Work and classes across the nation were canceled for two or three consecutive days last week, depending on the particular area, as Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southern Taiwan.
Typhoon days are controversial. Some think it affects productivity and the economy and therefore it would be preferable if calling a typhoon day would be made much more cautiously. Some think that a day off work and school brings a little joy, and it is not a big deal to do so.
Others say that typhoon days potentially deprive people requiring treatment of their right to receive medical care and students of their right to education. Some in the retail and service industries complain about “differential treatment,” as they do not get a day off even on a typhoon day.
The problem is that people’s opinions about typhoon days are often not based on whether they prevent disasters and casualties.
The above debate demonstrates that there is room for a rolling review of the typhoon day policy.
First, when deciding on whether to call a typhoon day, local governments should consider including an indicator of the potential harm a typhoon could bring.
Second, the government should provide support measures and eliminate unfair or unreasonable regulations.
It is not up to government heads to declare a typhoon day. Whether to cancel work and classes depends on if the predicted wind speed and rainfall meet the requirements.
As of 9pm Wednesday, there were two dead, two missing, and 102 injured, according to data provided by the Central Emergency Operation Center.
It is not clear if the casualties were related to the typhoon day policy. If so, the current policy should be maintained. Iif not, it should be amended, reviewed or canceled.
One of the dead was a truck driver whose vehicle collided with a large rock on the South Link Highway in Taimali Township (太麻里) at around 7pm on Monday last week. He was seriously injured and died three days later.
The Taitung County Government had already canceled work and classes by that time.
It is not clear if the driver was aware of the typhoon day announcement. It is also not clear that the cancellation was related to this incident, and whether there was any policy, either a deterrent or an incentive, that would have affected his decision to continue working.
The other person who died was a man in his 70s who fell to his death at about 11am on Tuesday while trimming a tree at his home in Shoufeng Township (壽豐).
Was his death related to the typhoon day policy? It is likely not. If this is the case, the authorities should improve their messaging to better inform the public about their policy decisions.
The scenarios in which these people died show that the declaration of a typhoon day is hardly relevant.
It is high time to review the policy on a rolling basis.
Yang Yung-nane is a professor of political science at National Cheng Kung University and an adviser to the Tainan City Government’s disaster prevention advisory cmmittee.
Translated by Fion Khan
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
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
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
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS