On the evening of March 5, the government suddenly announced it would conditionally allow imports of US beef containing the livestock feed additive ractopamine. The government gave a short explanation of its policy, saying it would ensure that ractopamine residues remained within safe levels, separate permits for beef and pork imports, enforce labeling and ban all imports of internal organs.
This policy trumps health, safety and quality goals that the public and meat industry have long been concerned about. Although many people had been expecting this to happen, it has been disconcerting to see how President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and government officials over the past couple of weeks have failed to honestly communicate with the public to establish a consensus.
Instead, they chose to run an “expert’s conference” on the matter that proved to be a total farce. What was really disturbing about this was how a group of so-called “academics and experts” did nothing to fulfill their social responsibilities. Instead they showed a willingness to join the government in putting on a show. After all this drama, it remains to be seen whether Taiwanese will accept this partial lifting of the ban on US beef containing ractopamine residues.
This conditional lifting of the ban has once again sacrificed Taiwan’s agricultural sector by using deregulation as a bargaining chip in trade talks. It has long been the case that the prices of agricultural products and the value of the agricultural industry in Taiwan have not been based on supply and demand. Instead, prices and industrial value have been suppressed and distorted in the name of national food security and price stability, with the result that farmers’ incomes have dropped and the agricultural economy has suffered.
Trade liberalization has meant that many overseas producers of agricultural products that enjoy economies of scale and low production costs are using international trade talks to demand that Taiwan open up its market to allow them to grab a share. With both domestic and international pressure, it is easy to see the problems facing Taiwan’s agricultural industry. The government has looked at what other governments are doing and adopted agricultural subsidies and emergency aid to make up for some of our farmer’s losses and assuage their anger. However, because of the many flaws in how subsidies are distributed, farmers’ incomes remain low and they must work extra jobs to make ends meet.
Although the government has announced it will separate beef and pork imports to appease swine farmers, farmers remember how they have been cheated by agricultural officials in the past. They no longer believe any government guarantees and instead choose to take to the streets in protest. Farmers know that if the import ban is lifted, there will be nothing to stop government officials from kowtowing to overseas pressure and there will be no guarantee that the government will not sacrifice the agricultural industry.
Given that government institutions already sense the significant impact on agriculture of such trade agreements as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, they should start restructuring the agricultural industry as soon as possible. The government should put a full reassignment system in place for farmers who are no longer competitive or willing to work the land. They should make appropriate plans for the use of idle farmland, instead of merely allocating funds to aid farmers hurt by imports.
We have already seen too many failed examples of such measures. The government should also assist farmers who are willing and suited to continue working the land to increase their competitiveness, while removing non-tariff barriers, so Taiwan’s agricultural products can be promoted internationally to alleviate the impact of trade liberalization.
Regrettably, government agencies have not been very active in this area, nor have they come up with comprehensive response measures. It is now commonplace to see farmers hit the streets in protest and this is bad for social stability.
The government keeps guaranteeing that it will do all it can to protect the health and safety of the Taiwanese public. However, everything from the “three controls and five check-points” to food safety certification and bird flu prevention policies has led farmers and the public to distrust the government and its ability to carry out its policies.
Most people feel that the new “PhD Cabinet” holds a high opinion of itself, but lacks the ability to reflect on its mistakes. Politicians need to remember that voters can make or break them and realize that they will eventually have to pay a high price for ignoring public opinion. I am pretty sure this is not how Ma wants to go down in history.
Du Yu is chief executive officer of the Chen-Li Task Force for Agricultural Reform.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry