One positive note emerged this week amid the finger-pointing and rush to judgement in the aftermath of the Puyuma Expess train derailment on Sunday that killed 18 passengers and injured 190: Premier William Lai’s (賴清德) decision to form an independent “transportation safety committee” to investigate major transportation incidents in the aviation, land and marine sectors.
However, in the rush to ameliorate the public clamor for results, Lai might be pushing the Executive Yuan to move too fast, when consideration is needed as to what shape the committee is to take, its guidelines and its authority.
Lai gave the Ministry of Transportation and Communications just one month to draft an organizational bill for the proposed agency and submit it to the Legislative Yuan for review.
Many nations have such agencies, but they often differ in substantial ways in terms of the sectors they cover, whether they are independent agencies and whether they are tasked with investigating accidents and determining responsibility or blame, or simply to research accidents and advise their governments on policy matters.
The US National Transportation Safety Board has since 1967 been in charge of investigating incidents in the aviation, highway, marine, pipeline and railroad sectors, as well as incidents related to the transportation of hazardous materials. Since 1996, it has also been responsible for coordinating federal assistance to families of accident victims.
The Transportation Safety Board of Canada covers all but highway accidents, while the Swiss Transportation Safety Investigation Board probes civil aviation, cableway, roadway, waterway and railway incidents.
The Japan Transport Safety Board conducts accident investigations, but does not get involved in apportioning blame and liability, while the British Transport Safety Commission says its job is “to inquire into transport safety matters in order to assist with the development of policies that will reduce risk” and lower transport-related casualties.
In most instances, the governments that have set up such boards or agencies have felt that having a single organization to investigate accidents and promote transportation safety was better than continuing to have separate agencies do the jobs.
Taiwan clearly needs such an independent inquiry agency — not just because of the mishmash of information from the Taiwan Railways Administration in the wake of Sunday’s tragedy, but because government task forces specially formed in the wake of such incidents often do not have qualified technical representatives.
As some opposition lawmakers have pointed out, the task force led by Minister Without Portfolio Wu Tze-cheng (吳澤成) that is leading the Cabinet inquiry into the derailment has no members from Nippon Sharyo, the Japanese company that makes the TEMU2000 trains used for the Puyuma Express service.
Compare this with investigations into aviation accidents in Taiwan and elsewhere that almost always include representatives from the manufacturer of the airplane and engines involved.
Taiwan needs an independent agency to investigate all types of transport accidents, but — given the amount of industrial pipelines around the nation — its brief should also cover pipelines and the transport of hazardous materials.
The need for such coverage is clear: Just remember the gas pipeline explosions on July 31, 2014, in Kaohsiung that killed 32 people and injured 321, and conflicting claims of responsibility for maintaining the myriad forest of pipelines from various industries and refineries in the city.
Taiwan needs a transportation safety board, but the government needs to take the time — and be given the time by its critics and the public — to ensure that such an agency is well designed and given the necessary authority.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun