The rarely seen spirit of cross-party cooperation made its presence felt in the legislature on Sunday when lawmakers concerned about protecting the environment joined forces despite their otherwise insurmountable mutual antipathy.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiu Wen-yen (邱文彥), Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Tien Chiu-chin (田秋堇) and People First Party (PFP) Legislator Chang Show-foong (張曉風) led by example as they called on their peers to quit bickering along party lines when it comes to the environment.
The main focus of the lawmakers was the remaining wetlands along the west coast and coastal areas that have not yet been concreted over.
Their call for cooperation was admirable, but given the track record of lawmakers, whether they be pan-green or pan-blue, the public should not expect a new era of eco-detente to be embraced any time soon.
What seems more likely is that a small number of legislators, such as Chang of the PFP, who is noted for opposing — but not stopping — the construction of a biotechnology center in Taipei City’s Nangang District (南港), will make regular calls on their peers to put aside partisan interests in the name of protecting the environment for future generations.
Such a call cannot be completely ignored, because it is generally accepted by the public, if not by politicians and corporate bosses, that protecting the environment is a good idea. However, most lawmakers are likely to remain silent when Chang and her colleagues call for huge infrastructure projects on wetlands or coastlines to be halted.
They will agree wholeheartedly when called on to do their civic duty and keep the nation clean, but then most likely vote down any proposals that might hurt their corporate constituents, while working to undermine any cross-party agreements made by Chang and like-minded lawmakers.
This is probably one of the few issues that could unite pan-green and pan-blue politicians — secret opposition to environmental policies to protect the corporate interests of their constituents.
Chang is a true environmentalist and appears determined to push policies that protect what is left of the nation’s already besieged natural environment. However, it is doubtful that she can achieve much on her own in the Legislative Yuan.
If, by some miracle and collusion of interests, Chang does get lawmakers from the KMT and DPP to agree to rules that keep developers away from wetlands and coastal areas, the rest of Taiwan will owe her a huge debt of gratitude because no other lawmaker has focused on the goals she has set out for herself.
It is a huge task. She would have to change the legal code regulating industry in those zones, amend the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例), strengthen the Environmental Protection Administration so that it is not simply a rubber stamp for corporate interests, and stop local politicians and business leaders from simply ignoring central government decisions. It would also be necessary to ensure rules were enforced nationally and not just for photogenic famous wetlands like those near Wugoushui Village (五溝水) in Pingtung County’s Wanluan Township (萬巒).
Chang is going to need a clear idea of the challenges that lie ahead if she is to protect Taiwan’s environment for the use of future generations.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS