20100307 State-owned land should be developed for public

State-owned land should be developed for public

By Huang Hui-hsin 黃惠欣
Sunday, Mar 07, 2010, Page 8

The National Property Administration (NPA) has once again become a target of much criticism after auctioning a 121.3 ping (401m²) plot of state-owned residential land on Feb. 25 for NT$6.02 million (US$194,000) per ping, the second-highest price on record in the country. As history tends to repeat itself, we cannot help but give a bitter smile.

Many still remember how the agency sold a 2,300 ping plot of public land in downtown Taipei to Shin Kong Life Insurance Co for NT$6.38 billion, or NT$2.77 million per ping, four years ago. What happened then? Shin Kong sold the land to Yuanlih Group for NT$10.1 billion two years later. The land had not been developed. By simply paying a little interest and land-value tax, Shin Kong made a profit of more than NT$3.7 billion on the deal, without any Taipei residents benefiting.

The sale triggered a public protest, and public land auctions were suspended as a result. Moreover, the Legislative Yuan passed a resolution temporarily banning sales of more than 500 ping plots. So why is history repeating itself today? Can the problem be resolved by Premier Wu Den-yih’s (吳敦義) temporary suspension of prime public land sales in Taipei, or by adjusting the 500 ping threshold to 300 ping or 400 ping?

We would like to point out that the biggest problem with public land sales lies with the Cabinet, not the NPA, which is merely implementing the government’s land policy. The authority in charge of public land has changed — from the National Property Management Committee under the former Democratic Progressive Party administration to the national land disposal and revitalization supervisory team headed by Vice Premier Eric Chu (朱立倫) — but the misguided idea of treating public land as a commodity remains unchanged. Both the previous and current administrations also lacked a national land policy that is based on public interest and sustainable use.

Whether these land sales stimulate or constrain the housing market, the focus has always been on the transaction, rather than the use, of public land. However, we have to remember that public land plays a different role from that of private land. It has many diversified uses, including providing affordable housing, meeting public infrastructure needs, and protecting and conserving the environment.

The government should not treat precious public land as a fiscal tool. Nor should it sell such land as if it were haggling at a traditional market simply to satisfy the needs of big businesses. Has the government even considered reviewing the nation’s long-suffering land policy?

Aside from selling off these properties, the NPA — an agency under the Ministry of Finance — is merely responsible for land registration. It has no power to manage these assets. A better solution would be a government restructuring that would either place this agency under the Ministry of the Interior or create a new ministry of public land to give the government more opportunity and room to consider how to put these assets to better use. Auctioning these plots of land only leads to real estate speculation, with the public suffering as a result of soaring property prices.

We should also invite the public to participate in the review of national land policy and use, so residents who live nearby can better understand future development projects and make informed decisions. Finding a solution to handling public land will take a lot of time. Let’s start by asking legislators to cancel the NPA’s budget for national land disposal.

Huang Hui-hsin is the convener of the Public Assets Saving Front.