Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) on Tuesday last week announced that air-conditioners would be installed in all classrooms of public elementary and junior-high schools nationwide within two years, and that 70 to 90 percent of the NT$30 billion (US$1.01 billion) expense would be covered by the government.
However, some Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have demanded that, since schools in remote areas might be unable to afford maintenance fees and electricity bills, the government “guarantee” to cover all those expenses for the schools.
The KMT was unable to implement policies to provide all schools with air-conditioners during its rule, so now that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government is doing it, it is trying to obstruct the project and turn it into a money pit.
Cabinet spokesman Ting Yi-ming (丁怡銘) later said that the government annually spends NT$1.7 billion on subsidies for electricity bills of all public elementary and junior-high schools, and that it of course would subsidize the annual increase of NT$1.53 billion as well.
This is a public issue open to debate.
The government’s decision to install air-conditioners is definitely good, as it shows an understanding of the difficulties students have studying in hot classrooms.
However, the electricity bills for the air-conditioning should not be subsidized by the government.
If the users have to pay for the use of the air-conditioners themselves, it would likely also have an educational effect.
For most air-conditioners in high-school and university classrooms, students help pay for the electricity by using payment cards to switch on the systems.
If, for example, a class of 30 students runs the air-conditioner efficiently by turning it off when leaving for physical education, each of them would pay less than NT$4 for air-conditioning per day.
The government subsidy would be superfluous, as the government’s various tuition exemption and subsidy programs have relieved many parents’ financial burden, to a degree that there are few students who could not afford to contribute to air-conditioning in classrooms.
If the government covers higher electricity bills due to air-conditioning, it would be a misuse of public funds.
It is the parents who should not forget to be responsible for raising their children, and they must also contribute financially.
The ones calling for a “free-of-charge” policy often do so out of greed.
In the past, stores were allowed to hand out plastic bags for free, contributing to a serious environmental problem. Now, stores are required to charge NT$1 to NT$2 per plastic bag, and consumers unwilling to spend even a single dollar have to bring their own shopping bags.
Similarly, when landlords rent out apartments, some include the cost of utilities, such as water and gas in the rent, but no landlord includes electricity bills for air-conditioning.
If landlords did so, some tenants would keep air-conditioners running all day, also while not at home, just to return to a pleasantly cool apartment at night. Why would they not?
If the government subsidized air-conditioning bills for classrooms, would students cherish it?
Would they learn to conserve energy and use the air-conditioning in a resource-efficient way if the government pays for them?
Lin Po-kuan is a junior-high school teacher.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS