Lawmakers on Monday said that plans to move the legislature to Taichung were still being considered, but experts have raised concerns about the logistics.
Such a move has been discussed since at least 2004. In 2012, Minister of Transportation and Communications Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) — who was a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator at the time — called for Taichung to be made the nation’s second capital.
Lin said that moving the Legislative Yuan would better balance national development and allow the land occupied by the legislature in Taipei to return to being a school, its original purpose.
Relocating a nation’s capital is not a new idea. Many countries do so to shed their colonial past, or to put administrative power closer to the public served.
Operating two capitals can introduce cost and security concerns, and the move would bring major logistical challenges.
Some lawmakers must be at the Legislative Yuan twice per week, and although Lin said that this would not be a problem with the High Speed Rail, the cost — which taxpayers would bear — would add up.
Lin also said that for government agencies, Taichung would be safer than Taipei, which is vulnerable to nuclear disasters, citing the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster in Japan.
Tokyo moved some government functions to Osaka following the incident, Lin said.
DPP Legislator Chen Ou-po (陳歐珀) agreed that the legislature might be safer outside Taipei, but gave a different reason, saying that the military could better protect the government if it were on the east coast, in Yilan County. Yilan would be safer than Taichung, which is directly across the Taiwan Strait from China and therefore more vulnerable to attack.
However, improvements in Chinese missile technology and China’s growing military presence in the South China Sea diminish the advantage of locating government facilities on the east coast.
Another consideration raised on Monday by professors Chen Ming-siang (陳銘祥) of Tamkang University and Peng Chin-peng (彭錦鵬) of National Taiwan University was that government officials from different agencies must regularly meet, so moving the Legislative Yuan would necessitate moving the Executive Yuan and possibly other government agencies.
Vice President William Lai (賴清德) in February 2018, when he was premier, said that he supported moving the legislative and executive branches to Taichung, while deputy legislative speaker Tsai Chi-chang (蔡其昌) said that it would solve issues of limited space and traffic congestion in Taipei.
Perhaps it mainly comes down to what a capital city means to Taiwanese. An article published by the BBC on Dec. 6, 2017, said that capital cities must be protected, must exert control and project unity, and must be seen as representative and accessible.
The legislative and executive branches are built on repurposed properties in a congested urban area, established when no consideration was given to space for protests or to the accessibility of institutions to the general public. They are in an area that is vulnerable to earthquakes, nuclear disasters and potentially volcanic eruptions.
However, if they were moved to Taichung, Taipei would likely no longer be seen as a center of control and unity.
It is not clear whether the relocation of the seat of power would help or hinder the development of a national consciousness in Taiwan, but given the uncertainty, the government should put it to a referendum and let Taiwanese choose.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations