The Legislative Yuan’s Economics and Energy Committee on May 6 conditionally passed the first reading of a draft amendment to the Factory Management Act (工廠管理輔導法) regarding unregistered factories built on farmland. It is to be the second revision to the act since 2010, when it was amended to allow unregistered factories to apply for temporary registrations so that the government could regulate factories that were illegally operating on farmland.
According to Council of Agriculture statistics, there are about 45,000 illegal factories on about 14,000 hectares of farmland. Over the past decade, only 7,421 of them have been granted a temporary license and only 10 have met the conditions to gain legal status, while 40 were moved to industrial zones with the government’s help.
With the deadline for temporary licenses to expire in June next year, while the number of unregistered factories on farmland keeps increasing, the amendment is a bid to address the long-standing issue by striking a balance between environmental protection and economic development.
In 2017, then-premier Lin Chuan (林全) said that the government would initially demolish illegal factories built after May 20, 2016, followed by those built earlier. Last year, then-premier William Lai (賴清德) said that the government would seek ways to help unregistered factories — most of them small or medium-sized — gain legal status, rather than extending the deadline. The draft amendment approved by Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) has devised mechanisms to regulate unregistered factories built before May 20, 2016, while denying leniency to those built after that.
The latest amendment aims to allow unregistered factories built before May 20, 2016, to continue operating past next year’s deadline, provided that they meet environmental and safety standards, and pay for land restoration and restitution for any pollution they caused.
The issue has existed for several decades. Unfortunately, the government has a poor track record addressing the issue, regardless of which party was in power. The problem continued because those who built the factories took a chance that the authorities would not find out.
However, this new amendment faces a fundamental problem: To ensure the interests of local industries, protect the livelihood of workers at unregistered factories and maintain economic growth, the government is creating a back door to assist unregistered operations to become legitimate. Creating this back door risks exacerbating the problem, especially if the lax enforcement and poor execution of the past persists. Instead of curbing unregistered factories, the proposed rule changes would encourage illegal factories to occupy farmland and make them less likely to use industrial zones.
Next year’s presidential and legislative elections make it difficult for the government to maintain a strict stance on unregistered factories, but those in power need to keep in mind that they are given power by the people to provide the greatest benefit to the nation as a whole. So, while the government is aiming to legitimize unlicensed establishments by giving them standards to meet, it still needs to include sunset provisions that would require less-polluting unregistered factories to gain a license and high-polluting ones to move to industrial zones within a certain timeframe or face being demolished.
Regulating unregistered factories is important for the economy, but the issue also needs to take into account social fairness and justice, the nation’s agriculture, people’s health and the environment.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs