The storm of controversy surrounding the Taipei Dome project continues to spread, with public opinion, the media and social networking sites unanimously calling it a scandal.
The public has finally woken up to the fact that, from the very beginning, this was an illegal development project: a stitch-up between the government and the private sector, helped along the way by politicians. It is thus a great pity that during the course of the recent negotiations between the Taipei City Government and the contractor, Farglory Land Development Co, the issue of tree protection was pushed to one side.
In support of the Songshan Tree Protection Volunteer Union, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said: “If there is no need to move the trees, why is a set of standard operating procedures required to rationalize it?”
This is about values, and is not something that can be substituted with engineering solutions, he said. “If we don’t allow trees to be trees, how can we call ourselves a civilized city?”
By early 2008, information about irregularities in connection with the Taipei Dome project had already been submitted to then-Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), and in the following year, the Control Yuan issued a correction. However, within the context of repeated contract violations by Farglory, Hau chose to turn a blind eye.
On top of this, a large number of the officials protecting the company within Taipei City Government were up to their necks in work shielding the firm — the reason for the present calamitous state of affairs. With the project now seriously delayed, Farglory has again violated the terms of its contract. How should Ko react?
The Taipei City government’s recent approach in dealing with the Taipei Dome project and related build-operate-transfer (BOT) projects has been to pursue financial penalties and exercise contractual rights to fight for so-called “citizen’s rights,” while neglecting the more fundamental issue of the public interest.
Built in the wrong location, once in operation the Taipei Dome will greatly affect traffic, the environment and public safety. For example, due to the public-private collaborative structure of the project, there has been an explosion in commercial facilities occupying areas originally designated as emergency dispersal points.
Furthermore, the commercial aspect of the development dwarfs the sporting side, in contravention of the area’s designation as a cultural and recreational zone within the Taipei municipal strategic plan. Demanding financial penalties and exercising contractual rights cannot replace these vital areas of public interest.
The tender process for the Taipei Dome project contained a hidden upper limit for modified information, which violates regulations of the Government Procurement Act (政府採購法) and the Promotion of Private Participation in Construction Projects Act (促進民間參與公共建設法). At the end of last year, it was confirmed that Farglory had violated the contract.
The 2017 Universiade organizing committee then publicly made it known that the existing Taipei Gymnasium could be used as a substitute for the opening and closing ceremonies, and that everything was in place except for one last crucial element.
Hopefully Ko will avoid following in the footsteps of his predecessor, Hau, and instead refuse to continue to safeguard the private interests of Farglory.
Ko should imitate the action of the tiger, stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, tear up the BOT contract and tear down that egg-shaped monstrosity.
Arthur Yo is director of policy at the Songshan Tree Protection Volunteer Union.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
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.