Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts

Saturday, March 23, 2013

Local KMT officials Oppose the 4th Nuclear Plant

Mayor Hau of Taipei came out this week against the Fourth Nuclear Plant... (Taipei Times)
Hau became the first local government head from the pan-blue camp to declare his stance on the nuclear issue by saying on Thursday that he would vote “yes” in a national referendum asking voters if construction and operation of the plant should be suspended.

His announcement prompted President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to call him on Thursday night to discuss his stance on the power plant. Ma met him yesterday in the Presidential Office to continue their discussion on the issue.

Presidential Office spokesperson Lee Chia-fei (李佳霏) said Ma and Hau exchanged opinions on the construction of the power plant, alternative sources of energy and the potential impact on the economy if the plant is suspended.

“The president said whether or not the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should be suspended is a crucial issue, and the public must be given sufficient information to help them make the final decision,” she said.

Hau yesterday said he opposed the construction of the power plant because of the state-owned Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) poor quality control over the plant and its failure to solve the problem of storing nuclear waste.
The Taipei Times article also added, strangely, a comment from Premier Jiang Yi-hua....
At a question-and-answer session at the legislature yesterday, Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said that he, the president, New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Hau were in frequent contact with each other to exchange views about the power plant.

“We all share the same position,” Jiang said when answering questions from KMT Legislator Hsu Shao-ping (徐少萍).
"We all share the same position? Jiang has said that he would die before letting plant construction halt. Hau wants it halted. Meanwhile New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu has registered lukewarm opposition to it, raising the waste issue.

What do Jiang, Hau, and Chu have in common? They are all mentioned in speculation regarding who will be the 2016 KMT presidential candidate. Jiang is an unlikely dark horse, while Hau probably could not get many votes south of Taipei. But it looks like we are watching everyone attempting to position themselves -- and the move of Hau and Chu to look like they are opposing the plant is solid evidence for where the sentiments of the public lie.

The New Taipei City Council, where the plant will be located, has also approved a measure calling for a halt to construction (KMT news organ).
__________________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Nuclear Plant Referendum and Power Stuff

Taking pictures in front of the Hakka Museum in Dongshih.

The Executive Yuan came out in favor of absentee ballots for the referendum, provided the system is only done domestically.
“The Executive Yuan recommends the adoption of transfer voting in Taiwan. For example, people who live in Pingtung County could vote in Taipei by-elections,” Executive Yuan Secretary-General Chen Wei-zen (陳威仁) told the legislature’s Internal Administration Committee.
The interesting thing will be how they prevent people from voting more than once..... the absentee ballot issue was a sensitive issue since so many Taiwanese live in China, where it seems like that the government will take steps to influence the vote directly. Other rumors came out of the Executive Yuan too, carried on the KMT news organ....
The controversy over a plebiscite on the fate of Nuclear Power Plant No. 4 (NPP4) continues to heat up. Rumor has it that high-level officials within the Blue camp were inclined to directly announce a halt to the construction of the NPP4 instead of first holding a plebiscite on the issue so as to avoid having a plebiscite result that would affect future elections.

An informed KMT legislator recounted that Chen Wei-jen (陳威仁), Secretary-General of the Executive Yuan (Cabinet), stated bluntly during yesterday’s meeting with KMT legislative caucus cadres that the Cabinet hoped that the report on nuclear safety would be presented by the end of June or no later than August, adding that a plebiscite on NPP4 must be held by the end of this year with no delay.
There's been some discussion that the referendum on nukes would lead to a referendum on sovereignty-related issues, but the referendum law is written to prevent that, as my man Ben reminds me.

This rumor also appeared in another form in the China Post as well, where the Premier said based on the 2000 decision by the Judicial Yuan, it would not be constitutional for the EY to stop the plant because only the legislature can do that.....
According to local reports, Chiang's speech at a recent Yuan Sitting noting that any possible decisions on ceasing the construction of Nuke 4 would require further discussion by Executive Yuan members has triggered questions about whether the Executive Yuan looks set to make an announcement to stop constructing Nuke 4.

“The Executive Yuan can not directly announce a cessation of Nuke 4's construction as it will completely mix up the boundary between execution and legislation,” said Chiang.

Chiang emphasized that the Cabinet will not consider violating law to stop the construction of Nuke 4.

According to Chiang, when the then-ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) ceased construction of Nuke 4 in 2000, the Judicial Yuan Interpretation stated that it is unconstitutional and the construction was resumed after four moths.

At the time, the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 520 (大法官釋字第520號) stated that the Executive Yuan cannot stop construction of Nuke 4 without first getting approval from the Legislative Yuan.

To do otherwise would violate the separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers.
You see how this is set up. The government has assured the public that safety will be first (example). Imagine if the government actually finds that the plant is unsafe in the final phases of construction (yes, I know, pigs will swoop past my window before that happens). It still can't shut the plant down. The ruling of the Judicial Yuan makes the government's findings moot, because only the legislature can halt construction. And the legislature is controlled by the KMT.....

Activists from the outlying islands demanded to meet with the premier to discuss the nuclear waste disposal problem (Taipei Times). Taiwan still has no plan for long-term nuclear waste storage, despite planning to begin operating another nuclear plant soon. Apparently the government expects magic ponies to drag the stuff away, or perhaps consume it. The activists complained:
Tao Foundation (蘭嶼部落文化基金會) secretary-general Sinan Mavivo said that Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) should not make excuses such as being unable to pick a final disposal site for low-level radioactive waste to delay making good its promise to remove nuclear waste from Orchid Island.
Recall that the government told the islanders they were getting a fish cannery and then sprayed money around......

The Taipei Times ran a piece from Taipower's CFO today, with some numbers. I love numbers....
Then there is the issue of the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. Taipower was established in accordance with the Company Act (公司法), and it holds full responsibility for its profits and losses. That means that Taipower must raise money for the construction project by itself, by issuing corporate bonds, commercial paper and even loans. To this day, the government and taxpayers have not contributed financially.

By the end of last year, the book value of the power plant’s fixed assets had reached NT$263.9 billion. If a referendum to halt construction is passed and the project is terminated, commercial operation would of course become impossible. If that were to happen, Taipower would have no choice but to list it as a loss according to International Financial Reporting Standards.

Along with the accumulated book losses, the total loss would reach NT$460 billion, a figure that is much higher than the company’s paid-in capital of NT$330 billion. As a result, the company would have no choice but to file for bankruptcy in accordance with the Company Act.
Years ago the government had plans to privatize Taipower, but one of the casualties of the stupid decision to build the fourth nuclear plant rather than invest in renewables and conservation was that plan. But further down he observes that if the fourth nuclear plant is not built, the lives of the other three nuke plants will have to be extended past their original forty years. Apparently Taipower cannot imagine an alternate universe where we shutter our nukes and coal plants and put in lots of solar and wind power.

Speaking of power, people wonder why so many of us don't think Taipower can be trusted with the new nuclear plant..... the TSU accused Taipower officials of colluding with independent power producers in order to obtain illegal insider benefits, when the independent power producers (IPPs) refused to raise rates....(Taipei Times):
Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) was behind the refusal of nine independent power producers (IPPs) to renegotiate electricity prices with the state-run company, Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) lawmakers said yesterday.

Four of the nine IPPs — which were slapped with a NT$6.32 billion (US$212.5 million) fine on Wednesday for conspiring to refuse Taipower’s request to renegotiate electricity prices — are subsidiaries of Taiwan Cogeneration Corp (Taiwan Cogen), Taipower’s reinvestment company, TSU caucus whip Lin Shih-chia (林世嘉) told a press conference.

Among the 36 board members of the four IPPs, 21 were appointed by the government, including 13 from Taiwan Cogen and four each from the Taiwan Sugar Co (Taisugar) and CPC Corp, Taiwan (CPC), which means that Taipower knew that the companies would refuse, Lin said.
______________________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

More referendum observations

A longtime observer of local politics pointed out to me another bit of anti-democratic fallout from the Double 50 threshold: ballot secrecy. There won't be any. Consider...

1. It is likely that the KMT will instruct its people to stay home.

2. It is also likely that the referendum will not combined with next year's elections.

3. Thus, the only thing voted on will be the Fourth Nuke Plant referendum.

If KMT types are ordered to stay home, this means that the only people going will be, in the very least, people who are voting to stop construction and operation of the plant, and who are more than likely pan-Green voters. In other words, anyone who goes to the polls that day outs themselves as a probable DPP supporter. That will be a consideration in people's minds, and it will inhibit participation in some cases.

