Amid all the debate and argument about electricity prices, Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) announcement that it is finally willing to refund at least NT$750 (US$23.79) per household next year seems trivial, given that the state-run utility is expected to make a hefty profit this year. However, whether the new measure resonates with the public is still unknown.
On Thursday, Minister of Economic Affairs John Deng (鄧振中) said at a meeting of the Economics Committee at the Legislative Yuan that the ministry would roll out an electricity price refund plan by the end of this month, aimed at both households and small businesses.
The rationale behind the refund plan is that Taipower is predicted to make a profit of more than NT$20 billion this year, its first year in the black in many years, and the company intends to give back the NT$9 billion it made through sudden declines in international coal and crude oil costs.
Even though that comes out to only about NT$187.5 per user a year (for a family of four) — or about two lunch boxes as some people have said — the issue over the refund plan is not about the amount of money that would be given back to the public, but rather whether the government can establish a reasonable price mechanism for determining electricity rates, and if Taipower can achieve better output and production efficiency.
Everyone is interested in lower electricity prices, but a more pressing issue for all Taiwanese is that the state-run company still has accumulated losses of NT$208.4 billion, which are to be shared by all taxpayers over a decade or two.
Moreover, most people understand that what led Taipower to propose the refund plan was the plunge in global oil prices in the past six months, which is a result of current economic and geopolitical realities involving the Middle East, the US and Russia. However, external factors aside, will people be able to deduct the refund from their electricity bill next year if little progress is being made in Taipower’s resource management and operational efficiency?
People have long argued that Taipower must work to replace old power plants and become more efficient at generating electricity in the long run, but it comes down to a question of where the money is. If the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) had not suffered an unprecedented defeat in the Nov. 29 elections, it would be unlikely that the company, or the economics ministry, would succumb to lawmakers’ requests and agree to share extra profits with the public.
The real issue is that the government’s pricing formulas for both fuel and electricity do not fully reflect the fluctuation of international prices in some key raw materials, nor the management and organizational reforms in the nation’s two big state-owned companies, Taipower and CPC Corp, Taiwan.
The Economics Committee is scheduled to hold a public hearing on Thursday over the new electricity pricing formula, which the ministry intends to adjust once every six months to reflect power generation costs and seasonal fluctuations.
There might be a chance to help reform the utility — which wields a tight monopoly over the market and seems to raise prices purely for its own profit — and contribute to the nation’s long-term energy development.
Working together, lawmakers across party lines should carefully supervise the new pricing formula, because the use of electricity is tied to the pricing of all kinds of goods and consumable products.
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with