On Tuesday, nearly 3,000 fishers marched from the Council of Agriculture to the Legislative Yuan in Taipei, demanding that the government retract “irrational” regulations it implemented last year that have resulted in fines totaling more than NT$120 million (US$3.89 million) for legal technicalities or accidentally entering another nation’s exclusive economic zone.
The protesters said the measures are “oppressive” and leave them no way to make a living.
The government decided on the tough approach after receiving a “yellow card” warning from the EU in October 2015 over the nation’s lack of oversight and weak sanctions for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.
Even though the EU does not recognize Taiwan as a county, the two sides have a robust relationship. Taiwan is the EU’s sixth-largest trading partner in Asia, with bilateral trade last year increasing by almost 10 percent from 2016.
The yellow card is just a warning. If Taiwan continues its illegal and unregulated activities, it could receive a red card, which comes with a ban on fishery products from Taiwan.
The real question that nobody seems to be asking is: How did the cumulative fines get so high? And that only accounts for those who got caught. Based on the fishers’ arguments, it seems as though they do not see any way to survive without breaking the rules.
Yes, the government seems to have gone overboard in some cases, such as fining a 70-year-old fisherman NT$1.2 million last year for turning in a form three days late.
It is hard to exercise discretion here, as there are sure to be fishers who purposely avoid paperwork — another fisher claimed that he was fined NT$1 million for turning in a form one day late, but the Fisheries Agency said that he did not report a catch he unloaded in another country.
It is understandable why these people are angry, as there are bound to be many people who are slapped with fines disproportionate to their actions.
The problem is, what use are fines when people keep accruing them anyway — and even stage protests to lower them? If heavy fines are not stopping people from breaking the rules, then a lower fine would surely not do anything to change the situation.
It is also understandable why the government would refuse to yield, but the responsibility should not fall entirely on the fishers.
The situation today is essentially caused by the government not enforcing regulations well enough, leading to the fishing industry establishing its own “unspoken” system. However, once faced with international pressure, the government suddenly changed the rules, leaving the fishers scrambling to adjust.
Just like drunk driving, fines do not stop people from breaking the rules. Many fishers are old and have been operating this way for decades.
It is a given that heavy fines and regulations need to stay in place, but the government should put more resources into helping them adjust and allow “accidental” offenders some wiggle room. The EU only gave Taiwan a warning; maybe the Taiwanese authorities should not be so extreme either.
The whole situation needs to be reviewed with a better plan to move toward a law-abiding and sustainable industry. This is a huge undertaking — transforming an entire industry cannot be done in one day and solved by only restricting and punishing people.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers