Bits and Pieces

Jesus and Mo: Carry

A good friend of mine in New York has pointed out some similarities between the Time Magazine layout and China Fashion Weekly. Go HERE to see the way lax copyright enforcement threatens jobs around the world.

=================

In other news, Deputy Minister of National Defense Andrew Yang yesterday announced that although President Ma's adminsitration was doing everything in its power to maintain peace, it still considered China "a major threat". To wit, he added:

“We are fully aware that we are facing a clear and present threat from the other side of the Taiwan Strait,”

Mmm, interesting comment. First, Ma is doing 'everything in his power to maintain peace' - that sounds like maintaining peace is a bit of an uphill struggle so can we assume that China have been leaning ever more heavily upon him? Could it be that should Ma not deliver a full ECFA on China's terms or, god forbid, the referendum is allowed and the public reject ECFA or the Government fails to sign it, China will label Ma a 'troublemaker' too?

Second, is it not absolutely astonishing that a Government can at once regard a country as a major threat and yet be engaged in talks on an economic pact that will integrate the economy of Taiwan into that of its greatest threat? We all know that Governments do shady deals in private with the very people they villify in public (Iran-contra scandal) but do they sign very extensive trade pacts with them, under current and oft stated threat of missile attack?

=================

Finally, a court is getting tough with everyone's favourite ex-civil servant Kuo Kuan-ying (郭冠英), ordering him to pay NT$50,000 in damages or serve a 50-day jail term for defaming National Taiwan University professor Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟) and political commentator Chin Heng-wei (金恆煒) for saying that they were “official violent dogs for Taiwanese independence” and that they “used violence to oppress the weak.”

Remember Kuo? He was the self proclaimed high-class mainlander who wrote under the pseudonym Fan Lan-chin (范蘭欽), whilst on the job, arguing that “[China] should spend many years suppressing [people in Taiwan] instead of granting [them] any political freedom once they have taken Taiwan by force,” in addition to calling Taiwan a “ghost island.”

Kuo used the humbug freedom of expression defense but apparently the judge had none of it thank goodness. Now, time to cough up the pennies Kuo or spend some time at the President's pleasure (Should have been more like NT$500,000).

=================

I just had to comment on the Government's attempts to argue against an ECFA referendum. The other day C.V. Chen came out with some arguments which it would be a compliment to call them weak, unsophisticated and ill-thought out. Here's some more from a public hearing by the Referendum Review Committee on the TSU's proposed question: “Do you agree that the government should sign an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China?”

MAC Deputy Minister Liu Te-shun (劉德勳) said [the ECFA] does not re­volve around the concept of an “area,” adding that “it is merely a mechanism.”

Liu urged the public to trust the legislature, saying legislative oversight was sufficient to keep the government in check. (The Legislature controlled by the same party as the President who is also Chairman of the party?)

With legislative oversight in place, Liu said it was unnecessary to hold a referendum on whether to sign the trade deal, although the government respects the public’s right to hold one if it so desires. (Let's see that respect in a RRC decision to allow the referendum then)

"We are not against a referendum,” he said. “We just don’t endorse it.”

Conducting a referendum on the cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement is unnecessary and inappropriate, according to Cabinet-level Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Chao Chien-min. (Giving the public a vote on a critical trade agreement inappropriate?)

"From this perspective (Of ECFA's supposed economic benefits), talk of the trade pact undermining the ROC’s sovereignty and economically shackling the nation to mainland China is baseless,” (But then so are the government's claims that it will be isolated if it doesn't sign it)

“The public must keep in mind that the ECFA requires legislative approval before going into effect. This is to say, the Legislature is already safeguarding the people’s interests.” (Ludicrous claim given that the LFY is dominated by the KMT) (Like it only reviewed about 3.5% of administrative orders made by the Government involving opening up to China?)

“The TSU should use ‘disagree,’ rather than ‘agree’ in its [referendum] question,” he said. “There is strong likelihood that the party is manipulating the referendum system in an effort to exploit loopholes in the referendum law.” (Baseless accusation)

“The TSU is clearly against signing an ECFA with China, but it asks whether voters ‘agree’ with an ECFA — this could be misleading and tricky,” he said. (Diversion)

“We do not support a referendum on the matter, because it’s a purely economic agreement, touching on taxation and tariff issues, which, according to the Referendum Act (公民投票法), cannot be subjected to a referendum,” Chao said. (False claim)

As the signing of an ECFA is likely to precede the referendum, “the result of any referendum should not create obstacles to the normal functioning of government,” Chao said. (Read: the Government will pursue its agenda regardless of the outcome of the referendum)

And on the other side ...

Lee Chien-liang (李建良), a professor at Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae, said that whether other countries have held referendums on a certain subject should not be a factor in deciding whether a referendum can or should be held in Taiwan. “Someone has to be the first, right?” He said. (Switzerland already held a similar referendum so Taiwan wouldn't be first anyway).

“It doesn’t matter whether the petitioner agrees with the question asked in the proposal or not ... I think the proposed question clearly asks whether the public supports the signing of an ECFA with China, not whether they agree with the content of an ECFA, so the rule that taxation and tariff issues cannot be a topic in a referendum does not apply here,” Lee said. (And anyway, is allowing gambling on outlying islands a topic suitable in a referendum and if not why was that vote allowed and, lets not forget, why was the threshold bypassed for that vote?)

Roll on June 3rd when we find out if the RRC really believes in democracy and the right to a referendum under the 2003 law or not ...)