Taiwan’s lawmakers have been wrangling over a proposal by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to hold a referendum about whether to finish building the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Gongliao District (貢寮). KMT legislators are looking increasingly uncertain about what they are supposed to be fighting for.
Lin Tsung-yao (林宗堯), a former member of the Atomic Energy Council’s Fourth Nuclear Power Plant Safety Monitoring Committee and a former General Electric engineer, who the KMT had been expecting to come to the rescue of the plant project said that the plant is a hopeless case as far as safety is concerned. Dismayed by Lin’s statement, KMT lawmakers are very unsure about how to continue this fight.
As the vote on the proposal approached, KMT legislators spent the night at the five-star Sheraton Taipei Hotel, while those from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and other opposition parties camped out on the floor of the legislative chamber. This may cast some light on the two camps’ relative determination.
When Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) suggested holding a referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Plant on Feb. 25, it came as big surprise. Jiang’s idea demolished the DPP’s twin policy mainstays of support for referendums and opposition to nuclear power, while the referendum turnout seemed certain to not reach the 50 percent threshold. It looked like a double win for the KMT.
However, now that everyone has had five months to mull it over, perhaps it was not worthwhile for the KMT to focus so much firepower on the issue. The reality is that all the KMT’s legislators are now gambling their futures on the Gongliao plant, which will only generate 5 percent of Taiwan’s total electricity supply. Even Jiang is feeling the pinch, with his public satisfaction rating down to 17 percent.
The Gongliao plant issue is politically very risky. If any of Taiwan’s four nuclear plants runs into any kind of trouble, KMT legislators will go down in flames. The plant is not scheduled to start operating until 2016. Since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) cannot run for a third term, he will not suffer from blame if anything goes wrong. If needs be, he and Jiang can shift all responsibility onto the legislature, because it was legislators that formally proposed the referendum.
One KMT legislator said ever since the 2011 meltdown at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan, he worries that something will go wrong with Taiwan’s nuclear plants every time there is an earthquake.
Even though the state-run Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) has taken people to visit the Gongliao plant’s No. 1 reactor, some people ask why nobody has ever visited reactor No. 2. The plant’s budget includes the cost of two reactors.
There were many glitches and breakdowns during the assembly and testing of the first reactor. Replacements for the faulty items have had to be taken from the second reactor. The truth is that, with a budget of nearly NT$300 billion (US$9.96 billion), only one reactor has been built so far.
If Taipower is made to divulge the engineering and procurement lists for its supplementary budget, the truth of the matter will come to light. The claim that only “a little bit more” money is needed is untrue. Even if the referendum gets passed, the KMT and the government are going to get dragged over the coals by anti-nuclear activists and opposition politicians whenever the plant’s budget comes under scrutiny.
It is hard to foresee when the Gongliao plant will finally go into operation. The three existing plants have been shut down many times. There have been a lot of problems with the dry storage facilities for spent fuel at the oldest nuclear power plant at Jinshan (金山) in New Taipei City, and there is no solution in sight for dealing with all the nation’s nuclear waste.
One mid-career politically appointed official from the KMT asks how the party’s legislators can hope to get re-elected if they are made to go on accepting nuclear power. In New Taipei City, Taipei, Keelung and Yilan County, in particular, the KMT’s stance on the Gongliao plant will poke a big hole in its support base, making it very hard for the KMT to continue in government.
The DPP, too, finds itself in a dilemma. Two of its policy mainstays have now become weapons in the hands of the other side. DPP lawmakers are doggedly occupying the speaker’s podium in the legislative chamber. Even if they cannot achieve their aim, they can be seen to be making an effort.
The KMT hopes that DPP occupation of the podium and getting into fistfights will win the KMT more support from its less dedicated “pale blue” supporters, as well as swing voters.
The strongest will to fight can be seen among civic groups. Anti-nuclear groups were opposed to politicians manipulating the “birdcage” referendum.
After five months of campaigning, most of them realized that the poll might as well go ahead. It will educate the public to oppose “birdcage” referendums in future, and instead move on to achieving real direct democracy.
If a referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant provides an opportunity to achieve direct democracy, then the NT$280 billion that has already been spent on the plant will not have been completely wasted.
Jay Fang is chairman of the Green Consumers’ Foundation.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS