It has been reported that the Taipei Department of Urban Development ordered the closure of a recycling yard in Wanhua District (萬華) because it contravened the Regulations on Land Use Zoning Control (土地使用分區管制自治條例). According to the law, a recycling yard may not be established in a residential area. The neighborhood applauded the decision, saying that they have been bothered by scavengers’ noises and trash, as well as traffic problems nearby.
The city government has the right to shut down business premises that contravene the law, and problems resulting from the activities of scavengers should also be properly handled.
Yet the matter is not as simple as it seems.
The report said that the recycling yard has been functioning for 50 years, and more than 200 people take their recyclables there to make a living. They are usually in their later years, most are from low and middle-to-low-income households, and some have disabilities.
Every day, they take lots of items to the yard in exchange for cash. In many ways, this recycling yard in Wanhua is a bank for the impoverished.
The city government seems to believe that it must be closed for the greater good. I beg to differ.
A-hua (啊華), a 56-year-old woman, is one of the people selling her recyclables there. Unlike many others who come with carts, she rides her bicycle to the recycling yard with only a basket of items. She lives on Huanhe S Road without electricity, as she cannot pay the bill. For five years, she has been using candles if she needs light in the night.
She once took off her hat and showed me the scars on her head. When she was younger, she was run over by a gravel truck. She has had brain surgery and a tracheostomy. As a result, A-hua is slower than others when expressing herself and reacting to the outside world. She has a hard time finding a job.
Had it not been for her parents, she would not have survived. Unfortunately, her parents passed away five years ago. She suddenly lost her support, and because of the house left to her by her parents, A-hua cannot claim subsidies from official agencies, so she earns her living by collecting and selling the recyclables.
However, due to her health, it is difficult for her to collect as many recyclables as others. A-hua has to bring her items to the recycling yard eight times a day to receive about NT$30. This is how much she can spend on food per day.
If the recycling yard is shut down, how will A-hua earn a living? What about other people who rely on this form of income? The city government must do something to help them.
Social work and welfare agencies should investigate these people’s financial circumstances and living conditions. They must ask whether those from low and middle-to-low-income families have enough social security. They must help those whose households are not categorized as low and middle-to-low-income obtain the subsidies they are eligible for, or reach out to non-governmental organizations to assist with their problems.
The best-case scenario is that these people find jobs. Meanwhile, the matter of waste recycling should be regarded as an environmental issue that involves the entire public.
As for the establishment of a recycling yard and where it should be, that is up to the wisdom of the city government to decide.
Yu Ying-fu is a lawyer and honorary chairperson of the Pearl S. Buck Foundation in Taipei.
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS