Today is Sunday, July 16, the day of the rally for housing justice along Ketagalan Boulevard, and I am walking with the other marchers, chatting with an elderly lady walking by my side.
She says to me: “The area that collapsed along Alley 110, Shueiyuan Road Sec 2 in Sijhih District (汐止) in 2017 is just behind the parking lot constructed on land owned by former legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌). I remember him posting on Facebook that that section of road, together with Dongshih Street in the hills around New Taipei City, was in danger of collapse after days of heavy rainfall, saying how this shows the importance of maintaining proper soil conservation along slopes.”
She then asks how it was that Huang had leased his land out for the construction of a parking lot. “Had he forgotten what he had written in that post?” she said.
I nodded, adding: “The land that the parking lot is built on was originally a Grade 2 Environmentally Sensitive Area on a slope, and according to New Taipei City urban planning guidelines developments in these areas must prepare a soil conservation plan to be sent for approval to the local authorities, otherwise it would be in contravention of the Urban Planning Act (都市計畫法) and the Soil and Water Conservation Act (水土保持法).”
The lady said: “Making a parking lot requires laying down non-porous concrete, which would mean the rainwater is unable to permeate the ground. Surely, this would increase the surface runoff and the burden on the drainage system, jeopardizing the safety of local residents, perhaps even leading to subsidence or collapse. Would Huang not have been aware of this?”
I sighed.
“The march is about fairness and justice, as well as judicial reform and housing justice, but the usage of land Huang owns is actually illegal. If he is unaware of this, is he really qualified to speak on judicial reform? Leasing land for the construction of a parking lot and thereby endangering soil conservation in the area, as well as jeopardizing the safety of local residents, surely runs counter to the spirit of promoting housing justice,” I said.
The lady said: “You know what? The more I think about it, today’s march is not really offering much in terms of vision or solutions to the problem, and is beginning to look increasingly like a political event designed to bolster certain people’s agendas in the ongoing presidential election campaign. I’m off.”
As she said that, I woke from my dream. When I reflected on it, I thought she had a point.
Yeh Yu-cheng is a secretary at the Pingtung Public Health Bureau.
Translated by Paul Cooper
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS