The DPP must stay true to its ideals

Due to the tensions between Beijing and Taipei, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has adopted a conciliatory stance on cross-strait issues and made stability a priority. As great hopes abound for improvements in domestic affairs, Chen risks disappointing his supporters if he were to retain the policies of his KMT predecessors. The Fourth Nuclear Power Plant is the most obvious example.

At first, former DPP party chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) pressured the government by threatening sanctions against members who did not adhere to the party platform, which openly opposes construction of the plant. But the administration did not wait long to announce it would re-evaluate the project -- a review Chen said would not be influenced by the DPP platform.

Anti-nuclear energy groups, long-time supporters of the DPP, held a demonstration to protest Chen's policy shift. They argue that the cost of continuing construction far outweighs that of halting it. When the evaluation panel held its first meeting on June 16, anti-nuclear activists launched a furious protest outside. When protest organizer Cheng Hsien-yu (鄭先祐) asked for dialogue, his request was rejected by Minister of Economic Affairs Lin Hsin-yi (林信義) who said that this was "strictly forbidden."

How should the DPP have positioned itself on the plant? Newspapers quoted the then-prospective DPP chairman Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) as expressing concern that stopping construction would entail "huge physical damage and affect Taiwan's foreign relations." He appeared to foresee an evaluation report that approved continuing construction. To avoid future discrepancies between the government's policy and the DPP platform, Hsieh adopted the cautious position that the platform needed re-interpretation, not revision.

I think Hsieh's remark was improper. The DPP has long opposed nuclear plants. It's platform clearly expresses not only opposition to additional nuclear power generators, but also support for closing the First, Second and Third Nuclear Power Plants. The most impressive step taken by DPP members in the anti-nuclear movement was the island-wide march initiated by former chairman Lin to promote holding a referendum on the issue. The march was well-supported throughout Taiwan.

Wasn't that a well-conceived move? Or was it merely part of a strategy on the part of the then-opposition party to attack the one in power? If the answer to the latter is no, the DPP should stand by its platform and campaign for the people's support, despite being in power now. In other words, the DPP is a player not a referee -- much less a disinterested outsider -- in the struggle over whether to proceed with construction or not

It is fine for the government to engage in an objective re-evaluation of the plant. If it intends to halt construction, it must ask for the Legislative Yuan's approval. But it will find little understanding from its former supporters, the anti-nuclear activists.

Far better for the DPP to stick to its anti-nuclear platform and call for a legislative review and a referendum to settle the matter. By doing so, the DPP can show that it has not forgotten its ideals and still highlight the core of the problem -- the absence of any laws regarding referenda or initiative rights and whether the legislature should be accountable for this absence -- so that society at large (including the KMT) accepts joint responsibility for it.