Congratulations to Premier Yu Shyi-kun and his administration for making the right decision on the Su Ao-Hualien Highway.
A day saved is a day's victory for those whose ancient homes will be devastated if the road is built.
It is also a victory for others (that is, all of us) who benefit from the wealth of Taiwan's east coast. Benefits come in the form of plant and animal (including human) diversity both on the land and in the sea, fresh air generated by an important part of "Taiwan's lungs," clean water and some of the world's most spectacular scenery.
Taiwan has nearly the highest number of plant and animal species per square kilometer in the world. But the Su Ao-Hualien Highway project is a child of the 50-year ecological disaster that governments both new and old have been foisting on all inhabitants of Taiwan in the name of "development." The ill-conceived highway would be a boon only to the cement, mining and construction businesses that now follow the east coast from Ilan to Hualien, and a few government officials who might get some money out of it, and who will have something to point at so they can say "look what we're doing."
Jobs? One need only to visit the construction sites around the county to know that any jobs created in the area would likely go to underpaid, imported labor from Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries. And, surely there are more meaningful jobs that might be found in the tourism and agriculture sectors.
But how will people get to the east coast if we don't build this highway?
There is already a highway. Hualien's airport has been expanded considerably. The Taiwan Railway Administration is in the process of completing its expansion of rail service, which will shorten travel times by 30 percent and at the same time significantly increase capacity. Moreover, does anyone remember the ferry service from Keelung to Hualien? Maybe it is time to take it out of mothballs.
Media coverage of this issue doesn't take into account several key issues that lie behind the decision to stop construction of the portion of the east coast Highway from Su Ao to Hualien. While some news reports note an environmental impact study and say that the EPA "approved" the project, they leave out an important word -- "conditional."
However, we shouldn't even be so charitable, for the environmental study was severely flawed in its assumptions and methodology.
But even allowing the study to stand, the Department of National Highways has to this day failed to address the reservations contained in the report that it commissioned, despite written interpolations from legislators and queries from concerned groups (cultural, academic, business, environmental and indigenous).
The concerns range from the gash that will run through a number of Aboriginal villages (Taroko-Atayal), the dumping of tunnel "waste" in the ocean off the east coast, the horrendous impact on the affected areas' watersheds and a litany of local environmental issues.
What is most telling, however, is that a cost/benefit analysis has not been done. That is, not one government agency has begun work on the basic evaluation that must be performed after the conditions in the environmental assessment report have been resolved (if indeed they can be resolved). Surprising? Perhaps, but they have just been putting off the inevitable, for the analysis will surely come up short, bringing the entire project into question.
Nor have administrative agencies (Ministry of Transportation and Communications, Council for Economic Planning and Development, Environmental Protection Administration and so on) followed their own internal procedures. While this would have been standard procedure under the old government, we expect more from a government that espouses transparency.
Yes, politics has played a major role in the project. A very sweet business opportunity lies along the east coast. It may have been sweeter during the bygone days when People First Party Chairman James Soong (
But even today the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (
The business groups that control the cement factories have a lot at stake here, and they are but the tip of the iceberg of those seeking a million ways to create "business opportunities." As long as these businesses have excess capacity -- and they certainly will, as long as the government continues to heavily subsidize their utilities, transportation and labor -- there will be immense pressure to open up and spread concrete and asphalt over the entire area of Taiwan's east coast counties.
Taiwan needs all of our help at this critical moment. Taiwan also needs business, but not the kind of absentee plundering that has gone on for the past 50 years and that now critically threatens our east coast.
Robin Winkler and Eric Chung are members of the Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS