ma pushing the ECFA so hard, what right minded KMT legislator is going to provide any kind of critical oversight during the 'ratification' process? Since their election campaign funds come from central party HQ, any criticism will leave KMT legislators susceptible to the accusation that they are acting to derail the ECFA, not a good way to curry favor with a President/Chairman looking to nominate election candidates.
The result: ECFA will pass, with the only real legislative oversight coming from the DPP.
