This month, academics at a forum on climate change criticized the lack of national planning for land use over the past half century, which has resulted in ineffective national land management. Wise words indeed. But if the Cabinet really wants national planning for land use, it must stop the implementation of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) “three cities, 15 counties” campaign promise to integrate Taichung City and Taichung County, Taipei City and Taipei County and Kaohsiung City and Kaohsiung County, giving them all special municipality status.
Ma’s credibility has suffered after breaking a series of election promises, including his “633” platform and goal of boosting the stock market beyond 10,000 points. To save his reputation, he is now preparing to fulfill the “three municipalities” promise, which he copied from former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Both Ma and Chen made the promise during their election campaigns. Although Ma is copying Chen, he would outshine Chen if he succeeded where Chen failed and would shake off his reputation for breaking promises.
Implementing this plan would, however, spell disaster.
A municipality holds provincial status — a step above county level — and the number and ranks of its government officials and its budget are much larger. For example, Taipei and Kaohsiung receive more than NT$50,000 per resident each year from the central government, while Taipei County, a relatively rich county, is allocated less than NT$22,000 per resident.
The expenditures of Taipei City, which has a population of 2.5 million, totaled NT$130.6 billion (US$3.92 billion) last year. For Taipei County, with a population of 3.75 million, the figure was NT$82.3 billion.
By this standard, the annual budget for Taipei County would surge to NT$150 billion after the administrative change.
No wonder Taipei County Commissioner Chou Hsi-wei (周錫瑋) shed a tear when he heard Taichung City and Taichung County would be integrated first.
If Ma implements his promise, the population of the three metropolises will be 12 million, or 53 percent of the country’s population.
Today, the combined annual expenditure of local governments totals NT$731.7 billion. If the integration plan is carried out, the annual spending of the three main cities alone would reach NT$601.7 billion.
If the government’s budget remains unchanged, the other half of the population will be left with less than 20 percent of the budget for local governments.
If the budgets of other cities and counties are unchanged, the budget for the three main cities would exacerbate the gap between urban and rural areas and the polarization of society into lower and upper classes with a dwindling middle class.
To keep the budgets of other cities and counties unchanged, the government would have to add hundreds of billions in funds annually.
In addition, the mayor of the enlarged Taipei City would be too powerful. It seems likely that the nation’s population will continue to concentrate in urban areas, but if the biggest administrative region exceeds one-sixth of the nation’s population, it may be difficult to solve conflicts with the central government.
After the integration of Taipei County, the population of Taipei City would be 6.75 million, or 37.4 percent of the country’s population. The city’s annual financial costs would reach NT$341.5 billion, or 46.7 percent of local government expenditures. Tax revenues would be NT$709.8 billion, or 46.7 percent of national tax revenue.
By that time, Taipei would control half of the nation’s real strength — reminiscent of Russia under the Soviet Union.
In the past, national land planning has been too fragmented, with Taiwan Province making up most of Taiwan and special municipalities and provincial municipalities being divided into urban and rural townships. This complicated national land planning and regional development.
These problems should have been resolved by combining small cities and counties and putting special and provincial municipalities and counties at the same level. Unfortunately, the government and the opposition were too busy wrangling for power when amending the Constitution to address such matters.
It has been suggested that as the importance of big cities has increased, the state should promote them. Four metropolises in China — Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai and Chongqing — have been turned into special municipalities. Taiwan should learn from this example, some say.
But the area, population size and density of the whole of Taiwan are not much different from those of Beijing, Tianjin or Shanghai, and the county is not half as large as Chongqing. After the completion of the high-speed rail and the east-west expressways, Taiwan will be similar to a major Chinese metropolis. Copying China would not benefit regional development.
Although Ma fears breaking more promises and is struggling to improve his image, it would be better to break this promise to avoid the dire consequences.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does