Is Taiwan the only nation that has to bribe its people to visit their own country? The seemingly endless announcements of travel subsidies — for government workers, tour groups, people of certain ages or travel to areas affected by natural disasters — seemingly proves this to be true.
Tourism promotions targeting international travelers are normal for most nations, but it is rare to hear about similar domestic travel subsidy offers in other countries.
According to Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌), a winter travel subsidy program that ran from November last year to the end of January and cost NT$1.4 billion (US$45.49 million) earned the hotel industry NT$10 billion in revenue, which led the Tourism Bureau to announce that it is considering a similar program from next month through June.
However, the subsidy offers do not make everyone happy. Almost every time a program is announced, there are complaints from travel agents, local governments and others about the size of the subsidies, the scope and duration of the offers, and so on.
Even civil servants complain about one of the longest-running schemes, the Taiwan Citizen Travel Card, introduced in 2003, which gives an estimated 500,000 government workers a holiday allowance of about NT$16,000 per year to spend on domestic travel.
Frequent complaints revolve around restrictions on card use — such as a decision in December 2016 requiring at least half the money to be spent on group tours — and the paperwork involved, or that they would prefer to just receive an annual cash bonus.
The latest complaints about the spring subsidy program came from the travel industry itself, which said that contrary to the bureau’s assertion that spring is a low season, April to June is a busy period domestically, and it is already difficult to charter tour buses and book hotel rooms.
Some travel agents even said that the government should stop subsidizing domestic travelers.
The complaints highlight a recurring problem with the government and the bureau’s proposals: They often take a scattergun approach, lack strong logistical support and fail to take into account the needs or suggestions of the groups involved.
For example, the government has domestically and internationally been promoting the nation’s Aboriginal communities and culture, as well as ecotourism, but encouraging more people to visit remote, ecologically sensitive areas that lack the infrastructure to support large groups of visitors can cause more harm than good.
Many Aboriginal communities have also been upset by the promotion of traditional ceremonies and events that are key parts of their heritage, not photography opportunities for outsiders who do not respect their traditions.
Funds for subsidy programs should be spent on improving tourism infrastructure, which would provide long-term benefits, Travel Quality Assurance Association public relations manager Frank Lee (李謙宏) said earlier this week.
He equated the travel subsidies to narcotics that provide a quick buzz, before the user returns to reality, intimating that without the buzz, Taiwanese would be reluctant to travel domestically.
That might sound a bit harsh, but it is not the first time, and probably will not be the last, that a travel industry insider suggests that the government pay serious attention to — and money on — improving tourism infrastructure, rather than short-term programs.
Everyone loves a good deal, but bargain hunting is not the way to build a sustainable product.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS