The Cabinet has been caught in a dilemma over changes to the minimum wage, between considerations of the economy versus workers’ rights. After losing Council of Labor Affairs Minister Jennifer Wang (王如玄) over this policy, the government is now faced with another dilemma, between economic development and the environment.
The Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) has once again refused to approve the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of Formosa Plastic Corp’s naphtha cracker expansion in Yunlin County’s Mailiao Township (麥寮), a decision that has angered Formosa Plastics and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
When the NT$6 billion (US$204 million) project failed its EIA, the ministry asked the EPA to explain why it was so concerned about volatile organic compounds being present in the paint on pipes. Restrictions placed on these compounds were why the project failed the EIA. If these restrictions were applied to industrial zones, science parks and private development projects across the nation, it would have a grievous impact on Taiwan’s ability to attract foreign investment.
Formosa Plastic’s naphtha cracker has a poor record on pollution and has caused several disasters that pose a threat to public health. However, both the plant management and the ministry were pretty confident that the expansion project would pass its EIA this time, keeping contact with the public or environmental groups to a minimum, and promoting the plan by themselves. It seems their confidence was misplaced. EPA Minister Stephen Shen (沈世宏) criticized the expanding the plant in an area where poor air quality already exceeds allowable limits.
This problem has resurfaced at a time when the Cabinet led by Premier Sean Chen (陳冲) is plagued by contentious issues such as placing a capital gains tax on securities transactions or raising the minimum wage. These policies are part and parcel of the “five pillars” — economic growth, social justice, a “green” environment, cultural development and talent cultivation — that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) highlighted in his second inaugural speech. Now the government is discovering that some of these pillars are mutually exclusive, so it must choose which ones it will prioritize.
Given that the Cabinet seems to favor the economic argument, it is extremely likely the naphtha cracker expansion will be resurrected. However, it remains to be seen if Shen will insist on keeping to the Air Pollution Control Act (空氣污染防制法). If the expansion plan eventually does pass its EIA, Ma will have to square government policy with his rhetoric last year on the Kuokuang Petrochemical Technology’s own naphtha cracker expansion, when he said both the economy and the environment were important, but if there were any concerns about economic development damaging the environment, the latter would take precedence.
Of course there will always be differences of opinion within the Cabinet, but conflicts in policy implementation are certainly avoidable. The Cabinet should not be sacrificing important values such as social justice and environmental protection to concentrate exclusively on the economy at every turn.
The president, premier and the Cabinet should be very clear among themselves about issues and where the government stands on them — there is no need for the ministry and the EPA to come to blows. Senior officials should also not be using their clout to sideline environmental considerations.
The government should keep itself above these kinds of frays, ensuring everything is done according to the rules. It should demand that Formosa Corp’s naphtha cracker expansion complies with the requirements in the Air Pollution Control Act and to the satisfaction of the EPA. If it achieves this and presides over the final completion of the expansion, everyone will be content.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers