MOE to recognize PRC diplomas
　

TEXTBOOK DIPLOMACY: The ministry said it would start by accepting credentials from 41 top Chinese universities that have received extra resources from Beijing
　

By Flora Wang
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 1

Deputy Minister of Education Lin Tsung-ming (林聰明) confirmed yesterday that the ministry planned to recognize Chinese credentials obtained after 1997.

“Basically [we are considering recognizing credentials] obtained after 1997, but we have not finalized the plan,” Lin said when approached for comment. He did not elaborate.

Lin said the ministry would hold public hearings to gauge public opinion on the matter, adding that the ministry planned to first recognize credentials issued by 41 top Chinese universities that China has provided with extra resources since 1985, including Peking University, Tsinghua University, Tianjin University and Fudan University.

At another setting, however, Minister of Education Wu Ching-ji (吳清基) said the ministry would not recognize any medical credentials from China.

Meanwhile, Wu said Taiwanese universities could begin enrolling students from China from June if bills cleared the legislature by the end of the current legislative session.

Wu said public universities would be allowed to recruit only graduate students, while private universities could recruit undergraduates.

Chinese students attending Taiwanese public universities would have to pay the same tuition fees as those at Taiwan’s private universities, Wu said.

The ministry has listed recognition of Chinese credentials and recruitment of students from China as one of the ministry’s major administrative goals since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) came into office last year.

However, proposed amendments to the law have been brought to a standstill because of a boycott by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

In response to the ministry’s plan, DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said the government’s policy to allow Chinese to study in Taiwan could pose a threat to Taiwanese students’ future employment opportunities and urged the government to carefully assess the situation before opening the nation’s education system to Chinese students.

“In the past few years, allowing Chinese students to come to Taiwan has been a highly sensitive issue because it relates to the competitiveness of Taiwan’s education industry, especially now, when people are having fewer children. We already have too many schools that can’t find enough students,” Tsai said.

Allowing Chinese to study in Taiwan could squeeze local students out of the domestic job market, she said.

She said that cross-strait educational exchanges not only touch upon sensitive political issues, but also expose the public to vastly different values on freedom of thought by both sides.

The DPP government handled the issue with great care, Tsai said, cautioning the administration to do likewise.

Asked for comment, KMT Legislator Cheng Chin-ling (鄭金玲) of the Education and Culture Committee said accepting Chinese credentials and students could serve as a stimulus for Taiwanese universities.

Meanwhile, the Taiwan Students Union — an organization of Taiwanese students studying in China — issued a statement criticizing the ministry for only planning to give recognition to credentials from 41 Chinese universities.

The union said the recognition should apply retroactively without limit rather than only for diplomas obtained since 1997.

ECFA slim boost to GDP, tool for unification: experts
　

MEANS TO AN END: An economist said that a pact with China was not a strategy for ensuring Taiwan’s prosperity, while the gains to China would be ‘extremely modest’
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 1

A new study by US economist Daniel Rosen forecasts that a proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China would increase Taiwan’s GDP by 4.5 percent over the next 10 years, but also cautioned that China’s motivation for signing the pact was solely concerned with unification.

“It would be difficult to find any other policy choice that would give that kind of boost,” Rosen told a conference in Washington on Tuesday.

He said, however, that an ECFA was “absolutely not a strategy for assuring [sic] Taiwan’s prosperity.”

Rosen, principal of Rhodium Group, a New York-based research firm and former senior adviser for international economic policy on the White House National Economic Council and director at the National Security Council, said an ECFA would only give Taiwan parity with Indonesia and “everybody else in the region that already has this normal relationship with the PRC [People’s Republic of China].”

“It will not get Taiwan anywhere, but out of the way of a moving bus. It just gets you across the street. Once across the street, Taiwan has to come up with a much more challenging domestic agenda for assuring its own competitiveness,” he said.

Rosen told the conference on the impact of economic integration on cross-strait relations that “If Taiwan does the ECFA then looking out to 2020 we would expect its GDP to be — just as a function of ECFA and no matter what else it does — about 4.5 percent higher than it would otherwise have been.”

Rosen said that if Taiwan does not sign an ECFA and “the region continues apace in its current liberalization undertakings” Taiwan would suffer a 1 percent drop in its economy “as a result of the liberalization others are doing while Taiwan sits on the sidelines.”

Rosen also told the conference, organized by the Center for National Policy, that China’s economic gains from an ECFA would be “extremely modest.”

“When I ask Chinese officials what is their motivation for ECFA, they say that it is pretty much to lay the groundwork for a happy ending. There is no pot of gold at the end of rainbow for China,” he said.

US-Taiwan Business Council president Rupert Hammond-­Chambers told the conference that he was much less optimistic about the direction in which ECFA talks were heading.

He said the major motivation for the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was “to spring Taiwan from its isolation on the trade liberalization front.”

An ECFA could give Taiwan the opportunity — if China does not get in the way — of signing bilateral free trade agreements with countries such as Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand, he said.

China’s “overarching goal,” however, was unification with Taiwan and that all of Beijing’s policies, including an ECFA, were “channeled in that direction,” he said.

Hammond-Chambers said there would be “significant difficulties” if, following the signing of an ECFA agreement, Beijing pressured Taipei into addressing political and military issues.

That would put Ma “between an assertive China that wants to talk about these things and the Taiwanese population he represents that is increasingly nervous about doing that,” he said.

“Which brings us back to the US,” he said. “Where will we be at that juncture? Will we have simply taken a step back and said well, China and Taiwan are getting on with it, we don’t have to engage, we don’t have to support Ma, we don’t have to do those material things we have done in the past. Then will we find, two or three or four years down the line, Taiwan really needs us. And by backing off, we have empowered the Chinese to act in a way that is destabilizing.”

Hammond-Chambers said the PRC was absolutely committed to ultimately bring Taiwan and China together and that an ECFA was part of that drive.

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and a coalition of business interests on Taiwan were supporting an ECFA at a time when the country was suffering economic distress, he said.

“The economic narrative that Ma is able to deliver is very appealing,” Hammond-Chambers said.

“But when you talk to people about military and security issues, their support for ECFA falls off and the coalition breaks up,” he said.

Investigators downplay report on Chen probe
　

SONG OF FREEDOM: As prosecutors said a magazine report was flawed, the former president’s office said he would release a CD about Taiwanese Independence
　

By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 3

Prosecutors investigating former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) alleged corruption and money laundering activities yesterday downplayed a media report that Fubon Financial Holding Co chairman Daniel Tsai (蔡明忠) had provided evidence against Chen to investigators.

The denials came after the Chinese-language Next Magazine reported yesterday that the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office’s Special Investigation Panel (SIP) secretly questioned Tsai and that he offered key evidence incriminating the former president.

CASH FOR APPROVAL?

Tsai reportedly told prosecutors that prior to the merger between Cathay Financial Holdings and Cathay United Bank, the family of Tsai Wan-lin (蔡萬霖) gave NT$500 million (US$16 million) to the Chen family. In exchange, Chen pressured the Ministry of Finance to approve the merger, the magazine cited Daniel Tsai as saying.

SIP spokesperson Chen Yun-nan (陳雲南) said that parts of the magazine report were false, but declined to say which parts.

In response to reports that the SIP would question Chen Shui-bian’s children, Chen Chih-chung (陳致中) and Chen Hsing-yu (陳幸妤), on embezzlement charges next week, the spokesperson said only that prosecutors would summon the necessary witnesses as the case develops.

In addition to corruption and money laundering convictions being reviewed by the Taiwan High Court, the former president has also been charged with embezzling secret diplomatic funds. Prosecutors are also investigating additional counts of money laundering.

Chen is suspected of accepting NT$200 million (US$6.1 million) in bribes related to Yuanta Financial Holding’s April 2007 merger with Fuhwa Financial Holding Co, then the nation’s 11th-largest financial group by assets.

He is also suspected of accepting another NT$340 million from former Chinatrust Financial Holding Co vice chairman Jeffrey Koo Jr (辜仲諒) in connection with Chinatrust’s failed takeover bid of Mega Financial Holding Co.

Prosecutors have said they are still investigating other unnamed businesspeople who are suspected of bribing the former first couple as a form of “protection” during the second financial reform while he was in office.

SONG FROM PRISON

In related news, the former president’s office said yesterday that he would release a CD about Taiwanese independence.

“The single-song CD is entitled One Country on Each Side. We are raising money so that we can release it in December,” a staff member from Chen’s office said.

“Chen Shui-bian wrote the lyrics. Composer Wang Ming-cheh (王明哲) wrote the music,” she said.

It was not clear whether Chen would record the song himself.

The office release the lyrics, which say: “Taiwan and China, one country on each side/ Taiwanese, oh Taiwanese, be brave and don’t hesitate/ Seek independence, fight for the future, build a beautiful country.”

Since his detention last November, Chen has published two books on his fight for Taiwan independence: The Cross of Taiwan, and The Voice that Cannot be Chained.

COA lends a hand to rice farmers in Tainan County

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 4
　

The Council of Agriculture (COA) said yesterday it would purchase rice at guaranteed prices from Tainan County farmers who are having difficulty selling their crops after their paddies were found to be contaminated with heavy metals.

Council Chairman Chen Wu-­hsiung (陳武雄) said he would instruct the Agriculture and Food Agency to study the details of purchasing rice from the farmers, though he suggested that rice from paddies in Houbi Township (後壁), where excessive amounts of chromium were found, could not have been contaminated and was of good quality.

Chen told media that rice cannot be contaminated by arsenic or chromium. Although such heavy metals in the soil may affect the growth of rice plants, the grains are free from contamination, the official said.

However, Chen’s comments may not be sufficient to alleviate consumer fears of eating contaminated rice, which means there will probably be no market for the township’s second harvest.

The council is stepping up efforts to help affected rice farmers by purchasing the crops from them at guaranteed prices.

It said it hopes the government’s purchase, which will serve as a gesture of quality guaranteeand help build confidence among consumers, as the rice will be put on the market.

A council spokesman said that local agricultural authorities were assisting farmers by ascertaining the quality of their rice harvest and providing storage space for rice stocks.

The council also announced that when the second harvest comes in, the government will purchase 1,440kg of rice at NT$23 per kilo, 800kg at NT$20 per kilo, and 2,360kg at NT$18.6 per kilo from each hectare of rice paddy.

The second harvest is expected to yield an average 4,500kg of rice per hectare.

In the wake of media reports about serious soil pollution in Houbi Township, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) announced on Monday that the agency would destroy 1,280kg of rice from the area.

Tsai Hung-teh (蔡鴻德), executive secretary of the EPA’s Soil and Groundwater Pollution Remediation Fund, said that tests by the Tainan County Government indicated that soil from rice paddies adjacent to a slag recycling plant was found to contain excessive amounts of chromium.

Tainan County Commissioner Su Huan-chih (蘇煥智) said the same day that further investigation of the contamination issue was necessary and that the county government would invite the Consumers Protection Association and environmental groups to conduct a joint investigation by taking soil samples for analysis.

He said results of the tests would be made public by early next week.

Furtive government deals disturbing

Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 8

Following the ruckus last month in which the government took the public and the legislature by surprise with its sudden announcement that it was lifting a ban on US bone-in beef imports, the government did it again on Monday night: It blitzed the public and lawmakers with a declaration that it had signed a financial memorandum of understanding (MOU) with China.

Both dealings followed an extremely disturbing pattern, in which government officials by day appeared all ears at public hearings and legislative meetings, saying they were interested in gathering input from the public and lawmakers before they would proceed with the issues they had at hand — only to have the government announce deals sealed in black and white later the same night.

These two incidents highlighted not just the degree to which the government holds the public and the legislature in contempt, but also accentuated President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) and Premier Wu Den-yih’s (吳敦義) lack of credibility. Prior to Monday, Ma and Wu had repeatedly said that the contents of the planned MOU would be submitted to the legislature for review and that the government would conduct negotiations in accordance with “the guiding principle of pursuing the public’s support and the legislature’s oversight” before signing the MOU.

