On October 31, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wanan and Democratic Progressive Party candidate Shen Boyang competed head-to-head in their first televised debate. Jiang Wanan demonstrated his political achievements by saying, "I said it four years ago, and I will do it four years later." Shen Boyang responded by saying, "Numbers are not body temperature." Two sentences reveal the core question of this debate: How much has the government done and how much improvement the citizens actually feel are the same thing?
Jiang Wanan’s strategy is clear, which is to use governance experience to test the challenger’s governance capabilities. He continuously inquired about policy details from urban renewal, childcare manpower, dual tutor system to traffic engineering. Shen Boyang focused on administrative accountability, child abuse and food safety, accidental felling of trees and public services, questioning whether the current government can truly respond to the needs of citizens.
In the first round, both offense and defense are the most representative. Jiang Wanan raised specific cases such as Swenli and West Lake, but Shen Boyang failed to immediately point out the flight height restrictions, which exposed the lack of preparation for municipal details. But Shen asked, since there are regulatory obstacles, why does the city government not fully inform residents and provide assistance in the early stage of integration? This also touches on the issue of administrative services. While it is important to understand the laws and regulations, it is also the government's responsibility to prevent citizens from spending years realizing that policies are unworkable.
Jiang Wanan listed the improvements of the Dome, Huida Beishike, Dugeng and Gongguan Circle to demonstrate the advantages of the incumbent. However, contract signing does not equal completion, expected investment does not equal actual output value, and accident reduction also requires complete comparative information. Shen Boyang's use of "body temperature" to question beautiful figures is contagious, but individual dissatisfaction cannot replace objective evidence. A good governance evaluation must simultaneously test policy results, implementation quality, and citizens’ feelings.
Shen Boyang repeatedly asked the city government about its responsibility in handling child abuse, food safety and accidental felling of tomato trees. Jiang Wanan emphasized layered responsibility, immediate handling and system reinforcement. However, punishment does not equal improvement of the system, and the mayor does not have to preside over every meeting, nor is he exempt from political responsibility. On the other hand, challengers cannot deny overall governance based on individual incidents.
The relocation of Songshan Airport and the attack and defense of the AI park further highlight the distance between vision and feasibility. Jiang Wanan emphasized industrial development and land development, while Shen Boyang questioned central coordination, medical evacuation, and AI dividend estimates. However, issuing a letter does not equal the completion of the relocation plan, and the turnover does not equal government revenue. Similarly, the smart commuting, free tutoring and dual tutors proposed by Shen must also explain the financial resources, manpower and implementation schedule.
This debate also presents the "conditional nationalization" of local elections. Jiang Wanan quoted Shen Boyang's past positions on financial planning laws, drug driving and cross-strait issues, and specifically affirmed Ke Wenzhe in his conclusion, which obviously has the political meaning of consolidating blue-white cooperation. However, the cooperation of party leaders does not mean that the votes of the third force will inevitably be transferred; central issues only have real municipal significance when they involve local finance, public security and governance authority.
The two men's closing remarks were in stark contrast. Jiang Wanan emphasized experience, action and consistency; Shen Boyang said "citizens first, then mayor", calling for listening, care and change. The former must answer what issues remain unresolved after four years of governance, while the latter must prove that reform ideas can be transformed into administrative capabilities.
There is no need to rush to declare a winner in this debate. Jiang Wanan has achievements and responsibilities that must be borne; Shen Boyang has proposed a new governance imagination, but there are also implementation details that must be filled in. What voters really deserve to ask is not whose numbers are beautiful or whose words are moving, but who can make policies stand the test of facts and implement promises to improve lives.
Numbers require somatosensory testing, and somatosensory needs evidence support. What Taipei needs is not just a mayor who knows how to do things, but also a government that can prove that things are done right and fairly, and that it truly benefits citizens.
Shen Boyang, Taipei mayoral candidate of the Democratic Progressive Party, called for "citizens first, then the mayor" and appealed for listening, care and change. (File photo) (The author is an associate professor at Chang Normal University)
