AmCham arrow Publications arrow Topics Archive arrow Topics Archive 2007 arrow Vol.37- No.11 arrow Commentary: Real Leadership
Commentary: Real Leadership PDF Print E-mail

Real Leadership

The best political leaders both inform and shape public opinion. One of the more significant requirements for strengthening Taiwan's social, political, and economic status by the year 2020 will be the rise of leaders who do more than just shape public opinion. The past seven years have witnessed an unhealthy - and often unseemly - evolution of leadership that pursues cross-faction and cross-party rhetorical vendettas, sows unnecessarily disruptive ethnic discord, and exhibits a profound pettiness of personal interaction that has soured the public image of political factional and party leaders. Nasty innuendo, false and unsubstantiated claims, bogus statistics, and a seemingly endless string of legally frivolous lawsuits dominate media reporting on current leaders and their interactions.

To what end? Despite the consummate skills of Taiwan's political leaders in galvanizing public sentiment to participate in parades, protest marches, and sit-ins, comparatively little effort is expended in cultivating public understanding of critical issues that seriously affect public welfare and economic wellbeing. It is, of course, easy to argue interminably about sovereignty, dignity, and identity without doing much homework. But it takes real research and reflection before one can substantively address issues that worry the average person on the street, such as job creation, taxation, healthcare, educational reform, and public services such as safe drinking water, adequate power supplies, and vastly improved sewage treatment.

 

Informing the public is easy for leaders when they stick with warm and fuzzy generalizations; it is difficult when hard facts indicate the need for tough decisions and near-term public sacrifice. For instance, the government has for decades controlled prices on water, power, and sewage treatment in order to keep consumer costs low. This long-term policy is reaping unfortunate results by stalling badly needed maintenance, upgrading, and expansion of these systems, making them inadequate to the requirements of a first-world economy. One example: At a recent AmCham Infrastructure Committee event, a government official reported the current 16.68% level of household connectivity to sewage treatment island-wide and the policy goal of increasing that to 22.1% by 2012. By comparison, South Korea's coverage currently stands at 87%. Taiwan's shortfall compared with its neighboring "Asian Tiger" is unconscionable.

Real leadership, at both municipal and national levels, would take on this issue - informing the public of the threat this appalling state of affairs poses in terms of drinking-water safety and disease control, plus its potential negative impact for the development of water sports, fishing, and other recreational activities along river and ocean shorelines. Social and economic opportunities are being stunted because of inattention to a basic infrastructural requirement found in any advanced society. Yet when politicians are asked about the feasibility of even a slight increase in sewage treatment taxes, they assert that the public will never stand for it and they'll be voted out of office if they try to make any changes. (A similar situation exists for badly needed increases in water and power pricing.) No one likes taxes, but when they are necessary to public health and safety, and bring social and economic benefits as well, leaders should build public understanding in support of what needs to be done. This requires articulating a long-range vision of the benefits to the public - a vision that moves beyond soft generalizations to specific deliverables that make practical sense and stimulate public acceptance and even enthusiasm. It requires complex implementation plans, including a realistic balance sheet that matches costs with funding from private-sector investment, taxation, or other government funding sources. In other words, leaders need to develop public support for change based upon detailed and reliable information. This also requires convincing the public to accept current sacrifices for the sake of future benefits.

Despite Taiwan's dismal national performance on sewage treatment - facts that visitors find incredible when they first hear them - there is hope. In recent years, former and current mayors of Taipei, Taichung, and Kaohsiung have initiated various riverside development projects to enhance the attractiveness of their cities as well as stimulate additional investment. While all three municipalities have made some impressive progress, the overarching issue of the need for improved sewage treatment has been insufficiently "marketed" to the public. While new parks, recreational facilities, and bikeways are readily visible achievements, sewage treatment systems are mostly underground or in remote locations. Out of sight, thus out of mind. Effective leaders need to be sure that the public understands how their livelihood and physical environment is affected by such unseen or unnoticed infrastructure.

The quality of leadership will be integral to determining Taiwan's status in 2020. Will leaders emerge who match their abilities in shaping public opinion with a dedication to doing their homework on solid issues of national importance? Will they master the facts, articulate long-term vision, and exhibit the political will necessary to garner public support for policies that have genuine impact on Taiwan's social, political, and economic health? If the answer is yes, then everyone can expect a substantially different set of priorities and modes of political action from the testy and often superficial discourse that characterizes so much of today's political scene.
 
[ Back ]