Costs of incompetent governance

Taipei has seen successive incidents involving the shirking of responsibility in recent years.

The first involves city police repeatedly failing to crack down on drug trafficking, only to realize that former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) administration had made public detailed data on all municipal vehicles — including the license plate numbers, makes and models of police vehicles — allowing drug dealers to use artificial intelligence (AI) to cross-reference the data and conduct countersurveillance.

The second involves the controversy over Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) eldest son being selected for a Taipei City Government-funded international student exchange program to study in the US. Taipei City Councilor Chin Huei-chu (秦慧珠) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) slammed the Taipei Department of Education for “living in the Qing Dynasty,” saying that the application forms for the program had not been updated in the past 15 years, causing Chiang to take the blame for a conflict-of-interest scandal.

Although these two controversies appear unrelated, they have given lie to the myth of city governance long touted by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). The blame is always placed on a rigid bureaucratic system or lower-level civil servants, while the mayor is portrayed as an innocent victim caught in the crossfire.

Consider the case of the “butt-naked” police surveillance vehicles. Ko blindly pursued “openness and transparency” at the time, disregarding opposition from the police and, with the arrogance of an outsider meddling in a professional field, insisting on publishing confidential vehicle registration data online.

Chiang has been in office for about four years, so he can no longer blame the previous administration. The city government, aware that the data had been copied by organized crime groups, refused to replace the license plates of hundreds of vehicles, citing a “lack of budget.” Detectives risk their lives driving these compromised vehicles. Meanwhile, the city government continues to boast about its ability to provide “fresh milk,” yet claims to be too broke to replace a few potentially life-saving license plates.

Next, consider the so-called “Qing Dynasty” Department of Education. KMT city councilors have defended Chiang by blaming the “poisonous legacy” of previous administrations — while the application form for the exchange program had not been updated in 15 years. This slap lands square in the faces of three consecutive KMT and TPP mayors. The Recusal of Public Servants Due to Conflicts of Interest Act (公職人員利益衝突迴避法) was expanded eight years ago, yet those in charge of legal affairs and ethics have feigned ignorance.

Chiang, who touts his background as a “Silicon Valley lawyer,” is approaching four years in office — yet he has not only failed to identify regulatory blind spots within city government departments, but lacked the political sensitivity to recognize the implications of his son applying for a city government-funded program. Even worse, his administration attempted to double down on the decision.

If a mayor is unwilling to allocate funds for the safety of police officers and cannot even ensure that departmental forms are properly managed, choosing instead to hide behind city councilors’ scapegoating to seek sympathy, is that any different from being a mere figurehead?

From the chaos of the Ko administration to the inaction of the Chiang administration, the pan-blue and white camps have demonstrated the same governing philosophy as former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) during his time as Taipei mayor: When something goes wrong, blame former Taipei deputy mayor Ou Chin-der (歐晉德). When things go well, it is all thanks to Ma.

They enjoy the prestige and budget of the capital city when times are good, but when mistakes are made, the accumulated failures of the past are to blame. The root cause of Taipei’s stagnation is the incompetence of leaders who refuse to take political responsibility.