The Taiwan Peace Foundation (
The museum is municipal property, operated under private management and municipal sponsorship.
The exhibits have helped me to understand the sorrow of the Taiwanese and the pain of the "Mainlanders" (Chinese immigrants who arrived after 1949 and their descendants) and sense the longing for peace and ethnic integration.
On weekends, thousands of people of different races, age and sex have watched folk culture performances in the small plaza in front of the 228 Memorial Park (
When the management contract was first signed, the Taipei government asked the museum not to seek profits by charging high fees, set the admission fee at NT$10 per person and required periodic free admission for Taipei residents and students.
The foundation had to finance the museum's operation with special government grants and private donations. Modeling its operation after museums in other advanced countries, the foundation recruited business talents who were good at fund raising and management specialists to serve as directors. Based on the success of the museum's operations, I cannot help but admire the director's accomplishment in running the museum as an enterprise.
I also admire the two mayors who allowed the private operation of the museum and the introduction of the idea of running a museum as a business enterprise. They helped build a sense of identity among the residents of greater Taipei.
Regretfully, before the management contract expired, the city's Bureau of Cultural Affairs violated both the contract's principles and the government procurement law.
Under the contract, the city government granted the foundation priority in renewing the contract. So why did the city fail to obtain a novation or propose a contract amendment in the six months after the government procurement law was passed?
Claiming that public bidding is required under the new procurement law, the city unilaterally changed the terms of the museum contract from the initial 3-years to 10-months. The move was an obvious breach of contract. It is no wonder that the foundation refused to accept the change and has even threatened to decline management.
On the other hand, if the foundation accepts the new contract, shouldn't the new term come under the procurement law? Doesn't this also make the city's under the table agreement with the foundation also illegal? Therefore, the city's move is contradictory.
The procurement law does not mandate public bidding for all purchasing by government agencies. Selective and restrictive bidding are other alternatives. Why doesn't the city government adopt one of these alternatives? Why does it try to force a contract renewal based on an authoritarian mentality?
It is truly beyond the understanding of legal and administrative logics. Perhaps politics is the real underlying reason?
The truly fascinating thing is that the Bureau of Cultural Affairs' Director-general, Lung Ying-tai (
Chen Pi-yuan is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS