The resignation of Taiwan High Speed Rail Corp (THSRC, 台灣高鐵) chairwoman Nita Ing (殷琪) ended the 11-year long wave of “build-operate-transfer” (BOT) projects that began with THSRC. Kaohsiung’s famous Urban Spotlight (城市光廊), which was built under an “operate-transfer” (OT) contract, also closed down quietly not long ago.
These two events put a symbolic end to the BOT and OT craze. One can’t help wonder why truly private operations cannot survive and even become the targets of strong criticism, just as everyone is praising privatization. What is the problem?
The BOT concept is used when a government lacks the funds for a large-scale infrastructure project. The private sector invests a certain amount of funds in the construction, and the government then allows private investors to recoup their investments by operating the project for a certain number of years. Once the time is up, the project is handed over to the government.
The process does not mean that the government does not invest any money. Rather, it is a question of how much it can save.
Unexpectedly, the teams that won some bids promised that the government would not have to pay a cent, leading the public to believe that BOT meant the government could get a public project for free. Suddenly, everyone who didn’t want to be left behind was talking about BOT.
The best example was the Kaohsiung MRT project, which from the start was completely unsuitable for a BOT contract. Since the BOT system was so highly praised, the project suddenly turned into a BOT contract.
The BOT idea merged with the privatization trend. The less government involvement the better, and anything that needed building became a BOT project. All this was an empty dream, because BOT is not a cure-all.
The BOT system both rose and fell with THSRC. The model has been widely criticized since the high speed rail failure as if it were a vicious beast, but a comparison with the chronically delayed Taiwan Railway Administration service raises the question of whether state-run businesses are any better. I am afraid not.
So what happened with the BOT system?
I took part in an investigation on the construction of a cultural hall last year. After interviewing several private OT operators, I realized many won their bid without having a cultural mission. They just wanted to make money. They mostly complained that the government wanted too much compensation, and hoped for looser restrictions so they could make more money, otherwise they worried income would not cover expenses. As for the promotion of culture, that could only be discussed once they got what they wanted.
The question is who decides on the size of the compensation. In Taiwan, those who tender the highest bids — those who promise the biggest returns — are frequently the winners.
The operators’ first priority is simply to win the tender, and the government doesn’t care if it is the lowest bid that wins, often forgetting the importance of sustainable operations, as well as the original intention of the project, such as the promotion of culture. As a result, operators only care about making a profit, and they give up as soon as that becomes difficult. Where does that leave the rights of the taxpayer? The same situation cropped up in the THSRC and Kaohsiung MRT projects.
The BOT system is not a natural disaster or a vicious beast, but when dealing with businesspeople who only care about money, the government should open its eyes and choose its partners with caution.
It’s now likely that big government will become the norm for future infrastructure projects.
Wang Yu-fong is an assistant professor at National Kaohsiung Marine University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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