Worth of Equator Principles
To be more socially responsible, Cathay United Bank’s board of directors signed the financing of international environmental norms — the Equator Principles — a few months ago. Cathay United Bank, the first Taiwanese bank to apply the Equator Principles, now implements the rules in banking business.
It assesses the following principles when analyzing a corporate banking loan: review and categorization, environmental and social assessment, applicable environmental and social standards, environmental and social management system and Equator Principles action plan, stakeholder engagement, grievance mechanism independent review, covenants, independent monitoring and reporting, and reporting and transparency. These key factors help bankers find the right loan target.
In the past, bankers giving loan would only consider the profit of fee and interest, neglecting the environmental and social welfare factors. This created a lot of side effects, including environmental pollution and undesirable externalities, which could potentially hurt future generations.
To address long-term social welfare issues, banks, as the rally point of capital and information, should help society to make good choices through the allocation of loans and by following the Equator Principles. If that happens, people might have brighter, safer and more sustainable futures.
Roger Chen
Chiayi
Complexities of burn care
It is unfortunate that some organizations have chosen to criticize decisions made related to the care of burn patients from the Formosa Fun Coast (八仙海岸) fire (“TMA urges respect for burn decisions,” July 16, page 2). Having spent a number of years caring for burn victims in critical condition at a large burn center, I think I can understand where they are coming from. I believe the root cause is frustration. It is frustration with a course of treatment many do not understand very well, and that not all hospitals are equipped to accept or treat these patients.
Burn care is not a simple process. In fact, it is one of the most complex courses of treatment. Not only does it involve the visible injury, but then there are the sometimes hidden inhalation injuries that can be devastating. Along with it comes associated insults to the vascular system and cardiac system, among others. It is not simply a one system injury and decisions on treatment by doctors and nursing staff change daily, even hourly, based on changes in patient response and physical status. It is not a “one size fits all” injury and the sad truth is that while a victim with 70 percent burns might survive, it is possible for a patient with 30 percent burns to succumb to such injuries.
I have seen hospitals completely overwhelmed by seemingly small numbers of burn patients. True, this most likely occurs in smaller communities, but without a staff trained in the acute phase and daily care of the burn patients, most hospitals are pushed to the limit. Initial physical assessment, calculation of a burn percentage and fluid resuscitation requirements, and placing of intravenous lines and catheters can be done in any emergency department. Then there are the specialized studies. It is all rapid response.
Does Taipei have a need for a dedicated burn treatment center? I believe so. How large should it be? That is for the medical community to determine, not politicians. I applaud the reaching out to Japan for assistance and peer review of treatment given to date. There are facilities that would be happy to assist in helping to train staff in the acute, daily and rehabilitation phases of burn care. For the physicians, there are any number of avenues for them to obtain training. In the facility in which I worked, there were always several visiting doctors who were there, for varying amounts of time, for training in both acute and day-to-day burn care.
I would ask that people try to be a bit more patient and understanding before they leap to judge the care these patients are getting. Everyone associated with this disaster is doing their best to alleviate the suffering of the many victims. I wish only the very best for both families and hospital staff.
Tom Kuleck
Taichung
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