The funds distributed recently in the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program (FLIDP) have sparked a wide debate in political circles. The FLIDP was established in 2017 to build infrastructure in Taiwan over the next 30 years. It includes eight funding categories: railway projects, water infrastructure resistant to climate change, green energy and digital infrastructure, urban and rural projects to balance overall development, childcare facilities, and food safety and human resources infrastructure. According to the special budget review report for phase three of the FLIDP plan, Kaohsiung received NT$126.5 billion (US$4 billion), the highest amount out of the six special municipalities. In particular, Cianjhen Fishing Port, which originally applied for NT$30 million for renovation, was given NT$8.1 billion.
The budget, which was “bloated” 270 times, was heavily criticised by opposition parties. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City councilors accused the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of “splurging” and playing “favoritism”: allocating more resources to DPP-governed cities while neglecting KMT-governed cities. Others complained of “unfairness,” demanding to know why Taipei only received NT$18.4 billion.
Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) hit back remarking that regional development should be encouraged by all, regardless of political affiliations, and that Kaohsiung fishers’ lives deserve improvement.
The controversy unveils several issues, but most importantly, the gap between rural-urban development gap and the north-south divide in Taiwan.
Since relocating its headquarters to Taipei in 1949, the KMT has in power for a total of more than 60 years. Owing to its long-standing bias, the social and economic development gap between the north and the south gradually widened. While the KMT relishes in concentrating investment in technology in its base in northern Taiwan, investment in Taiwan’s south mainly focused on heavy industries, which resulted in serious air pollution.
To address this gap, the DPP government launched the FLIDP to give all 22 cities and counties in Taiwan extra infrastructure and development funding — an opportunity to catch up with Taipei. As the most developed city benefiting from vested interests, Taipei is the last city that should be complaining about “not getting enough.” For example, Taipei’s MRT system has been fully developed for years, while Kaohsiung and Taichung still struggle with funding, building and planning new lines.
Taiwan is one of the top three countries that have invested in pelagic fisheries. Kaohsiung’s Cianjhen Fishing Port, the largest base for pelagic fishing vessels in the country, brings in NT$30 billion annually and takes up 60 percent of Taiwan’s pelagic fishing, but has not had a proper makeover for more than 50 years.
For one, fishers returning from fishing have no facilities to shower after disembarking and are forced to bathe in public. Dilapidated facilities and a dirty environment also need urgent attention. For example, fish and other products are still placed on the ground with no protection, an issue other countries have long addressed. As a suitable drainage system is also lacking, salt water and wastewater are often clogged in ditches and flow to nearby residences.
With so much still in need of renewal, is it too much to ask to have NT$8.1 billion for a port that has been significantly contributing to Taiwan’s pelagic fishing industry and putting most of the fresh catch on the Taiwanese public’s table? Furthermore, the funding is a promising investment that would bring in more revenue as the number of vessels that it can harbor increases and new tourism is established.
If Taipei wishes to lose its label of Tian Long Guo (天龍國), a phrase used to mock a perceived sense of superiority among Taipei residents toward other areas, it should start by letting other cities have equal access to resources and funding. After all, closing the gap between the north and south of Taiwan is long overdue.
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been dubbed Taiwan’s “sacred mountain.” In the past few years, it has invested in the construction of fabs in the US, Japan and Europe, and has long been a world-leading super enterprise — a source of pride for Taiwanese. However, many erroneous news reports, some part of cognitive warfare campaigns, have appeared online, intentionally spreading the false idea that TSMC is not really a Taiwanese company. It is true that TSMC depositary receipts can be purchased on the US securities market, and the proportion of foreign investment in the company is high. However, this reflects the
RSS