Overhauling status for votes
While Article 3, Clause 3 of the 1955 amended Water Act (水利法) states that the public juridical persons governing water management are autonomous bodies, while the 1993 Organic Regulations for Irrigation and Water Conservancy Associations (農田水利會組織通則) Article 1, Clause 2 — which predates the now-abolished Act for Establishment of National Chiang Kai-Shek Cultural Center (國立中正文化中心設置條例), which said that “the center is a non-departmental public body and the supervisory authority of the center is the Ministry of Education” by more than 10 years — confirms the irrigation associations are “public juridical persons.”
The associations are among the first organizations to be operated as a semi-autonomous non-departmental public bodies. As such, their budgets need to be passed by the Council of Agriculture — which comes under the control of the Executive Yuan — and any engineering works or procurements are subject to the Government Procurement Act (政府採購法).
In addition, matters related to real estate must obtain council prior approval and be incorporated into the budget, and when necessary, land can be expropriated for its purposes.
This being the case, changing the status of the associations, in both structural and practical terms, to a government agency, cannot be said to be illegal.
The thing to be careful about is the exact nature of the organization overseeing the water rights management and distribution for agriculture, industry and the general public, to ensure that the interests of each are met.
What must be avoided is blanket opposition to government policy overhauling organizational status of various bodies simply for electoral considerations, thereby endangering democratic progress.
Chin Pei-chen
Taipei
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