It says much about the government’s regard for public support and legislative scrutiny that officials found themselves needing to make guarded dealings at night, shying away from broad daylight.

Financial Supervisory Commission Chairman Sean Chen (陳冲) said both sides exchanged signed documents at 6pm on Monday. If the MOU had met with public approval and passed lawmakers’ appraisal as the president and the premier had promised, wouldn’t it have been a celebratory matter? Wouldn’t the government have held a press conference early in the morning with festive aplomb, instead of releasing a public announcement on the inking of the MOU at a press conference at a time when most government agencies closed for the day?

From the opaque manner in which the government conducted negotiations with other countries in the recent US beef and MOU talks and the way in which it ambushed its people with sudden announcements after the fact, it would come as no surprise if we were to wake up one day to find that the government had already signed an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China despite the lack of domestic consensus on the matter.

Public discourse and debate on issues that pertain to public welfare and national interests is an essential feature in a democracy. Regrettably, as is evident from the government’s recent displays of arrogant obliviousness to public opinion and legislative oversight in its dealings on matters of great importance to the public’s welfare and interests, it appears that one-party dominance, about which many have expressed concern, is slowly taking hold, with the legislature becoming ineffective in its role of keeping the executive branch in check.

Taiwan’s democracy has been lauded by many, at home and abroad, including by Ma himself. It is hoped that the next chapter of Taiwan’s success story would not have an unfortunate twist in which the government conceals an autocratic character by means of a pseudo-democratic cover.

Looking at land value the way a farmer does
　

By Hsu Shih-jung 徐世榮
Thursday, Nov 19, 2009, Page 8

The Ministry of the Interior’s Regional Planning Committee approved the fourth stage of the Central Taiwan Science Park last Thursday, despite much public protest and a number of important factors not having been clarified, such as the environmental impact assessment. The approval of this development project and the disregard for public participation in the administrative process once again raise serious questions about both the legitimacy and rationality of the government’s public policymaking.

At the committee’s previous meeting, teary-eyed senior citizens from Changhua County voiced grievances over the government’s planned brutal expropriation of their land, complaining that they would have nothing with which to make a living. All in attendance were touched and could feel their sorrow.

Land expropriation is a very important state measure. Most advanced democracies are reluctant to use it, and see it as a last resort because of the serious consequences. In Taiwan, however, land expropriation has long been abused. The government exercises this right at every turn, making it the favored method for policymaking. This is a great irony in Taiwan, a country that claims to adhere to democracy and to guarantee the right to private ownership.

We must understand that the initiation of land expropriation must be predicated on the public interest, and the fulfillment of the public interest requires strict administrative procedures and the full participation of local residents to reach the widest possible consensus.

However, the Non-urban Land Use Control Regulations (非都市土地使用管制規則) and the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例) are seriously flawed, turning the “public interest” into the best excuse and the sharpest tool for those in power — such as local governments — to deprive people of their right to own private property and their right to survival. The sad thing is that current legislation gives local residents and landowners no right to oppose expropriation. Despite legal requirements for public hearings, price negotiation between the government and landowners and reviews by the local land planning committees, these are all empty promises.

Local residents are closely tied to the land they call home, and have a different take on farmland from that of the government or big business. Such land should not be viewed from the economic aspect alone, because the safety and lives of local residents depend on this land and they identify with it on a spiritual level. It is exceedingly important, especially for those who are now in their 70s or 80s. They feel that if they have their land, there is hope that their lives and livelihoods will continue. Most Taiwanese farming villages are dealing with aging populations, but these elderly residents also have the fundamental right to survival, and this right should not be sacrificed on the altar of economic production value.

It goes without saying that the government should thoroughly investigate the impact that the fourth stage of the science park would have on local communities, culture and public welfare, and it should also respect the right of residents to choose. The government should evaluate the public interest based on relevant administrative procedures and regulations, and at the very least hold public hearings. This is the only way to avoid further social division and confrontation and to guarantee the rights and interests of the public.

The government should postpone the fourth stage of the science park until these issues have been resolved.

Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the Department of Land Economics at National Chengchi University.