The Executive Yuan on Thursday last week announced its draft amendment to the Mining Act (礦業法). The draft has major flaws that fall under three main issues.
First, there is the issue of history. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) first worked on the legislation in Beijing, then in Nanjing, and finally in Taipei, after its retreat to Taiwan.
The legislation has undergone 16 rounds of revision since its enactment on May 26, 1930. Each round revised articles, but never addressed the act’s underlying principle.
Ridiculously, the seventh round of revisions — made in 1949 after the government had relocated to Taiwan — still assumed that the legislation should address the needs of China’s administrative regions.
The legislation’s basic structure — laid out in China in 1930 — is not applicable to modern Taiwan in terms of its society and politics.
These problems have never been addressed, and the Cabinet’s proposed draft does not address them either, which is its most egregious issue.
Second, there is the issue of geography. The assumption behind the act is that a huge expanse of land — like China — must be controlled. Its design treats mining rights and land use rights separately.
The design is ill-suited to Taiwan, an island that mostly consists of high-altitude areas and has limited mineral resources. Countries such as Taiwan, Japan and other Pacific island nations need a mining policy focused on their particular geographies.
Third, there is the issue of content. Most of the minerals listed in the act are specific to China and are nowhere to be found in Taiwan.
Of the 60 minerals listed in Article 3 of the draft, only one-third are found in Taiwan. What is the point of listing these minerals at all?
There is no consistency in the terminology used. The draft mixes mineral names with chemical names, listing sulfur with pyrite and natural alkali, and mingles descriptions of commercial use with generic terms, such as abrasives, mineral pigments, and “gems and jade,” along with using umbrella terms with specific descriptions, such as marble and calcite.
Listing these in the proposed draft in this fashion is unforgivable.
There is a complete absence of minerals central to the government’s policy of safeguarding sovereignty — no green energy resources such as geothermal energy, methane ice and shale gas.
The entire passage of the Executive Yuan’s proposal — from the drafting and the announcement to the briefing session — has been filled with major administrative flaws.
An evasion of public scrutiny and incomplete meeting minutes all had people feeling deceived, and could even affect the authority of the draft.
The act is in dire need of amendment, but it must be revised from the ground up.
It is high time to establish a Mining Act that applies to a modern Taiwan and covers the nation’s geographic conditions.
With certain conditions in place, the act’s purpose is to regulate mining activity. The current worthless legislation is meant to restrict a developing mining industry.
The mining trade — one of the few industries covered in the Constitution — is influenced by and has an effect on geography, geology, mineral deposits, environmental protection and indigenous rights.
This is why it has been viewed as “untouchable,” but this is no excuse for the Ministry of Economic Affairs to do as it pleases.
Tseng Pao-chung is vice chairman of the Chinese Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers.
Translated by Rita Wang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.