So the DPP did this in the past and the Kuomintang did this . I think from our concepts we can all condemn this kind of behavior. It is not an ideal and it is not a good way for us to think of a civilized Congress and a rational Congress. But I still want to say it. That is to say, if we have to say that you have done this before, sometimes I feel that it will be very annoying to hear it. It was like this in the past. What you said is so good, so it is not that we are electing the 11th new Congress now , hoping that it will not Is it the same hiho~ Hello everyone, I am Zhiqi and welcome back to "The Strong My Friend"! I think everyone should have seen the serious conflicts that broke out in the Legislative Yuan these days . In order to have a deeper understanding of this issue, today we invited Zhang Honglin, CEO of the Gongdu League, a friend in the NGO circle, to talk! Then my friend who is strong, where is his strength? First of all, he is the current CEO of the "Citizens Oversight of Congress Alliance". It has been established for 17 years. Their founding goal is to supervise Congress to eliminate incompetent legislators. Under their promotion, the current Legislative Yuan meeting and party group consultations are all There is a public live broadcast , and they know clearly every member's usual attendance and speech performance ! That’s because the threshold for understanding the topics we’re going to discuss today is really high! Therefore, we specially invited CEO Zhang Honglin, who is very familiar with the on-site procedural rules and practical operations of the Legislative Yuan , to talk to you about "What exactly is being changed in the congressional reform?" "What is the most controversial part?" "What are the opinions of both sides ?" , is there any problem?" and "What might happen if the bill is passed?" Well, please let our CEO say hello to our audience first. Well, everyone, except for us, what's happening outside the camera today? And our planning, Yangyang , let’s talk to us. Hello everyone, I’m Yangyang . But before we start, let’s go through the business service time. I think first of all, we can ask the CEO to introduce us to this outbreak. What are the controversial Huadong Three Laws , which is what everyone calls the Two Trillion Bill and the Congressional Reform Act ? The five Congressional Reform Laws include, of course, the so-called Legislators’ Exercise of Powers and Criminal Law, the Legislative Yuan’s Organizational Law, and the Legislators’ Conduct Law . The five methods for the mutual election of the president and vice-president by legislators. In addition, the three traffic regulations in Huadong that everyone talked about mainly mentioned the construction regulations of Huadong Expressway and the special regulations on the construction of the round-island high-speed railway. The construction regulations for the east extension of National Highway No. 6 to Hualien are generally covered by these three bills. However, according to past evaluations, the cost may be as high as nearly 2 trillion yuan. I think there are actually many people in the community regarding the two trillion bill. There is a bit of backlash. I think it is a controversy that can be understood intuitively . However, the controversy over parliamentary reform seems to be more difficult to understand. It is a bit complicated (the Three Laws of East China). In fact, there is still a big controversy , which is that this is different from what someone would come up with in the past. Isn't Qianzhan also a so-called money pit, etc. Indeed, Qianzhan has a lot of track construction parts and was criticized by many environmental groups at the time. However, there is a very different part. Don't forget that it was the administrative department that proposed the Qianzhan bill. That is to say, in the role of separation of powers in our constitution, the executive branch is responsible for the planning of administrative affairs and proposes a budget , but it must be reviewed by the Legislative Yuan. This is the double insurance of democracy. I give you the right to propose proposals and the right to budget , but the final decision is made by the Legislative Yuan after review. But this time the bills have just been heard. These three bills were drafted by the Legislative Yuan and the Kuomintang themselves. They passed the construction bills themselves and then asked the executive branch to implement them. This is of course very different. So in the future, if the Legislative Yuan can draft bills on its own because of its dominance, the Legislative Yuan can also do so in the future. To make any decision is to build the second Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall and then pass the budget myself to ask the executive branch to complete it as scheduled. This is really undermining the constitution and disrupting government. We must say that such a principle is really inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution. I must say that it is not going to happen. If we amend the constitution , we will label people as destroying the constitution and disorderly government. When we supported the 18-year-old referendum, we were destroying the constitution and disorderly government first , so we should not label them randomly. But I think the spirit of separation of powers in the constitution should be universal in democratic countries. Today you have violated the principle of executive power and disrupted everyone's respective roles . Of course, back to our current congressional reform bill. In fact, there are several articles in it. As a citizen group, at least as the Citizen Oversight Congress Alliance, we can also responsibly say how many articles there are. We basically support these regulations . For example, regarding the authority of hearings and investigations, I think we can all skip it for a moment. Don’t look at whether it is the political party you support now. As the ruling party, first ask whether you think officials will lie. What do you think? Will officials mislead you? Do you think officials will collude with officials and businessmen when we are discussing some matters rigorously ? Next , we think that in the current state of administrative dominance , whether the legislation should be given some power to check and balance the administration? I think in the general direction, I believe that if it is rational, no one will object to this matter. Another thing is that personnel agree. In terms of our concept of separation of powers, the power of review can be nominated by the president. We talked about the nomination power of the Judicial Yuan, the Examination Yuan, the Supervisory Yuan , including the Chief Justice and the Prosecutor General. After the nomination, of course, it goes through the Legislative Yuan. We just mentioned that the beauty of the democratic mechanism is that it has two Insurance, we will let the legislative branch do the deliberation , including some independent agencies such as the NCC and the Central Election Commission. In principle, it is attached to the administrative system and nominated by the Executive Yuan , but it also needs to be reviewed and approved by the Legislative Yuan. To be honest, it is even Our public televisions are all the same , so for such an important independent agency , we believe that it must be strictly reviewed and reviewed. In terms of this direction, we think it is of course a better direction. So there are some directions that we think are good, but here In the process of this revision of the law, some of the procedures were rough, and some went beyond what we expected. It expanded some powers. Of course, this time it was more controversial, except for the right to consent to hearings, investigations, and personnel. Of course, another thing is that when we talk about whether the president has to accept questions from legislators when he enters the Legislative Yuan , in fact, the current regulations basically allow the president to come to the legislative Yuan to make a report. He can choose to do so or not. But if he comes Some legislators have asked whether it is possible to ask questions . In fact, it is possible under the original regulations. But the dispute is more likely to be that they require question-and-answer. So the concept of question-and-answer. You may talk about what is question-and-answer. In simple terms, Now as long as you see the Legislative Yuan questioning the president or the committee questioning officials, it is a question and answer minister. I want to ask why this law was so fixed in the first place! ? Please answer , Minister, please don’t say that I think you have a question and you don’t answer it seriously. Have you done your homework? Question and answer is a dialectic of this intensity between two people. Let me first talk about the question and answer part in the Legislative Yuan. We don’t necessarily think that is bad, because it is a dialectic , not to mention whether the president is responsible for the legislative branch in the constitutional system . If I talk about a simple president, if it actually becomes a general thing like this Do you still want the Chief Executive's Question to the Chief Executive? Should the Chief Policy Question be abolished? In the future, should the President concurrently serve as the Chief Executive? Just be consistent in this way. I think this is a question that does sound complicated. As for the rules of the constitutional game , I think as an opposition party you have put forward these suggestions. When you are now the majority in Congress, you certainly have the responsibility to make this matter clear. Another big controversy is this contempt of Congress. What kind of situation is this ? Of course, I think there is a little bit of it . We think it is a very serious expansion of the powers of the Legislative Yuan, called judicial power. Let’s start with this. We just said that the Public Supervisory Alliance basically does not object to the so-called hearings and investigations. Power , but under normal circumstances, our contempt of Congress is basically tied to the power of hearings and investigations. Why are conjoined twins ? In contempt of Congress, this penalty is usually only issued when conducting a hearing and investigation, because it is equivalent to a matching penalty . When I am conducting an investigation, our House of Representatives agrees to investigate this case that is deemed to be harmful or of major national concern. You refused to come to attend today or later found out that you lied about some things . Because when I wanted to decide on this matter and the direction of amending the law, you actually gave me wrong information. So this is contempt of Congress. You made me helpless in the process. Do this completely and make the final correct decision , so basically the hearing investigation will extend to the so-called contempt of Congress. He basically focuses on this refusal and then hinders the so-called hearing investigation or uses wrong information to influence it. The current direction of amending the law seems to be independent. There is a crime called contempt of parliament. Among them, we saw that it was passed on May 21. The first one passed at 9:58 in the morning was Article 25, which was revised by the Kuomintang and the People's Party. What it means is that "the answer to the question shall not exceed the scope of the question" "and no counter-question is allowed" Basically there is a new name for this, and there is another thing called counter-question. I must say that there is no counter-question in the world. The establishment of a provision like counter-question in Congress can only mean that our Republic of China is unique in the world (? When this very innovative version proposed by the two parties of the Republic of China comes to the Legislative Yuan, it is a dialectical occasion. When someone said today, I think Your Ministry of Health and Welfare is cheating . Do you want him not to respond? I said there are no committee members. You need to have this with proof. Where did you get our information? How can you turn around and ask me where you want it from? Your counter-question is ridiculous. Since you want it. Basically, using the dialectical method, there will naturally be tension in the process of attack and defense . Although everyone often says that it is the committee’s question time , our design is this way. So why do we say that rules are important ? Otherwise , if we don’t stand When we quarrel , you talk for one minute and I talk for one minute. You talk for one minute and I talk for one minute. I can talk. At least I dare not talk about it. There is no quarrel , but it should be more peaceful. At least they are separated. There is no friction and collision, and there is no overlapping sound. It makes everyone feel so annoyed and anxious. There is no way there is such a high tension. If everyone says no , I like this kind of tension . Then how can you set a counter-question ? If the official is guilty of perjury, please ask the legislator to use wrong false information. Questioning whether an official is guilty or not ? Therefore, it is not clear yet what forms of contempt of Congress constitute contempt of Congress. There is no part about counter-questioning. Of course, there is no such thing as counter-questioning. Just tell me. I may have accidentally dropped my pen while talking to Zhiqi just now. Qi said, do you despise my Zhiqi Qiqi program? I can only say that you said yes, that’s what I meant. If you frown your eyes and brows for whatever reason, I think you are unhappy. I can probably rule it as contempt. Congress , the only standard they have for contempt of Congress now is if half of us here agree that you are in contempt of Congress, then I can send you away. So the definition of contempt of Congress is decided by the majority of people. Isn’t it ridiculous? He almost doesn’t need to go through the judiciary . I know that judicial proceedings still have a certain degree of rigor , but now he wants to convict you and sentence you. There is also criminal liability. This is the so-called player referees. They are all my own people. I have heard that they hope to establish it in the criminal law. This contempt of Congress is about to leave . The CEO just mentioned a lot of issues related to congressional reform . Many people said that in fact, these issues raised by the public are just doing what the DPP promised before but failed to do. What do you think of this part of the statement? We should go back to what Tsai Ing-wen originally proposed about parliamentary reform. We can examine it. At that time, Tsai Ing-wen called out the three aspects of parliament . The first is "the people's parliament" and "open." There are three directions : Congress" and the so-called "professional Congress". The "People's Congress" is probably about amending the constitution to lower the voting age. Of course, a referendum was mentioned in the end, but it was not passed. In addition, of course, the hope of this single Congress must be implemented . This is to abolish the so-called Supervisory Yuan and so on. He hopes to also change the name of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly to a secret ballot . Of course, he has not done this part before. Of course, it is now the version proposed by the public. In the "Open Congress", it is mentioned to build a website. This allows everyone to make legislative initiatives . Of course, it also mentions online live broadcasts and the establishment of a congressional channel. If the procedural committee does not block the case , I think the second point of this part is probably completed, because we later have a congressional channel and the Congress The channel is fixed , and we now have it in both wired and wireless parts. So I think the open and transparent part of the Congress is at least the general direction part. However, the Public Oversight Alliance also requires that it include assistant recruitment information and so on . He failed to do that. The third part talked about a "professional Congress." He also mentioned that he emphasized the need for interest avoidance and professional members of Congress. It’s a pity that this matter has not been done , but I must say that there is no parliamentary reform this time. Why is it criticized for expanding power this time ? A very important indicator is whether there is relative self-discipline . That is to say, when you want to increase this power. Do you have to be relatively self-disciplined ? In the so-called "professional Congress" mentioned by President Tsai Ing-wen, there is hope that legislators will become full-time legislators. I particularly emphasize what is meant by full-time legislators. Our Taiwan laws and regulations are basically basic in the representation of public opinion. It is possible to work part-time , so basically a legislator is now the same as a minister who earns 190,000 a month. But he can still work part- time. Can our legislator also work part-time? So a legislator can become an independent director and then it depends on whether you dare to come to the Financial Supervisory Commission. Punishing my bank because I have a legislator among the chairman or independent directors depends on what you do. Our administrative officials cannot do it , but our public opinion representatives are not limited by current laws and regulations. We have also known in the past that the Kuomintang is boycotting the public But we have always told the outside world that what he is boycotting is not those who have proposed regulations or bills, because the Legislative Yuan has been highly transparent and can be found on these information websites. In fact, what he is boycotting is what we are currently doing to evaluate them . In addition to the performance in the hospital, we specifically asked about the avoidance of interests and the hiring of assistants. We (taxpayers) gave him nearly 400,000 yuan a month in assistant hiring fees and hired eight to fourteen people by law. We asked him how many people do you have? One is placed in the Congress, several is placed in the local government to do constituent services. Are there any third-class relatives ? Then we also asked him about some information about whether you have part-time for-profit and non-profit organizations. The Kuomintang resisted us because of this part of self-discipline and transparency , so this is also We are talking about many of the reform bills this time that only increase one's power but do not regulate self-discipline. So of course we must say that this kind of reform is problematic. This kind of reform has the risk of expanding power without self-discipline . You increase your power , but you do not limit yourself in the future when you exercise power or in this role, once you break the law, because as you can imagine, the greater power I give you means that I must also have greater responsibility for you because of this so-called responsibility. Otherwise, I will not give you the power. Under normal circumstances, how should we pass this bill ? If we are normal, of course, when it comes to the third reading of legislation, we currently have a procedure committee , a procedure committee, in principle. At noon every Tuesday, he will open a case. He will collect the version proposed by the political Yuan or each committee member . Of course, the people also have this creative right. If there are public petitions, etc., in principle, our procedure committee will start after the case is accepted. Divide the case and see which committee this belongs to is responsible for the discussion. Are there any formal issues ? This cannot be filed with others because you cannot file it under the law. There is no substantive review here. I just talked about it after leaving the committee. We will go to the first reading meeting. The first reading meeting will read the laws and regulations. In principle, there is no substantive deliberation. Only a certain committee member has proposed a bill. Are there any objections? If there are objections, of course it can be blocked. If there is no objection, of course it will be passed . It is useless to pass it because after the first reading meeting, there are still convening committee members who are willing to arrange these cases. You can think about the Legislative Yuan. There are hundreds , sometimes more, and thousands of cases in one session. Sometimes you see that every time At the beginning of the session, the Executive Yuan or the political parties sometimes say that I am going to introduce some so-called priority bills this session. This is my main focus. This is of course a good thing. They propose bills that are responsible to the people and what they want to amend and what content they have. Of course , after the content is released, of course, our convening committee will start to review whether it is theoretically possible to propose this bill under normal circumstances. There are many people, and you will have to incorporate them into the bill to review. Of course, the internal committee has not finished discussing it . If there is a tacit understanding and doubts about the issue , everyone will send it to the party group for negotiation . If there is still no consensus after the negotiation, of course, the number of people cannot make it an unresolved issue. In the end, it will be voted by the main court. Then the second reading we just mentioned The meeting part is more detailed. For cases like the committee, we read it article by article and then confirm it. Because when it comes to legislation, you still have to be very rigorous because if it is passed, it will become a law that regulates everyone. I just mentioned that if there is a problem, everyone I found that there were omissions during the discussion. The original remedy could have been some amendment motions for you to make corrections, but its original purpose was not for you to attack or defend it. The reason is to solve the problem. In case there are any omissions, read it a second time. If everything passes, no problem. Next, the third reading will be followed by the first reading. Basically, he will not discuss it item by item . He will also ask whether there are objections to this law and if it needs to be revised , unless it is Typos : For example, there was a law in the past that required you to wear a helmet when driving. It means that you may have to. Everyone suddenly discovered that there was a serious omission in the meaning of the word. The original meaning cannot be changed, but it is possible to do so. If the words are not smooth or may be misused, then of course we will ask our president to make an announcement after it is passed. After the presidential announcement, it will be promulgated and implemented at a certain point in time. If the president thinks this matter or the Executive Yuan reflects on him When there are obstacles, the president can ask the Legislative Yuan to return it for review. I have a few small questions that I would like to clarify. So is the congressional reform bill proposed by the Democratic Progressive Party still in the procedural committee? No, that’s what he should basically say: He is being released. Some of them have been blocked, some are not allowed to pass by the procedural committee, and some of them are like, for example, I gave an example before, it was said that our legislators should be allowed to go to enemy countries or to China. Some of them had to make relevant disclosures, etc., and the committee directly blocked them, so there were indeed some cases that did not even get to the first reading meeting or even read this version. The other part was the one just mentioned before the committee. The part basically doesn’t allow you to hold meetings to discuss and consolidate the case , so it hasn’t been decided yet . Of course, this is also a part that we think is very bad. I also saw many netizens saying this. When he was watching the live video of the Congress, he felt that what was really not being discussed in the committee was the Democratic Progressive Party . For example, they may have been raising this motion to adjourn the meeting to interfere with the normal progress of the meeting. What did the CEO think of this matter? Currently, we are a dual convening committee. There are two people in the Institutional Judiciary and Legal Affairs Committee. Of course, the DPP part is Zhong Jiabin, who I just talked about. The other part is Wu Zongxian, who we call the so-called expert in combating fraud and corruption. Basically, Wu Zongxian leads it. Because he wants to force it through , of course the Democratic Progressive Party wants him to adjourn the meeting and stop the discussion. It's about the same as offense and defense. I want to interfere with your continued progress. His purpose is to hinder you from continuing to advance this discussion. Then we What I just mentioned is actually that when Zhong Jiabin was the chairman of the Kuomintang and the People's Party, you also proposed the motion to adjourn the meeting five times . So theoretically speaking from the standpoint of the CEO, in fact, the offensive and defensive methods of the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party are like this . Don't you agree very much? It should be said that although it is understandable that they are both attacking and defending this kind of discussion, I still have to say that I think this part is of course basically different . I think the appearance is slightly different because now the two parties in the National Assembly It is a majority, that is, the Democratic Progressive Party is proposing a motion to adjourn the meeting . Indeed, it will not adjourn the meeting because my vote will not win. Your action is just an obstruction to the proceedings , but because you are now in the majority, you are the chairman of Zhong Jiabin. When you call for a motion to adjourn a meeting , you are really asking for it. It is not about attacking or defending matters. You are directly confiscating all the powers of the chairman and convening committees. But after all, we still have a dual convening committee system. When it is my turn to be the chairman, you must always respect that I am the chairman. Well , you actually asked me to dissolve the meeting when I didn’t even say anything. Let me say it again, not once but five times. I think this is true. I think it has exceeded what we think is reasonable. There are many in the party’s offense and defense this time. When people were discussing , they heard that the bill to be voted on on May 17, the day the conflict broke out, is actually a different version of the bill proposed by the blue and white parties that was announced before. That is why this is the case. But if you still think about it , There is a lot of information this time. This time, 28 versions of the congressional reform version were submitted for discussion. The most amazing thing is that on the same day (5/17 vote), the 29th version of the re-amendment motion was proposed. That version canceled the previous 28 versions. I think it is wise for everyone to talk about the motion to amend. The purpose of the motion to amend must be that I originally had a regulation and I discovered some omissions during the discussion. Then I made a motion to amend again. You can imagine that the motion to amend again turned it into something like An attack and defense means that everyone spent a lot of time before you put forward a bunch of versions. Because the original amendment motion was given priority, I would like to emphasize that it is not for you to use it to attack and defend. The original concept must have occurred during everyone's careful deliberation. Omissions , so you can bring this amendment motion for discussion , but it does not mean that you actually proposed a brand new version. Each article of law has been fully covered by the previous 28 versions in the amendment motion . The thing that I am suddenly very curious about is that I am on the Internet. On the road, I will see some people saying that whether it is Congress's expansion of powers or these measures are unprecedented, I am curious whether this is really unprecedented, because it just sounds like these are some existing loopholes, and then this The loophole has been used to a large extent this time. Has no one used it in this way before ? In fact, I just mentioned the motion to amend, the direct payment of the second reading, etc. And then why is the vote confiscated? I must say that this part is shared by both the government and the opposition. The Democratic Progressive Party did this in the past and the Kuomintang did this . I think from our perspective we can all condemn this kind of behavior. It is not an ideal and it is not a good way for us to think of a civilized Congress and a rational Congress. But I still want to say a little bit. In this process, if we go back to the historical part and talk about this matter , that is, if we have to use that kind of saying again, you did this before, sometimes I feel that it will be very annoying to hear it, but it was like this in the past. You said it very well. So , don’t we elect the 11th new Congress now and hope it will be different? We should ask a question: Is it right to do this now? Currently, there are two parties in the country and the five congressional reform laws proposed by them , as well as the three Huadong laws. Which parts of the law have passed the second reading? The current part is the part where we have the information and materials we have. Of course, the laws and regulations passed in it are of course passed . If everyone is more controversial, the first part is what we call the presidential question. The second reading of this part is the second reading. The other part is about counter-questions and contempt of Congress. This is what everyone is more concerned about . There is another part that everyone may be more concerned about. The law has a so-called investigative power. The objects of exercise are currently passed through the law. The second reading of the law says that "requesting government agencies" "troops, legal persons, groups" "or relevant people in society" "requires relevant documents to be provided within five days" " " Archives, information, etc." "Let's do an investigation." Of course, the two parties in the country will keep saying that this will not be so easy to implement. Why should we go through any discussions? But I still want to say that this regulation is a regulation , and no one can do it. We know that the number of seats in the Legislative Yuan will always change in the next term . We still think it is too high and even exceeds that of the judiciary. Even the judges want to transfer us and the police want to interrogate us. We all have some regulations. He has become a very loose one as long as the number of people is Since he has the numerical advantage, he can come and make adjustments. He can also feel that Zhiqi has done something dissatisfied with the two parties in our country in this episode of Qiqi. He can ask Zhiqi to come and report to me , although he will say no. I won't be so rude , but I mean it's okay in law and in spirit. You are saying now that you won't , but we all know who has the final say. Often you will change your mind. We still talk about the results of the legislation. The legislation itself has to think about some of the most extreme situations that currently exist and the most serious one just now. Listen carefully . Even the troops have their rights. Even the rights of the troops are involved in it - it involves national security. So we can only explain the literal meaning of this law. Indeed, everyone still has a lot of anxiety about such a formulation. I still I believe that most normal people would not object to the need for the executive branch to be supervised. The purpose of electing the Legislative Yuan is to check and balance the executive branch. But you must also be reasonable and at the same time you must be moderate. You should be self-disciplined. The current version obviously does not have any part of this framework. But as the CEO just said, we usually only correct some typos during the third reading. But now, the three regulations you just mentioned have been passed in the second reading. Of course, unless he wants to amend the law very much. The simple thing is to remove the troops. Maybe the fine-tuning part can be done , but it is no longer the question of whether to remove the troops. We just mentioned that you still have legal persons, and you still have this group, because they have always said that they will not adjust individuals. This statement is a bit strange. The quibble is because there is an individual in the group. If something comes out that is not an individual in the end , what should we do if he is like this ? Now that the second reading has been passed, of course, this is what we see now. There are several possible solutions, because of course there are still some in our current constitutional system. Of course, it is one thing whether there are some methods to deal with the deadlock. At least there is this method. The first part we just mentioned is that I may think that this part is unworkable, and I can return it for reconsideration. Of course, the Legislative Yuan will vote. You can still vote and you still have to implement another part because there are some (possibly) unconstitutional parts. I can bring it to the justices because our justices are originally responsible for resolving this kind of constitutional conflict. He follows the spirit of our constitution. I will interpret the current sub-law , because this is all sub-law enforcement. Does it violate the principles and spirit of the so-called constitution ? If the justice thinks that this statute is unconstitutional , of course I just mentioned that the statute is invalid and the Legislative Yuan will have to amend it. You can't force it. Of course, the other part is that if the president has doubts about his authority during the seconding process , or the constitution is being reviewed and handed over to the justices for interpretation , he can also hold it back without signing it. There is no clear limit on what you can do. How long should we suppress this lien ? Of course, there will be constitutionalism and conflicts between political parties . The other part is of course the people just mentioned. Of course, they can also apply for policies. We have also had referendums for some laws and regulations before, such as the referendum on Nuclear IV. Indeed, we can also propose that this is also a means that can be done. The other one is of course the people directly taking to the streets for demonstrations . If it is true, they still cannot shake it. There is also another power, which is the power of recall. We have exercised these so-called areas in the past. Legislators may be targeted for removal because of this . This is probably something that may happen in the future . Finally, does the CEO have anything to remind the audience about this incident ? Why do we always supervise Congress ? The reason is that we have always had a slogan that only with a normal Congress can we have a normal country. Only with a normal Congress can the country be normal. On the one hand, if we let everyone rethink why we had the opportunity to visit before the election, we have always mentioned that you must exercise your rights seriously. Right, because your vote will at least determine some aspects of the future of the entire government and country . I have always felt that Taiwan is driving this car, this car of democracy , although it is still stumbling , but in the process, of course, various countries We have all experienced this kind of chaos in the operation of the constitution . Only by talking about this kind of problem can we know how to avoid these things from happening again in the future . So overall , I think we should be a little patient when it comes to Taiwan. It is acceptable to have this kind of chaos in discussions between political parties. I think everyone is a little anxious now. There is a red line that is afraid of being crossed. In fact, it comes from China’s outreach to Taiwan. Because this time, you have to say that Fu Kunqi, who led the protests today, is not I just went to China a while ago . Is this considered China’s long-arm jurisdiction, which uses the Legislative Yuan to control our entire country ? There will be this kind of legislative process in the future . If we still agree that this is just a simple discussion, attack and defense , and we will modify it in the future. Is it still acceptable to everyone, including the Five National Security Laws and the Anti-Infiltration Law , to amend some laws and regulations related to national security ? Especially, I think if you talk about the disclosure of assistants that we just talked about , in fact, the Kuomintang is still unwilling to disclose the employment status of its assistants. I have to wonder if what you may have seen is only on the surface whether these legislators have had contact with China. But you can imagine whether any of the hundreds of assistants are flirting with China to get some information to tell their legislators. What laws should be revised? Because we don’t know who he hired now and his information has not been disclosed to the public. So I think our anxiety is probably not just that democracy can learn from this process and that deliberation and offense and defense can be understood and accepted. He is just a person with whom everyone has different opinions. integration process I think what everyone really needs to pay attention to is whether they are taking advantage of this wave of chaos to secretly extradite some laws and regulations that will cause harm to the country and create holes in the National Security Council. I think the whole people must pay close attention to these laws and regulations. I believe that Many viewers may realize after listening to this episode that wow, this is actually a bit serious . There should be many viewers around him who may not be sure what is going on or what. As for them who feel that this matter is actually nothing, does the CEO have some instrumental content or rhetoric that can actually help this group of people to make others understand that this matter is really nothing? It’s serious , but I’m really embarrassed about this matter. Even the Gongdu League has been criticized. I must say that this is Taiwan’s predicament , because now any program that may include our episode will be mentioned. I had it at that time. A restriction said that we were invited, and my private message box immediately received a lot of people saying that he had a position , but I actually thought about it in my heart and said that when we have been doing the show for so long, I already know most of it very clearly. Everything has a stance, as long as it is information , because information is meaningful through meaningful interpretation , it is itself a kind of stance screening , so you have to expect people who have no stance or information without a stance, which is ideal , I think. I happened to meet a group of my own classmates a while ago and asked this question. In fact, I can probably share the first part simply. They always think that because you have a position and value, your comments are not objective , so I will say. What everyone should go back to talk about is the matter itself. Also, of course, everyone is talking about the accusation part . If you go back to talk about our evaluation, I have always said that the evaluation of the Gongdu League is very simple. There are three levels. The first question is that you and I If you don’t agree that legislators should be supervised, can they be evaluated? If you agree, then let’s ask the second question: Are there any problems with the evaluation indicators of the Public Supervision League ? We have published them online. Please take a look at these more than 50 indicators. Do you think so? Which weighting item is problematic? If you think legislators should be supervised and you also think there is no problem with evaluation, that is the third level. If you think the Public Supervisory Alliance has some manipulation , then I must say that every time the Kuomintang accuses us of being a flanker, it does not say anything. Which of our indicators has a problem? I welcome him to tell me that your attendance rate was written incorrectly for me. I obviously had attendance. I clearly had ten proposals. Why did you write me zero ? Then I think it is a very long topic if we return to the people. I still think that the resilience of democracy comes from the people's independent thinking. Everyone's resistance to false information. I think only the more people in Taiwan, the more young people or any citizen has this so-called independent thinking ability, the stronger your resistance to false information. The higher the immunity , I think everyone can interpret the information when it comes. Thank you very much for our CEO Zhang Honglin’s wonderful sharing today. This episode will be here first. If you like today’s video, don’t forget it. Share the video or click here to see more related videos. Today's Zhiqi Qiqi will come to an end here. We will see you tomorrow night. So in the past, the DPP did this, the Kuomintang did this, and I want to learn from our We can all condemn this concept . It is neither an ideal nor a good way for what we think is a civilized Congress and a rational Congress. But I still want to say that if we have to use that kind of saying again, you have done this before. Sometimes I find it annoying to listen to it. That’s how it used to be. What you said was so good. So don’t we elect the 11th new Congress now and hope it will be different? We should ask a question: Is it right to do this now?
