After Taiwan High Speed Rail Corp (THSRC) chairwoman Nita Ing (殷琪) resigned and was succeeded by Ou Chin-der (歐晉德), the government intervened with the management of the debt-ridden company. The personnel reshuffle signified the failure of the build-operate-transfer (BOT) project, which was launched 12 years ago.
Although the government has not yet taken over management of THSRC, the company has in practice become a state-run enterprise. Under these circumstances, the pan-blue camp has its sights on settling a few political scores. Prosecutors and the Control Yuan are also prepared to investigate any irregularities, in an attempt to launch yet another political purge.
But in response to questions about why THSRC has sunk to its current low, Ing bluntly said in a recent interview that traditional industries have been undermined over the last 12 years and this has cost Taiwan nearly 2 million jobs and sabotaged the domestic aviation industry as well as the high-speed rail.
This is not only a fundamental problem for THSRC, it is a warning that applies to other aspects of Taiwan’s economic development.
Although the high-speed rail is Taiwan’s largest BOT project, construction was delayed repeatedly and on several occasions the project struggled with financial difficulties.
With many shareholders unwilling to increase their investment in the project, government departments had to put up capital. The resulting situation was absurd: The government’s stake in a BOT project exceeded that of private investors.
The company’s financial problems did not improve after the high-speed rail began operating. Instead, its finances continued to deteriorate. As revenue has fallen short of expenditure, debt continued to mount and has now hit NT$400 billion (US$12.3 billion).
Ing, who was from the private sector, has now stepped down and the government is taking the dominant role.
To be blunt, Ing’s political affiliation was never blue. When the Democratic Progressive Party was in power, pan-blue politicians and media outlets criticized THSRC in an attempt to create the impression that the BOT project was corrupt in nature.
Ing’s resignation and the government’s new controlling role is tantamount to declaring the THSRC project a failure. This pleases the pan-blue camp to no end, and it is now attacking THSRC through the Control Yuan and judiciary. They will not be satisfied until Ing is in jail.
No concrete evidence of irregularities has been brought forward in what remains a mess of confused accusations in a political battle. Let the results of the judicial investigation speak for itself.
The public should not blindly follow politicians and media outlets with an agenda.
The most important task at hand is to analyze the repercussions of Taiwan’s economic reliance on China.
By so doing, we will not only understand the root causes of THSRC’s problems, but also uncover problems associated with weak domestic demand and skyrocketing unemployment.
The comments Ing made to the media have answered all these questions. THSRC failed as a result of the government’s longstanding pro-China policy and years of encouraging businesses to move to China.
Ing admitted that the main reason for the failure was a miscalculation of the number of passengers. The government initially estimated that 230,000 people would travel on the high-speed rail each day, but daily passenger numbers are only about 80,000, one-third of projected targets.
This miscalculation was the result of the inability to predict 12 years ago that so many businesses would have moved operations to China by now, resulting in the loss of around 2 million jobs.
The claim that the high-speed rail killed Taiwan’s aviation sector is wrong, too. The relocation of Taiwanese businesses to China killed both the aviation industry and THSRC.
Ever since the government began promoting the relocation of industries to China, the government and pro-unification media outlets have not reported on this fairly. The reality is that most of the 2 million positions that moved to China were investors and high-level management — people with strong spending power.
If these jobs had stayed in Taiwan, public transport and infrastructure such as THSRC, the Taipei and Kaohsiung MRT systems, taxis, domestic flights, restaurants, entertainment facilities, hotels, department stores, supermarkets and even the sex industry would prosper and thrive.
Even more importantly, if these 2 million Taiwanese had stayed in Taiwan, their factories and businesses would also have stayed and unemployment would not be so high. In this way, domestic demand would be strong, the economy would naturally experience strong growth and we would not have problems like a struggling high-speed rail, low demand for domestic flights, shops closing, empty taxis, university graduates unable to find jobs and a society full of pessimism.
Serious policy problems can be a nation’s downfall. The failure of THSRC is not a matter of individual ineptitude. THSRC is a victim of industries relocating to China. This policy has taken away 2 million consumers, not to mention countless employment opportunities, passengers and clients.
The prosperity of the past will not be recreated, regardless of who takes over THSRC, who manages domestic flights or who opens new restaurants.
There were restrictions on businesses relocating to China during the terms of former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), and we still had to pay a heavy price. Now, with the Ma administration opening the floodgates, we can’t even begin to imagine how the economy will suffer.
The high-speed rail is a warning that shows us the road to China is a dead-end. If the government continues to concern itself only with political struggle and fails to heed the warning signs; if it against all wisdom pursues a financial memorandum of understanding and an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China, not only will the high-speed rail collapse, Taiwan’s entire economy will collapse.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG AND DREW CAMERON
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under