The Taipei Dome, being built on the site of the old Songshan Tobacco Factory, has been steeped in controversy since its inception. After taking office, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) reviewed the development and pledged to consider the necessity of removing trees from the area. Farglory Land Development Co chairman Chao Teng-hsiung (趙藤雄), who is eager to get on with the project, then held a press conference at which he asked for a meeting with Ko and said that “frankly speaking, these trees are ugly ... more beautiful trees could be planted there later,” adding that it seemed “human life is worth less than the life of a tree.”
In saying trees are more valuable than people, Chao was referring to a planned underground passage that would double as an emergency exit from the Taipei Dome. The blueprint shows that the passage would be 80m wide, but since commercial premises are planned along its sides, only 18m would remain in the middle — a greatly reduced width from that intended in the original plan.
If it is a requirement that a passage doubling as an emergency exit must be 80m wide, then an underground shopping arcade should not be built there. Farglory is planning to profit from leasing shop space in the passage. If 18m is enough to provide the passage with emergency exit facilities, then the whole design could be narrowed and the trees would not have to be moved.
Chao’s statements about the trees have become the target of much ridicule and criticism on the Internet. Organizations that want to preserve the trees say that it is 87 trees, not 33, that are at stake, and that another 50 have already been moved — and died. Chao’s statement that other trees can be planted to replace trees that have been cut down is a long-term pledge that does not carry much credibility.
Since the plans for the Taipei Dome were initiated in 2007, tree-preservation organizations have been advocating the protection of more than 1,000 trees in the area. In 2009, a 100-year-old camphor tree said to be the largest in Taipei was moved. The Green Party’s Calvin Wen (溫炳原) and Pan Han-shen (潘翰聲) climbed the tree to try and protect it, while their comrade Yu Yi (游藝) tried to stop a crane from moving the tree. In the end it was moved — and died.
Land surrounding the dome is expensive. Farglory has done all it can to expand the commercial area and volume. The Taipei City Government approved it all and started to cut down trees, calling it “site preparation.” Hundreds of trees were pushed over by excavators and then hacked into pieces, as Farglory’s only concern was to clear the site.
There have been many calls for a return to the original design, which only included the dome structure, while reducing the surrounding commercial facilities and preserving more trees and greenery and protecting the city environment, but these calls have been all but ignored.
Many people say that Farglory’s escalation of the conflict is a response to the Ko administration replacing that of former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) — which was very well-inclined toward the company. Farglory, which has now lost its support in City Hall, could be facing fines over the project, which is well behind schedule. If the city government forces changes to the design of the underground passage due to the controversy over the trees, that would give Farglory a legitimate reason for delaying construction.
The city government should insist on protecting the trees and the environment, and treat every tree as an important environmental asset that must not be lost.
Each of the Taipei Dome project’s many problems should be clarified and eliminated one by one.
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Acting Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) has formally announced his intention to stand for permanent party chairman. He has decided that he is the right person to steer the fledgling third force in Taiwan’s politics through the challenges it would certainly face in the post-Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) era, rather than serve in a caretaker role while the party finds a more suitable candidate. Huang is sure to secure the position. He is almost certainly not the right man for the job. Ko not only founded the party, he forged it into a one-man political force, with himself
RSS