The date has been set for a referendum on a liquefied natural gas (LNG) project near algal reefs on the coast of Datan Borough (大潭) in Taoyuan’s Guanyin District (觀音).
Although the Cabinet is willing to discuss the project and has adopted some suggestions offered by environmental groups, it is still rejected by other environmental groups.
Few people have a thorough understanding of the project’s ecological, environmental, energy and engineering implications, and rigorous thinking is needed to foresee the effects that either outcome — passing or not passing the referendum — would have.
A referendum, in which people vote yes or no, is not in the public’s best interest.
The referendum question is inflexible: “Do you agree with the relocation of CPC Corp’s [CPC Corp, Taiwan] third natural gas receiving station away from the coastal area and waters at Datan Algal Reef in Taoyuan?” For example, it asks for the relocation of the station, rather than simply moving it farther away from the reefs.
This is why some environmental organizations do not accept moving the terminal farther from the shore. Unless the groups that proposed the referendum are willing to withdraw it — which seems unlikely — the government should propose a counter-referendum.
Article 14 of the Referendum Act (公民投票法) states: “If the Executive Yuan deems it necessary to carry out referendums for a matter as prescribed in Subparagraph 3 of Paragraph 2 of Article 2, it may hand the main text and the statement of reasons, after they are approved by the Legislative Yuan, to the competent authority to implement the referendum.”
In other words, the government can initiate a referendum without gathering signatures.
The government had decided not to counter any of the four referendums to be held on Aug. 28 with referendums of its own, but the situation changed after Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) discussed the issue with Democratic Progressive Party legislators and reached an agreement between the Cabinet and the Legislative Yuan — he should report to the president and quickly counter with a referendum.
With the voting just three months away, the government cannot stand by and wait for a disaster that would block its energy plan, throw industry and taxpayers into an energy crisis, perpetuate pollution from coal-fired power generation and make it nearly impossible to achieve the goal of a nuclear-free homeland by 2025.
Even if the referendum is blocked, the Cabinet must still follow through on its pledge to move the station 400m farther out from shore and extend the project by another two years. As this would cost an additional NT$15 billion (US$539.26 million), taxpayers would still be forced to cover the cost of the government’s backing down.
Instead of backing down, the Cabinet should counter with a more aggressive referendum: “Do you agree that CPC Corp, to meet the need for an energy transition, shall establish a liquid natural gas receiving system in Taoyuan’s Guantang (觀塘) area that will not affect the algal reef ecology?”
The reasoning should list every alternative solution, including how far from the shore the station should be located, and the alternative of using a floating receiving system proposed by former Environmental Protection Administration deputy minister Chan Shun-kuei (詹順貴) and others.
It should be clearly explained how these alternatives accommodate the needs of the algal reef and the terminal so that voters can make an informed choice. Doing so would also change the referendum from a yes-or-no issue to a multiple-choice issue.
Chen Wen-ching is a director of the Formosa Association of Resource Recycling.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The recent passing of Taiwanese actress Barbie Hsu (徐熙媛), known to many as “Big S,” due to influenza-induced pneumonia at just 48 years old is a devastating reminder that the flu is not just a seasonal nuisance — it is a serious and potentially fatal illness. Hsu, a beloved actress and cultural icon who shaped the memories of many growing up in Taiwan, should not have died from a preventable disease. Yet her death is part of a larger trend that Taiwan has ignored for too long — our collective underestimation of the flu and our low uptake of the
For Taipei, last year was a particularly dangerous period, with China stepping up coercive pressures on Taiwan amid signs of US President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, which eventually led his Democratic Party to force him to abandon his re-election campaign. The political drift in the US bred uncertainty in Taiwan and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region about American strategic commitment and resolve. With America deeply involved in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, the last thing Washington wanted was a Taiwan Strait contingency, which is why Biden invested in personal diplomacy with China’s dictator Xi Jinping (習近平). The return of
Actress Barbie Hsu (徐熙媛), known affectionately as “Big S,” recently passed away from pneumonia caused by the flu. The Mandarin word for the flu — which translates to “epidemic cold” in English — is misleading. Although the flu tends to spread rapidly and shares similar symptoms with the common cold, its name easily leads people to underestimate its dangers and delay seeking medical treatment. The flu is an acute viral respiratory illness, and there are vaccines to prevent its spread and strengthen immunity. This being the case, the Mandarin word for “influenza” used in Taiwan should be renamed from the misleading
Following a YouTuber’s warning that tens of thousands of Taiwanese have Chinese IDs, the government launched a nationwide probe and announced that it has revoked the Republic of China (Taiwan) citizenship of three Taiwanese who have Chinese IDs. Taiwanese rapper Pa Chiung (八炯) and YouTuber Chen Po-yuan (陳柏源) in December last year released a documentary showing conversations with Chinese “united front” related agency members and warned that there were 100,000 Taiwanese holding Chinese IDs. In the video, a Taiwanese named Lin Jincheng (林金城), who is wanted for fraud in Taiwan and has become the head of the Taiwan Youth Entrepreneurship Park
RSS