Lawmakers agree to ban ‘risky beef’
　

BEEFING UP THE LAW: After several hours of delay, lawmakers agreed to vote on a KMT proposal on Tuesday, along with two DPP supplementary measures
　

By Flora Wang, Jenny W. Hsu and Shih Hsiu-chuan
STAFF REPORTERS
Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 1

“Referendums are not forbidden ... But we should avoid them unless it is absolutely necessary.”— Wu Den-yih, premier
　

Legislators across party lines reached a consensus yesterday to pass a proposed amendment to the Act Governing Food Sanitation (食品衛生管理法) that would ban imports of “risky” beef products from areas where cases of mad cow disease have been documented over the past decade.

The bill stipulates that “risky” products, including brains, eyes, spinal cords, intestines and ground beef, should be prohibited from entering Taiwan until effective treatment for the disease has been found.

The bill was proposed by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Daniel Hwang (黃義交) and backed by the KMT caucus. It will be put to the third reading next Tuesday, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) said yesterday afternoon.

Lawmakers reached an agreement after Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators occupied the speaker’s podium, stacking it with placards and stalling the KMT’s plan to call for a vote on Hwang’s proposal.

The DPP proposal is similar to the KMT’s, but also seeks to ban bone-in beef and beef from cows older than 30 months of age from places hit by the disease over the past decade.

Legislators also agreed to vote on two DPP-sponsored resolutions on Tuesday: One would require that imports of bone-in beef be banned until a referendum is held on the matter; the second seeks to ban imports of products from cows older than 30 months of age.

President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration agreed to lift a ban on imports of US bone-in beef, offal and ground beef based on a protocol that it signed with the US in October, triggering widespread criticism because of fears of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease.

KMT and DPP lawmakers proposed their draft amendments to the Act amid growing pressure from the public.

The DPP has demanded the Executive Yuan reopen negotiations with the US on the protocol covering US beef imports. National Security Council Secretary-General Su Chi (蘇起), however, ruled out a new round of talks during a press conference last Thursday, saying such a move would jeopardize Taiwan-US relations.

KMT caucus secretary-general Lu Hsueh-chang (呂學樟) told a press conference after yesterday’s session that the caucus had never compromised on its insistence on tightening beef imports even if its members had come under pressure from all sectors, “including the US.”

Lu said lawmakers also agreed on the KMT’s resolution that the KMT, the DPP and the government stand together in the face of pressure from other countries after the bill clears the legislative floor.

The DPP caucus called yesterday’s outcome a “giant victory for the people” and insisted that a referendum on bone-in US beef be held before the meat is allowed to enter the country.

Noting that the DPP caucus made two last-minute proposals — that the ban on meat from cattle above 30 months be maintained and that a referendum on US bone-in beef imports be held — DPP Legislator Yeh Yi-jin (葉宜津) said: “This is a choice between your taste buds and your health.”

The DPP caucus said the outcome was a product of a two-month dispute between the DPP and the KMT.

The DPP caucus blamed the Ma administration and the KMT for “wasting” two months and called on Ma to apologize and for Su to resign because he was the “brains” behind the deal.

American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesman Thomas Hodges said AIT was “disappointed” with the outcome, but declined to elaborate.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) deputy spokesman James Chang (章計平) said safeguarding the public’s health was the government’s foremost concern, but it was also crucial for Taiwan to respect the protocol it signed with the US.

Chang did not comment on whether the matter had affected bilateral relations and said the ministry would not say anything more until the vote.

Earlier yesterday, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said the government would like to renegotiate the matter with the US, even though a mandatory renegotiation was scheduled at six months after the signing of the protocol in late October.

The government will respect the legislature’s revision of the Act “no matter how it is amended” and will try to obtain the US’ understanding, Wu said in an interview on China Television Co.

On a proposal by consumer groups to hold a referendum on whether the government should start renegotiations with the US, Wu said this should be regarded as “a last resort,” to be used when other measures are exhausted.

“Referendums are not forbidden and no one has the right to obstruct a referendum. But we should avoid them unless it is absolutely necessary,” Wu said.

If lawmakers reach a consensus on the Act to incorporate articles to ensure the safety of US beef imports and relieve public concerns about the products, it would not be necessary to put the issue to a referendum, he said.

Ma’s China policy ‘disappointing’: DPP spokeswoman

AP AND CNA, WITH STAFF WRITER, TAIPEI
Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 3

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said yesterday that the government had failed to attract adequate levels of Chinese investment to bolster the nation’s economy.

“The amount of Chinese investment in Taiwan has been very little,” DPP Spokeswoman Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) said yesterday. “It is disappointing to see that there is such a huge gap between the government’s promise to bolster Taiwan’s economy with Chinese injection and the outcome.”

President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been forging closer economic ties with China and working to redress the imbalance in the trade flow between the two sides.

CONTRAST

However, Minister of Economic Affairs Shih Yen-shiang (施顏祥) said at a separate setting yesterday that Chinese enterprises, including airliners and software companies, have only invested NT$1.2 billion (US$37.16 million) in Taiwan since the nation opened up for investment from China in July.

The amount contrasts with the more than US$100 billion that Taiwanese companies have invested in China since the late 1980s.

Bilateral trade — mostly Taiwanese exports — now exceeds US$110 billion annually.

China’s relatively small investment can be explained by the fact that Chinese companies are still unfamiliar with Taiwan after six months, Shih said.

He added that the ministry would make arrangements to help Chinese investors better adapt to Taiwan.

PRECONDITIONS

In other developments, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said yesterday that the government would maintain the three preconditions it has set for the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China.

These preconditions are that the trade agreement must be consistent with the country’s needs, that it must receive approval from the public and must be subject to the supervision of the Legislative Yuan, Wu said in an interview with China Television Co.

For many businesses in Taiwan, he said, it is urgent that an ECFA be signed by May or June.

NO BLIND EYE

At the same time, however, the government cannot turn a blind eye to the “20 percent to 30 percent” of Taiwanese who have doubts about the agreement, Wu said.

He said that the government opposes the idea of holding a referendum on an ECFA because if it were rejected at the polls, no other referendum on the matter could be held for another three years.
　

Pro-independence radio station chief claims bias
　

SHUT DOWN: The head of Ocean Wire said the government had singled out the station because it helped organize a protest, but the NCC dismissed the accusation
　

By Su Jin-feng, Chang Ching-ya and Shelley Shan
STAFF REPORTERS
Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 3

Operators of pro-independence underground radio station Ocean Wire (海洋之聲) said that political motives were behind Monday’s raid by the National Communications Commission (NCC) of their offices.

The NCC earlier maintained that the shutdown was part of Premier Wu Den-yih’s (吳敦義) call last Friday for a crackdown on underground radio stations that were hawking illegal medicine to listeners.

However, the Taichung-based station said it believed its closure was a direct response by the government to the protests it organized during the talks between Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and his Chinese counterpart, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), last week in Taichung.

The protests included a sit-in in front of Chiang’s Nantou house in which protesters accused him of “selling out Taiwan” and “betraying his homeland,” as well as a protest in front of Taichung County’s Jenn Lann Temple (鎮瀾宮), where Chen paid a visit.

Ocean Wire chief executive Chang Chih-mei (張志梅) said he believed the station was shut down because of pressure on President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) from the Chinese government.

Recordings made from area surveillance cameras showed groups of police officers arriving at the station headquarters in Sinshe Township (新社), Taichung County on Monday at around 9:30am. Ten minutes later the station was off the air.

Pan-green politicians said yesterday that the raid was another example of the government being biased against pro-independence underground radio stations.

Taichung City Councilor Frank Liu (劉國隆) of the Taiwan Solidarity Union said the frequency of the raids on Ocean Wire was disproportionate to other underground stations in the area and questioned whether the NCC was exhibiting bias against the station.

Taichung City Councilor Cheng Kung-chin (鄭功進), a member of the Democratic Progressive Party agreed, saying the closure showed both government and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials were eager to punish the protesters.

Cheng Chuan-ping (鄭泉泙), director of the NCC’s Northern Regional Regulatory Department, said yesterday that Ocean Wire was only one of five illegal stations shut down on Monday.

“We applied for search warrants from the court based on Article 58 of the Telecommunications Act (電信法), which sets specific penalties for radio stations that disturb the legal use of radio waves or arbitrarily use or alter radio frequencies,” he said.

Cheng said the NCC had applied for five search warrants, including two for stations in northern Taiwan, one in the central region and two for stations in southern Taiwan. Before applying for search warrants, the NCC gathers evidence and seeks assistance from other government agencies, he said.

Cheng said the NCC cracked down on illegal radio stations every day, adding that the Control Yuan censured the commission this year for failing to deal with illegal radio stations. Cheng said that the commission has reduced the number of illegal stations from about 200 to 100.

“We don’t single out any station, nor do we leave specific stations unchecked,” Cheng said. “I think that all the 100 stations have been penalized once or twice. If there is any station that we haven’t checked, please let us know.”

Creating jobs – but for whom?

Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 8

In an economic downturn, there is an expression economists use to illustrate the difference between a depression and recession: A recession is when your neighbor loses his job, while a depression is when you lose your job.

This might be appropriate in gauging how well the local economy has rebounded after bottoming out, especially when economic indicators are sending mixed signals and a “jobless recovery” is looming.

Because of a low base last year, the Council for Economic Planning and Development (CEPD) rated the nation’s economic climate as “yellow-red” this month for the first time in 25 months, which suggests the domestic economy might soon overheat. The indicator jumped 11 points from last month to 37 — the highest in five-and-a-half years.

At the same time, the nation’s consumer confidence index edged up to a 20-month high as public sentiment toward equity investment showed strong signs of improvement.

This all seems to point to good news to come.

However, as of the end of last month, 645,000 workers were still out of a job, or an unemployment rate of 5.86 percent. This did not include part-time workers, whose job security is questionable.

Less encouraging is that in the near future, a mismatch in the nation’s supply and demand for workers could emerge, as CEPD chairman Tsai Hsun-hsiung (蔡勳雄) has warned.

The mismatch suggests two extremes: One is that the nation’s top-tier managerial talent may be insufficient or unfit to meet the demand for such employees, and the other is that there will be an excess of low-end jobs with a thinner paycheck for which local job seekers may be overqualified and which they will be reluctant to take up, according to Tsai.

His conclusion was that while the nation could still experience an economic recovery, it would be accompanied by a surging jobless rate: the so-called jobless recovery.

If unemployment keeps rising, how would it be possible to spur domestic consumption — which makes up a smaller chunk of the local economy than exports — to back up a solid recovery?

The employment mismatch sends an even louder warning to local workers, because the gap will most likely be filled by expatriate workers, especially from Hong Kong, China and Vietnam.

A growing jobless rate may be inevitable and understandable as the local economy migrates from a manufacturing-oriented system to a more service-based economy, but what has the government done to address the mismatch and worsening unemployment problem?

The government seems to have tied its hopes to closer ties with China, claiming that the inking of an economic accord with China would generate more jobs in Taiwan. However, the government has refrained from detailing what kind of job opportunities would be created.

Perhaps the best way of testing claims that the economy is heating up is to check if your job is secure and promises reasonable pay growth.

The honeymoon with China is over
　

By Emerson Chang 張子揚
Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 8

Following the failure of talks on a cross-strait tax agreement, the timing of the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China has also become uncertain.

These two developments are very different from the tone that China has used to deal with the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) over the past 18 months. Does this mean China is changing its policy that Taiwan must agree to all its requests? My view is that the Ma administration’s repeated emphasis of its policy of placing economic issues ahead of political issues has blocked China’s agenda on cross-strait political issues.

China’s response has been to deal with each issue on its own merits instead of demanding that Taiwan grant its every request. The aim is to make the Ma government understand that economic negotiations are far less advantageous than comprehensive negotiations based on politico-economic considerations.

Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Vice Chairman Zheng Lizhong (鄭立中) has said technical problems led to the failure of the cross-strait tax agreement and the possible delay in signing an ECFA, and that this had nothing to do with the sovereignty issue. He said tax agreements are “practically and technically very difficult,” and that “they did not include political aspects.” Zheng also said that the ECFA proposal did not touch upon politically sensitive issues, but was purely an economic issue.

These statements seem to imply that Zheng respects and goes along with the Ma government’s policy of placing economic interests ahead of political issues, but in the end the Ma government will taste the bitter consequences of Ma’s broken election promises as he comes under pressure from China-based Taiwanese businesspeople, the pan-green camp and the media. This result is a reflection of how China has started to deal pragmatically with the Ma government by repositioning itself through apparent strategic retreat and using Ma’s position to its own advantage.

What has the Ma administration done to annoy China? The development of cross-strait relations over the past two months don’t seem to provide any clues, because in October, at the Shaanxi Cross-Strait Trade and Science Cooperation General Assembly, Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi (王毅) said experts on both sides had completed most of their joint studies into an ECFA, and that a date would be set to release the findings based on thorough cross-strait consultations.

Besides, before ARATS Chairman Chen Yunlin’s (陳雲林) departure to Taiwan, Wang said at the Beijing airport: “I hope the fourth round of talks will become an opportunity for formal ECFA talks.”

Unexpectedly, just after Chen arrived in Taiwan, Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) included the government’s “mutual non-denial” slogan in his welcoming message. In addition, the Mainland Affairs Council’s missile withdrawal advertisement impaired China’s efforts to win over Taiwanese hearts and minds. This makes it seem as if there are differing opinions within the Ma government about its avowed policy of placing economic issues ahead of political issues, and repeatedly dealing China heavy blows using political issues suggests a double standard.

Following the recent local elections, the government has been paying more attention to public opinion and the pan-green camp, which has resulted in joint blue-green calls for an ECFA being pursued simultaneously with other free-trade agreements. This places China in a dilemma and creates the risk of escalating cross-strait problems.

This process highlights how China’s Taiwan strategy has temporarily retreated from one of actively pushing for economic integration to bring about political integration into a strategy of attempting to regain the power to set the agenda and time frame. Catering to public opinion in Taiwan, where people are worried about loss of autonomy and control, Zheng has said that “talks about signing an ECFA are not based on the unilateral wishful thinking of either side.” This is a softer statement to clarify that China no longer demands that Taiwan grant every Chinese wish.

Zheng’s words echo Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) statement when he met Chiang in June last year that consultation on an equal footing meant that both parties should treat each other as equals, and without imposing their will on the other party.

This implies that the 18-month cross-strait honeymoon has ended. At future talks, if either side hopes for preferential treatment, it will have to rely on economic strength or political wisdom.

Emerson Chang is director of the Department of International Studies at Nan Hua University.

Don’t place hope in PRC investment

Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 8

The two “China” parties — the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — say they only want what is best for Taiwan when it comes to trade and economic exchanges across the Taiwan Strait. Chinese officials have even said that Taiwanese businesspeople go to China to make money off the backs of the Chinese.

However, Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and SEF Secretary-General Kao Koong-lian (高孔廉) have exposed the claims for the lies that they are. Chiang has said that “over the past 20 years, Taiwanese investment in China has exceeded NT$4.8 trillion [US$148.7 billion], and so it cannot be denied that China’s economic growth owes a lot to Taiwanese businesspeople.” Kao has said that “Taiwan was opened up to Chinese investment in June, but to date, investments only stand at NT$1.19 billion, not a very large sum.”

Putting it more bluntly, investment by Taiwanese businesspeople in China is a bit like trying to scare off dogs by throwing food at them. As Chinese officials would have it, Taiwanese businesspeople enjoy preferential investment conditions in China, as if to say that Taiwan is enjoying unilateral benefits while China is making sacrifices for the sake of Taiwan.

What is the reality? China-bound Taiwanese investors are sacrificing Taiwan and helping China achieve its goals.

Over the past 20 years, Taiwan’s economic development has dropped to negative growth, unemployment has reached new heights with no signs of falling and salaries have fallen to the levels of 13 years ago, while China’s economy continues to grow at double-digit rates. It is also rapidly increasing the number of missiles it has aimed at Taiwan and claims that it will “buy Taiwan.” The question is whether this situation is beneficial to Taiwan, or to China.

As far as the government is concerned, Chinese investment in Taiwan is limited, and the way to deal with this is to deregulate even more areas. This is suicidal. We must not place any hope in Chinese investment: The more there is, the greater the danger to Taiwan. On the one hand, Chinese investment is fueling housing prices and the stock market, increasing the suffering of Taiwanese while doing nothing to create local employment. On the other hand, these investments are used to buy up Taiwanese businesses and gradually gain control over the economy. Chinese are even buying up media outlets through returning Taiwanese businesspeople to promote unification and oppose independence. Their involvement in local elections is even more frightening.

Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) responded to Chiang and Kao by saying that many Chinese businesspeople have told him they are worried about frequent protests in Taiwan, which they find frightening.

However, Beijing has total control over whether there will be any Chinese investment in Taiwan, and whether Chinese money will flow in or out of Taiwan. The best example of this is when the Chinese government banned Chinese tourists from visiting Kaohsiung after the Australian documentary about exiled Uighur leader Rebiya Kadeer was screened at the Kaohsiung Film Festival earlier this year.

In the same way, Chinese investments are used to whet the appetite of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and entice him to make even more concessions so that China can gain leverage over Taiwan’s sovereignty in the same way that it has gained leverage in the Taiwanese economy.

It is worth noting that China feels the NT$4.8 trillion it has attracted from Taiwanese businesses is not enough. Chen said that if traditional small and medium-sized companies in southern Taiwan cooperated with privately run companies in Jiangsu or Zhejiang provinces, they could work together to make their money off foreigners.

This may be true, but while Chinese companies would be guaranteed to turn a profit, the companies from southern Taiwan would be more likely to be guaranteed endless suffering and problems. If they were to cooperate with Chinese companies, workers in southern Taiwan would become dependent on Chinese officials for their paychecks, and that could change the political landscape in southern Taiwan.

Chen has been called the main culprit behind the persecution of Taiwanese businesspeople in China by those who have suffered such problems. Now he has been in Taiwan to ply his trade. Doesn’t that make the government his accomplices?

Those who harbor illusions about Chinese investments in Taiwan should remember the painful lesson learned by many Taiwanese businesses that invested in China and sacrificed Taiwan over the past 20 years only to help China achieve its goals while themselves struggling to survive. Taiwanese are increasingly questioning the proposed cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA), and in an opinion poll conducted by the Chinese-language Wealth Magazine, 29 percent of respondents supported signing an ECFA, while 54 percent worried that they or members of their family would lose their jobs after such an agreement is signed.

This is clear evidence that the public isn’t fooled so easily. Taiwan and China have moved closer over the past 20 years, and investments and trade have increased. The resulting factor price equalization has led to Taiwanese salaries and incomes being pulled down by China. Ma is well aware of this, but he still persists in pushing for closer economic and trade relations with China, and mobilized a massive police force to protect Chen during his visit, which was aimed at attracting more Taiwanese businesspeople as a part of China’s unification strategy. The only explanation is that he wants to thoroughly equalize Taiwan and China to pave the way for eventual unification, which would stifle and kill Taiwan.

Hu Jintao: a perfect peace prize candidate
　

By James Wang 王景弘
Wednesday, Dec 30, 2009, Page 8

There are a number of people with deep blue convictions who fully support President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) policy of capitulation to China. Some of them even say he should be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Back in the real world, the similarities between Ma and the ill-fated last Ming emperor are all too obvious.

The Nobel Peace Prize might have become cheapened of late, but not to the extent that it should be awarded to a politician who would sacrifice freedom, democracy and human rights to a communist dictatorship.

Former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher did the same thing when she ceded the territory of Hong Kong to China, which is an undemocratic country with no respect for human rights — and I don’t recall her being nominated for the prize.

Taiwan is a democracy, but only as a result of the sacrifice and struggle of a colonized people: It was not easily come by.

All Taiwan wants is to maintain its autonomy, and it has no wish to threaten any other nation. Any politician that sacrifices Taiwan’s democracy and allows it to become a colony of totalitarian China would be worse than the last Ming emperor. What sense would the peace prize nomination make then?

China lovers could even consider Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) for nomination. He fits the bill perfectly and the prize would surely be his for the taking.

The Chinese seem to be good at casting things in a rosy light. It has certainly happened before.

Former Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) circumvented using the words “communist dictatorship” with Orwellian aplomb, coining the phrase “socialism with Chinese characteristics.”

His move toward a capitalist model, leading the Chinese economy to a turn in fortunes, was dubbed China’s “rise.”

Hu is quite happy to bounce along the capitalist road and watch his country’s “rise,” but we all know that “Chinese characteristics” under a one-party dictatorship is, by any name, the sacrifice of democracy and the suppression of human rights.

Every moment of every day Beijing is in a state of paranoia about independence for Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet, afraid that people will call for freedom, democracy and human rights. If China is rising and becoming such a “great nation,” why would so many people be demanding independence?

This is one of those “rare historic opportunities” that Hu has talked of.

He should change his approach and adopt the magnanimity befitting a great nation. It would reinvent China’s image in an instant.

He could embrace a democratic system, guarantee human rights, respect the choice of the Taiwanese people and welcome the return of the Dalai Lama to Tibet and Rebiya Kadeer, the exiled Uighur leader, to Xinjiang, allowing self-rule for those regions.

A great nation on the rise should be able to demonstrate this kind of confidence.

If US President Barack Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, what is to stop Hu being nominated?

It wouldn’t hurt China to drop the idea of unification and allow Taiwan de jure independence, respecting the choice of Taiwanese.

Both sides would gain a peaceful co-­existence, Hu would win the Nobel Peace Prize and Ma could avoid going down in history as a “last emperor.”

Now that’s what I call a win-win situation.

James Wang is a media commentator.