On Tuesday, I got so worked up that my mind went completely blank after spotting an article in the Liberty Times bearing the headline "A NT$250 million fake afforestation project."
I have participated in the examination of the nation's afforestation project in my capacity as an agricultural economist. Besides myself, five professionals specializing in water and soil conservation and four forestry experts also had a hand in the inspection.
In the summer of 2000, after the project had been in progress for three consecutive years, officials of the Council of Agriculture arranged a trip for inspectors to evaluate afforestation projects across the nation. Each inspector was supposed to file a report after the trip.
In my report, in addition to summarizing the achievements of such afforestation projects, I pointed out a number of problems concerning the formulation of the government's policy and its implementation procedures. Although I was critical of the fact that such an inspection project was just a formality, I did try to offer practical suggestions. I believe I did a thorough job and fulfilled the promise I made to the government.
Unfortunately, I was so naive that I thought that the authorities concerned would review my report and genuinely study the pros and cons of such a project.
Three years later, based on the report I presented to the government, I published a book and sent a copy to a score of legislators and Control Yuan members, as well as relatives and students. However, none of legislators, whose main job it is to check the government's expenditure on behalf of the people, sent me a reply; only two Control Yuan members phoned me to express their gratitude.
In retrospect, I do feel a measure of regret for giving away so much material which many of the recipients may have put straight into the recycling bin.
I believe that none of the problems have been solved, even if the government agencies responsible for afforestation had been concerned about the examination and evaluation of the afforestation project.
As the afforestation inspectors were not law enforcement officials, they were not in a position to investigate any fraudulent practices.
However, in a project of such magnitude, we can expect that the government would arrange all sorts of examinations, investigations and reviews in the beginning, middle and end of the whole process. Such a complete set of procedures is such a formality that nobody will pay attention to them.
Further, all of the authorities concerned would always claim that each plan is carried out according to certain types of principles, rather than earnestly and conscienciously reviewing all past flawed projects.
In the end, we have only realized that one project is being carried out after another, but we have no idea what these projects will bring about.
This whole situation made me finally realize that when people say scholars are the backbone of society, they must have been hypnotized by some complacent academics or experts.
Whenever I thumb through the books I have published, I get agitated. I do not mind being isolated by the government simply because I have acted willfully. However, I do feel lonely, for I seem to be the only one attempting to address such an issue.
Wu Pei-ying is a professor in the department of agricultural economics at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS