On June 30, the Ministry of Transportation and Communications revised the temporary parking rules, implementing a system of penalty points and cracking down on stopping at red lines.
As the ministry prepares to create more yellow parking line and stopping zones, it is to be lenient with enforcement of penalty points, but drivers are still to be fined if they stop at red lines, even to pick up passengers or unload cargo.
However, the Vision Zero Alliance and professional drivers have expressed discontent.
My daughter was fined recently. She was not happy. Usually, it takes less than 30 seconds and does not disrupt traffic when drivers pick up a passenger, but now they face the risk of a fine simply for stopping at a red line — and most of the lines are red at the moment.
For many, fines under these circumstances are unreasonable. The new rules must be re-examined.
Have you ever stopped at a red line to allow a passenger to get out? Have you hailed a taxi at a red line? Are the regulations reasonable?
It is wrong to break the law, but in urban areas, it is almost impossible to abide by the traffic rules all the time.
In a radius of a few hundred meters around my house, there are few spaces for parking, which are almost always occupied, while yellow lines are also in short supply. Otherwise, its red lines.
Are the long red lines needed at intersections? If the rules are obeyed, getting into a car or hailing a taxi becomes nearly impossible.
More often than not, convenience stores, rehabilitation centers and long-term care centers are surrounded by red lines, meaning delivery trucks and vehicles carrying passengers in wheelchairs have to stop at them.
Some people take great pleasure in reporting traffic offenses. If they watch a red line zone in such an area for a short time, they would see many drivers breaking the rules.
Moreover, professional drivers who are reported might lose their job.
The ministry has received many complaints from drivers of taxis, buses and cargo trucks who have been repeatedly fined and given points for temporary parking in zones with red lines, which has hurt their incomes.
Taiwan is a densely populated nation where many people rely on automobiles. Drivers need to park temporarily — red lines notwithstanding — to complete their tasks. If they lose their job because of a traffic rule, is it in line with the principle of proportionality regarding road safety?
Drivers who illegally occupy road space are annoying, but sometimes, drivers need to stop temporarily. If the result is a penalty, the law is neither reasonable nor fair.
The ministry has asked local governments to create more yellow line areas and stopping zones, while the penalty point system is likely to be implemented next year, but does that mean parking spaces will be reduced? Is it going to become even more difficult to park legally?
Perhaps the red lines at intersections could be shortened and other areas be made yellow instead of red.
Or perhaps the ministry should revise the rules, allowing drivers to stop at red lines for a short time, if there is obvious need and traffic is not impeded.
That way, elderly people and other passengers with mobility issues would also be able to access vehicles more easily.
The ministry should also disregard public reporting of temporary parking, as fines do not improve traffic flow, but only lead to further annoyance.
Chang Yen-ming is a former Water Resources Agency section head.
Translated by Emma Liu
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Workers’ rights groups on July 17 called on the Ministry of Labor to protect migrant fishers, days after CNN reported what it described as a “pattern of abuse” in Taiwan’s distant-water fishing industry. The report detailed the harrowing account of Indonesian migrant fisher Silwanus Tangkotta, who crushed his fingers in a metal door last year while aboard a Taiwanese fishing vessel. The captain reportedly refused to return to port for medical treatment, as they “hadn’t caught enough fish to justify the trip.” Tangkotta lost two fingers, and was fired and denied compensation upon returning to land. Another former migrant fisher, Adrian Dogdodo