KMT’s Response to the DPP’s “Five Questions” for Chairman Ma

News Release

KMT’s Response to the DPP’s “Five Questions” for Chairman Ma

Source: KMT Cultural and Communications Committee

February 12, 2010

KMT Spokesman Lee Chien-jung today (February 11) formally responded to the five questions the DPP asked Chairman Ma Ying-jeou regarding a cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), and also refuted the DPP’s explanations. Lee stressed that he proposed five questions for DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen yesterday, asking whether the DPP supported or opposed a cross-Strait Economic Agreement and whether the DPP’s negative evaluation of a cross-Strait Economic Agreement was beneficial or detrimental to Taiwan’s best interests. However, as of this morning, the DPP had only given ambiguous responses and offered neither further explanations nor alternative plans, so the DPP disappointed the public, added Lee.

With regard to the DPP’s accusation that President Ma passively resisted the establishment of an oversight committee on cross-Strait affairs in the Legislative Yuan, Lee stated that Chairman Ma had never opposed the legislative cross-Strait oversight mechanism; however, Chairman Ma believed that any bid to set up a cross-Strait oversight mechanism should conform to the legislative system stipulated in the Constitution and relevant laws, saying that any oversight should be made public and transparent.   

With respect to the DPP’s demand that Taiwan request that Mainland China not obstruct our signing Free Trade Agreements (FTA) with other countries when concluding a cross-Strait Economic Agreement, Lee stressed that President Ma had clearly stated the government’s position during an interview several days ago. President Ma said that if we were to make such a request, the public would mistakenly conclude that Taiwan needed the Mainland’s consent to enter into FTAs with other countries. “Why should we ask for permission from the Mainland authorities? We can just do it,” explained President Ma. President Ma said that while the government was negotiating with Mainland China on a cross-Strait Economic Agreement, both foreign affairs and international trade agencies were working hard to hold talks with the United States, the European Union, Japan, Singapore, etc., for FTA’s at the same time.

The DPP also asked whether the Mainland would be willing to continue negotiations if Taiwan did not open its market to Mainland agricultural products and laborers. Director Lee stated that since President Ma assumed office in May 2008, his administration had neither permitted the importation of additional Mainland agricultural products nor accepted Mainland laborers, and the government would uphold this principle during the ECFA negotiations. If the DPP supports President Ma’s stance on the two-abovementioned issues, would the DPP please speak out loudly, so that the two parties could stand as one when facing the outside world.    

In response to the DPP’s question as to why a referendum on a cross-Strait Economic Agreement could not be held, Lee stated that according to an Economics Ministry study, throughout the entire world, referenda were not needed to conclude FTAs, the only exception being Costa Rica. Costa Rica’s FTA with the US had been rejected by its Legislative Assembly after it was signed, so the Costa Rican President had proposed a referendum. FTAs signed by other countries were ratified by their legislative organs after signing, not through referenda.

As to the DPP’s proposal to hold a referendum on a cross-Strait Economic Agreement, Lee asked DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen why the DPP had not proposed a referendum on joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) when the DPP was in power in 2002. Lee pointed out that our accession to the WTO had a much more significant impact on a broader range of the agricultural sector. Will the DPP please tell the public whether the DPP brought up the idea of holding a referendum at the time.  

Spokesman Lee Chien-jung also pointed out that Tsai Ing-wen had rejected legislative oversight when she participated in WTO talks in Macao under the DPP administration. However, the DPP replied that Tsai joined the negotiations as an academic, so she had not been obliged to be subject to legislative oversight. Lee stressed that the purpose of yesterday’s question was mainly to expose the DPP’s contradictory positions, arguing that Tsai Ing-wen had previously been the official negotiator under the guise of an advisor but rejected legislative oversight. By contrast, the whole course of negotiations on a cross-Strait Economic Agreement between Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council and related ministries and Mainland China was completely open to the public. Officials even went to the Legislative Yuan regularly to make reports and were subject to oversight, added Lee, saying that in comparison, the KMT administration’s acts were more open, transparent, and respectful to public opinion than those of the previous DPP administration.

Attachment : none