It’s a sad day when corruption reaches the level where school principals are apparently stealing food from the mouths of babes.
In an investigation in New Taipei City (新北市), prosecutors from the Banciao District Prosecutors’ Office are probing the dealings of more than 10 elementary-school principals who reportedly accepted kickbacks to give good reviews to lunch vendors that supply between 80 and 90 percent of the city’s elementary schools.
In some cases, prosecutors said, vendors were bribing principals with up to NT$300,000 per semester.
The vendors were reportedly bribing principals to give them better evaluations than they would normally have received based on the quality of their lunches, enabling them to make more successful bids to supply other schools.
If these allegations are true, these bribes could have far-reaching effects on the health of pupils in New Taipei City.
In order to cut costs so they could pay these bribes, lunch vendors likely made deals with the least expensive farmers’ associations they could find, which in turn likely sourced the cheapest food from dubious food companies in the nation’s industrial heartland. The most likely end result of this chain of cost cutting is that food companies used substandard food, while farmers’ associations provided produce containing all kinds of harmful chemical pesticide and fertilizer residues.
However, despite the low-quality, sometimes toxic nature of this food, the whole chain of suppliers could still obtain Council of Agriculture certification. Could it have something to do with these bribes? Could these food vendors have been using their squeaky clean, paid-for evaluations to help their suppliers apply for council certification?
These questions need to be asked, especially after almost one-fifth of school lunches failed nutritional safety tests in a Consumer Protection Commission study.
The commission said that in a test in September, it found chloramphenicol — a chemical that causes severe blood problems such as anemia, low blood platelet counts, low white cell counts and leukemia — in some school lunches. The commission added that two samples of food containing unusually high levels of chloramphenicol and another banned pesticide bore Certified Agricultural Standard (CAS) approval labels.
That’s curious. How did the council go about granting these food vendors certification if they were selling toxic food?
In another case in May, education officials in New Taipei City found that chicken being given to students was tainted with a banned chemical, but had carried the CAS label. The chemical was an antibiotic called doxycycline, which can cause permanent skin sensitivity and thinness and is especially dangerous for children.
These cases are not just about officials taking money that didn’t belong to them; it is about failure to protect the health of children.
In all likelihood, principals taking bribes to give good grades to lunch vendors led to students eating sub-standard food, some tainted with toxic chemicals. The good grades from the schools probably had a knock-on effect, allowing the food companies that sold produce to those lunch vendors to apply for CAS status.
Children are especially sensitive to the types of toxic waste that was found in their food. Those responsible should be held accountable to the highest degree.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS