Xu Qiaoxin accuses Lai Ching‑te of imposing oil delisting threshold; office rebuts.

Recently, the political arena has been stirred up by a controversy surrounding relevant standards in the Chung Lien oil products case. The decision-making process regarding the 20% recall threshold for substandard oil under the Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation has particularly become a focal point of contention between the ruling and opposition parties. Kuomintang (KMT) Legislator Hsu Chiao-hsin recently publicly claimed that this 20% recall threshold was personally finalized by President Lai Ching-te, and further named Jiang Chih-gang, Director-General of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the Ministry of Health and Welfare, questioning his close interactions with individuals related to the case. These remarks immediately dropped a political bombshell, bringing the trust crisis between the executive and legislative branches back to the surface and drawing high-level attention from all sectors.

Faced with the strong accusations and inquiries from the opposition legislator, the Presidential Office demonstrated a high degree of defense and a tough attitude at the very beginning. Presidential Office Spokesperson Kuo Ya-hui issued a stern public response that evening, pointing out that Hsu Chiao-hsin's claims were completely fabricated stories without any factual basis. Kuo Ya-hui further analyzed that the true political purpose behind Hsu Chiao-hsin's accusation was to divert attention, attempting to achieve the effect of "besieging Wei to rescue Zhao" by attacking the central government, thereby "rescuing the beleaguered General Wan-an." The Presidential Office emphasized that the drafting and execution of relevant food safety regulations have established professional procedures and legal bases, and specific politicians are not permitted to maliciously distort facts for their own political interests or to rescue allies.

Tracing deeply into the core of this controversy, the Chung Lien oil products case itself involves major violations of food safety and market order, which inherently touches the society's sensitive food safety nerves. When initially handling such substandard oil products, law enforcement and competent authorities originally had a set of professional risk assessments and legal interpretations internally regarding what proportion should mandate a comprehensive recall. However, as the case escalated, the opposition camp began to question whether the executive branch involved human intervention or political considerations in setting the standards. Hsu Chiao-hsin directly pointed the finger at President Lai Ching-te as the head of state, intending to elevate a simple administrative discretion and food safety management issue to the political decision-making level of the highest power core, thereby heightening the tension of the conflict.

In addition to the accusations against the President, Hsu Chiao-hsin also named FDA Director-General Jiang Chih-gang, questioning his favorable interactions with individuals related to the case. This move was clearly an attempt to create a breakthrough from the professional neutrality of the civil service system. In Taiwan's administrative system, as the highest professional official safeguarding food safety, the FDA Director-General's decisions and interpersonal interactions are often scrutinized by the public under a magnifying glass. By questioning the impartiality of the Director-General, the opposition party attempted to shake the public's confidence in the government's food safety control mechanisms. However, whether contacts between competent authorities and related industries or stakeholders constitute legitimate business communication or fall into a gray area of benefit conveyance often requires concrete evidence to support it, rather than relying solely on external speculation and accusations.

From the perspective of a broader political ecosystem and the rivalry between local and central governments, the "rescuing General Wan-an" mentioned by Presidential Office Spokesperson Kuo Ya-hui precisely refers to the political pressure recently faced by Taipei City Mayor Chiang Wan-an regarding municipal and related issues. By taking the initiative to attack in the central battlefield and throwing out more sensational accusations, opposition legislators often attempt to divert attention from the losses incurred by local heads in handling specific administrative crises. This political maneuver of "besieging Wei to rescue Zhao" is not uncommon in Taiwan's party politics, but when it becomes entangled with food safety issues concerning the health of the entire citizenry, it often blurs the true focus on food safety, causing food safety issues to degenerate into casualties of partisan vicious fighting.

In summary, the controversy over the 20% recall threshold triggered by the Chung-Lien oil products case has completely evolved from a simple sanitary administration and legal application issue into a fierce political war of words. The ruling and opposition parties are telling their own versions of the story, with the Presidential Office sternly refuting smearing rumors, while the opposition party continues to hound the decision-making process and personnel interactions. This storm not only highlights the deeply rooted confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties in Taiwan's political arena, but also once again tests the public's trust in the government's ability to handle food safety crises. How to clarify the truth amidst the smoke of political offense and defense and return to the track of professionalism and the rule of law is the most pressing issue that all sectors need to face up to at present.