facebook entry of KMT legislator 蔡正元 (Tsai Zheng-Yuan)
https://www.facebook.com/tsaichengyuan/posts/623060581068205
[quote][聲援大埔民眾]是高挫折的人
他們需要假藉大埔案
做情緒上的發洩[/quote]
Translate: Those who supports Dapu farmers are people who are deeply frustrated in life, and they are only using the Dapu incident to release their emotional baggage.
His facebook page went on to say real people of Dapu don’t understand why most of those on the streets aren’t people from Dapu. He went on to quote an UDN report, which states real Dapu people are fine with what’s going on, they just want to see development hastened so they can move in. The reports quotes one Dapu citizens as saying only 4 household refused to be moved, he feels perfectly fine. He thinks that development will bring better business, so even though it’s a bit sad to see his family’s traditional 3 winged complex torn down, he can’t wait to see progress.
So Tsai concludes that people who come out to support the Dapu farmers can’t be bothered with the facts, because they just want to be riled up.
Aside from Legislator Tsai, the chairman of New Party (新黨) Yu Mu-ming says “Taiwan is a mess because a few people does what ever they want, believing they are representing justice by blindly going against the establishment. These people know that the Ma government is soft, and afraid to put public power in action, that’s why they are doing this.”
Sounds reasonable and is 100% my opinion what 泰正元 says.
Flame for this, but then again what else can you do on this island - definitely not vote 
[quote=“hsinhai78”]Sounds reasonable and is 100% my opinion what 泰正元 says.
Flame for this, but then again what else can you do on is island 
[/quote]
why flame you when it’s obviously something you will agree with? 
[quote=“hsinhai78”]Sounds reasonable and is 100% my opinion what 泰正元 says.
Flame for this, but then again what else can you do on this island - definitely not vote [/quote]
Really? It’s reasonable for a legislator to be an amateur sociologist and psychologist?
Simple fact is, these areas have value in the fertility of the land and in their old world charms. As just another modern ugly town on the west coast they have more than enough competition. This will not increase business.
The most prosperous rural townships are those that continue growing and innovating like Gukeng (Taiwan’s most prosperous) and Luye, and have turned to tourism like Nanzhuang. Why would anyone want to set up operations for a modern business in Dapu unless…oh yeah, because they will be able to pollute the hell out of the rivers and soil.
These people have been very ill-served by their elected officials.
I’m wondering how much of all this land grabbing also has to do with water. Agriculture is the biggest user of water in Taiwan and there have been cases recently where farmers were paid not to grow rice so factories would have water. How much easier as a long term policy just to take the land (since it is very difficult to build new reservoirs), pay peanuts, and be done with it? Problem solved and great profits made. More plausible than this is being done for the people to spur development.
I think it’s mostly property development to be honest, although water has been a contentious issue for all the science park developments.
If you look at the Dapu rezoning, the large majority of it is was for residential housing, and the original manufacturer that wanted a factory site there has already pulled out of the deal. Yeah the Taipei Times is good for something sometimes.
taipeitimes.com/News/editori … 2003569018
[quote]The origins of the Dapu incident can be traced back to 2008, when an optoelectronics company applied to the Miaoli County Government for land on which to build a factory.
The county government, keen to attract investment from the company in question, drew up a plan for the expansion of the Jhunan Science Park, which is a branch of the Hsinchu Science Park, along with designated areas on the periphery of the Jhunan base. Although the company has said that it no longer needs land to build a factory, the county government is still determined to forge ahead with the plan.
To obtain a “dedicated park business area” of 27.98 hectares, the expansion plan demands 154 hectares of new urban planning land. Apart from the core “dedicated park business area,” the plan allocates 67.55 hectares for residential zones, 2.88 hectares for a business zone and 1.85 hectares for a scientific and technological commerce zone, and it specifies that this land is to be developed through zone expropriation.[/quote]
[quote=“headhonchoII”]I think it’s mostly property development to be honest, although water has been a contentious issue for all the science park developments.
If you look at the Dapu rezoning, the large majority of it is was for residential housing, and the original manufacturer that wanted a factory site there has already pulled out of the deal.[/quote]
Yeah, I’m just noodling. I’ve read that most science parks end up being simply residential blocks. What a ridiculous waste of prime farmland.
It’s crazy, in a country like Taiwan with literally thousands of run down urban areas and dilapidated factories and underused roads, and then they go and build on even MORE farmland, and like you said it’s usually the most fertile and productive land they take!
Nuts.
Taiwan has no approved long-term spatial development plan, none. I recall the then new Premier (the ex Professor guy) a couple of years ago discovered this when asking his staff where the plans where.
We ain’t got any!
Edit- It seems they cobbled something together last year, talk about dealing with something after the horse has bolted.
loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_ … 03401_text
That I can 100% agree with.
The problem though is that there are far more property lots in one hectare of residential/economic zoned land than in agricultural land. That makes it much easier to expropriate farmland since there are less residents who need to support the plan and need to be compensated. But with only a few farmers losing their land of whom only a small percentage (together with students) protest, you will not lose elections. Expropriating half of 中和 or 土城 would result in losing an election.
This would be my only critcism of the law’s practical application: a 100% fair and reasonable election is sabotaged by the type of democracy that Taiwan has today. There is a public contempt for technocratic, rational decisions - instead it is all about emotions.
One reason is the fewer landholders and less educated and influential, but the main reason is that rezoning of farmland to urban/industrial use gives the most mark-up in market value by far.
When you rezone farmland you can build on ALL the farmland whereas before you could only build on 10% of it and the property must still be registered as a farm dwelling.
That I can 100% agree with.
The problem though is that there are far more property lots in one hectare of residential/economic zoned land than in agricultural land. That makes it much easier to expropriate farmland since there are less residents who need to support the plan and need to be compensated. But with only a few farmers losing their land of whom only a small percentage (together with students) protest, you will not lose elections. Expropriating half of 中和 or 土城 would result in losing an election.
This would be my only critcism of the law’s practical application: a 100% fair and reasonable election is sabotaged by the type of democracy that Taiwan has today. There is a public contempt for technocratic, rational decisions - instead it is all about emotions.[/quote]
Protecting the rights of the minority is not a bug of the democratic process; it’s a feature. I’m sure no one is surprised you don’t get that and that you fully support an unaccountable system where the courts and police are used to strip people of their rights.
Unaccountable? Where? Cases please with detailed descriptions of any violations of lawful procedure and the sentences rendered by the administrative courts. I’m sure you can’t come up with anything in the Dapu case.
Your contempt for the rule of law and the democratic state that the ROC is over the [/b]alleged[/b] rights violation of a few is appalling. There are administrative courts in Taiwan, but rather than winning anything there I see these 4 Dapu families and their misguided collaborators terrorize the citizens of Taipei by blocking public space.
Interior minister said to news media that nation do have issues for science park development. The Ministry of Interior will set up quantity tool and benchmark to measure Urban Carrying Capacity in area. Minister also talked to media that he did ask “how many science park does Taiwan need?” when he was member of committee that conducted assessing Dapu Expropriation. I think it is just show that Central government admit there is problem in Expropriation. It starts at beginning of forming plan of Expropriation, the purpose. Does the expropriation have rightfulness? Is it appropriate in term of public interest and ethic?
Scholars from National Taiwan University said that if you add up new urban development and existing urban area all together, it can contain twice of Taiwan population. How many new urban development we actually need? Or it just become another investor heaven?
Dapu Incident will be turning point for Taiwan expropriation.
Unaccountable? Where? Cases please with detailed descriptions of any violations of lawful procedure and the sentences rendered by the administrative courts. I’m sure you can’t come up with anything in the Dapu case.
Your contempt for the rule of law and the democratic state that the ROC is over the [/b]alleged[/b] rights violation of a few is appalling. There are administrative courts in Taiwan, but rather than winning anything there I see these 4 Dapu families and their misguided collaborators terrorize the citizens of Taipei by blocking public space.[/quote]
[color=#008000]~~~Mod’s note: the following post was edited to remove a personal attack.[/color]
Terrorize. 
This is a standard blue trope. Oh the scary Greens. Only it is your people who murdered and tortured and used, and still use, organized crime gangs to stifle opponents according to all real accounts of history.
How can one even begin to argue with you when you can’t master the facts? It was four families who held out to the end, not four families who opposed this.
There is no alleged violation of rights. It is clear. Confiscating property for the sake of a science park, which as HHII says, is nothing more than apartments now, is not compelling enough under any fair system. If you had a shred of decency you would acknowledge that. People shouldn’t be compelled to give up their property for someone else’s desire to live in a fancy new bathroom-tiled apartment block.
You can’t keep citing that procedures were followed when the legality and fairness of these procedures are the very facts in dispute. At some point you need to grow up and realize that laws are not necessarily the normative expressions of fairness and justice.
It is painfully obvious that expropriation in Dapu was about land speculation and not national development. Even if procedures were followed that does not make it just. To invoke Godwin’s Law, as by Godwin you deserve it, were the Nazi’s justified in following procedures during the Final Solution? Law is law right?
You must draw the line somewhere between justice and mere legality. So where is it?
I finally realized what hsinhai’s postings remind me of. The US after 911 when people twisted any word said to question other’s patriotism. How dare you, and how could you, and why don’t you love and accept things exactly as they are, and all that.
The law is an ass, and the politicians are pigs with their snouts in the trough.
The law and this government should be torn down.
hsinhai has always held a very authoritarian view of Taiwan and its laws, which means he will up held the letter of the law when it suits his narrative, and discard it when it doesn’t.
For example, he was arguing the meaning of the word 人 in the ROC constitution because it implies ROC nationals in some articles, so he likes to interpret it to mean ROC nationals in every instance that word is used in the constitution. No amount of new regulations or interpretation by the supreme court will change his mind on that, because he wants foreigners participating of political events to be illegal.
How about the 10th article of the ROC constitution which says “The people shall have freedom of residence and of change of residence.”
The supreme court states in Explanation 443 that Article 10 means "The people have the right and freedom to choose the place of residence, and live out their private live without being interfered. Furthermore, one have the right to freely migrate or live in the place of one’s choosing.
Even supreme court Case 953 of 2012 points out there are many illegal conducts in the Dapu incident.
The procedure of review process to evaluate whether it was justified to force people out of their homes was just a sham.
So why would one who believes in the letter of the constitution support tearing down houses of those who choose not to move?
If public welfare in Article 23 is all the excuse required to nullify people’s rights, that’s just a perfect authoritarian back door for the machine of the state to conveniently infringe the rights of the people. By the way, the Dapu incident in no way benefits public welfare. It satisfies the welfare of the few. Like many have stated, there are many industrial parks that are half empty right now.
Thanks, hansioux. I had read that the Supreme Court had found flaws, but couldn’t find anything concrete.
In Taiwan, the law is the law until you find a different judge.
But it’s obvious just looking at the fact that nearly 100% of expropriation cases are approved that the laws are just rubber stamps. It’s just not probable that the average would be so high. One might counter that people only apply for solid cases but that also is improbable given the high number every year.