Latest TISR poll: 58% want Fourth Nuclear Plant suspended, 52% support keeping the other three plants in operation. The public is wary of Nuke 4 but separates that issue from the issue of nuclear power as a whole, says TISR.

The Atomic Energy agency and the KMT rejected a DPP proposal to amend the law to provide for a local referendum when a nuclear power plant has its fuel rods loaded, TT said. Although it is local lives and health affected by the plant, the government refuses to give them any say in whether they want such a plant in their neighborhood. The article also observed that the plan to remove the nuke waste from Orchid Island by 2016 is "hardly possible" and thus the project has been pushed back to 2021 at the moment. Argh.
________________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Saturday, March 09, 2013

Nuke Referendum Round Up =UPDATE=

The kids playing air hockey in Keelung.

UPDATE: Anti-nuke March today got tens of thousands. Enormous turnout. Very happy.

Tsunamis and the Fourth Nuke Plant
Adam Chimienti had a great piece in the Taipei Times today, pointing out that the defeat of the Shoreham Nuclear Reactor complex on Long Island back in the 1980s meant that the disaster of Hurricane Sandy did not result in flooding in reactors right off the nation's most important financial center. One of the points he made in the piece was that the Manila Trench, just off southern Taiwan, is a likely source of a massive quake in the near future. I picked up a journal paper that made the same argument, since there have been no recorded big quakes in over four centuries from that trench, meaning that a really massive one is probably building. It explores what would happen in the case of a massive quake in that Trench.


The paper observes:
It is significant that since the Spanish colonization of Luzon in the 1560s, no earthquake exceeding magnitude 7.8 has been observed (Repetti, 1946). Conservatively, it can be postulated that very large events on this megathrust have a recurrence interval exceeding 440 years. Taking a trench-normal convergence velocity of 87 mm/yr, strain of 38 m would have accumulated over this period. Though large, this slip magnitude remains within the range of plausible scenarios. It is comparable to the 1960 Mw 9.5 Chilean earthquake, in which coseismic slip reached 40 m (Barrientos and Ward, 1990), and larger than the 2004 Aceh-Andaman event, which produced 20 m of coseismic slip (Chlieh et al., 2007).
One of the propaganda claims you'll soon be hearing is that Taiwan can't produce a quake big enough to severely damage our reactors. This is nonsense (Wikipedia has a list of historical quakes in Taiwan) but we also face the problem of tsunamis. Their simulation of a massive quake/tsunami results in waves 8 meters high rolling over Luzon, with southern Taiwan getting smashed as well (extra points for identifying the location of the nuke plant there). But they also note that southern China's topographical orientation is such that 8 meter waves also smack it, despite the greater distance, meaning that....
Farther in the north, Taiwan receives the impact of reflections from mainland China, and the central western coast appears to suffer waves of up to 3 m in height. The southern Japanese islands of Ishigaki, Miyako and Okinawa ( 25 N, 125 E) also suffer from reflective waves and may experience waves of about 2 m. It appears that the reflective waves travel to, as far as, northern Papua ( 2 S, 137 E), which may be hit by waves of up to 2 m.
That's right. A quake on the southwest corner of the island, also results in waves 3 meters high striking northern and central Taiwan. That's separate from the quake-induced shaking. The paper does not simulate the onshore effects, but they can be imagined...
The second suspected tsunami inundated Kaohsiung, southwestern Taiwan, in 1781 (Wang et al., 2006). Besides appearing in a contemporary Chinese travelogue and a Japanese historiography, it was also recorded by Dutch colonists in the 18th-century Taiwan. Flooding lasted upwards of 8 h and many villages were swept away, resulting in more than 40,000 casualties (Wang et al., 2006). Despite the severity of this event, no inland or nearshore earthquake was identified as the cause. This would be consistent with the theory that the tsunami was generated by a far-field earthquake from off the Philippines.
Historical sources say the height of the 1781 wave exceeded 20 meters. This paper offers a comprehensive list of tsunami events and wave heights in the South China Sea region.

The belief that a large tsunami has never struck Taiwan's east coast is challenged by this presentation, which draws on aboriginal folklore and field studies to show that this belief is false. This Taipei Times piece from the other day observes that Taipower is supposed to study the tsunami and earthquake record in the area, but to date no one has been appointed to carry out the study.


Referendum
The wording of the referendum has been released....
If the KMT proposal is approved by the legislature, the public will be asked in a referendum: “Do you agree that the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should be halted and that it not become operational?” (你是否同意核四廠停止興建不得運轉) 
Despite the fact that the proposal originates from KMT legislators, the KMT government obviously wants to continue construction and thus can block the referendum merely by asking its supporters to stay home. That is why the referendum is worded negatively. Yes, that's right. They will put the issue on the ballot, and then ask their people to stay home. The cynicism of this would be breathtaking, if it were not the norm in politics here and abroad.

A longtime observer also pointed out that the phrase "not become operational" is deliberate. Recall that referendums can only be held on the topic at eight year intervals. By inserting that phrase at the end, the KMT then prevents a referendum on operating the plant when it becomes operational a few years from now. Indeed, the KMT whip said as much:
KMT caucus whip Lai said that the reason the KMT included “not become operational (不得運轉)” in the plebiscite question was that “otherwise, if the plebiscite failed to pass and the construction of Nuclear Power Plant No. 4 continued, then someone might propose another plebiscite on whether or not Nuclear Power Plant No. 4 should become operational. Therefore, why don’t we just solve the problem once for all in order to save the trouble.”
One of the things that scares so many of us viewing this debacle is that construction in Taiwan is so often sub-par, yet this is regarded as normal and the same practices of corner-cutting and fly-by-night firms are taking place at the Fourth Nuclear Plant. This article describes:
At a separate press conference, DPP lawmakers Yeh Yi-jin (葉宜津) and Ho Hsin-chun (何欣純) said a construction company with a questionable record was among the subcontractors at the plant in Gongliao (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市).

Kuo Teng Construction Co (國登營造), which was found to be responsible for construction flaws at the Wugu-Yangmei Overpass, secured a construction bid worth more than NT$300 million (US$1 billion) for the plant.

While the winning bidder for the project listed on the Public Construction Commission’s (PCC) Web site was Cheng An Technology Co (城安新科技公司), Yeh said, its company address was the same as Kuo Teng’s, according to data provided by the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
There was also a piece about plastic bottles being used as filler in the plants concrete walls, another common practice in Taiwan. Jenny Hsu in WSJ added:
Situated in the coastal Gongliao district, the plant, which is missing only fuel rods and is scheduled to begin commercial operations by 2015, has been blasted by critics as a “ticking time bomb.” Since 2008, the project has suffered a string of mishaps, including floods and small fires (in Chinese). Concerns over safety at the plant skyrocketed after Fukushima.
The first three nuke plants are all scheduled to be decommissioned by 2025 according to current plans. The fourth is due to come online in 2015 or 2016 but I suspect that the KMT will push it back a couple of years, since it might not be a good idea to remind the public of KMT duplicity during a major election year (2016).

Polls
Bunch of polls on the issue out recently (here and here).
  • TISR: 59.6% opposed to finishing the plant; 67% in New Taipei City where it is located.
  • Business Today: 54% want it scrapped, another 23% oppose it. Just 11% trust the government to operate it properly.
  • Pro-KMT China Times: 62.4% want it stopped, only 21.2% want it to continue.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Tuesday, March 05, 2013

Fourth Nuke Referendum Round Up

In Taiwan even the dogs dress like betel nut girls.

The DPP says it will work to get the referendum law changed for the upcoming referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Plant (also here). The DPP's strategy:
DPP Legislator Pan Men-an (潘孟安) said the DPP caucus would likely adopt a strategy that urges voters to treat the referendum as a vote of no confidence in President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to mobilize local communities.
We had a referendum on Ma; it was call the 2012 Presidential election. Let's do something revolutionary and treat this as a referendum on the nuclear power plant.

Speaking of referendums, the local authorities organized a referendum in 1994 on the plant, even before it was approved. 96% voted against. Naturally this was ignored.

Eric Chu, now the chief of Taipei city, advocated absentee voting, which would increase the turnout. Remember that half the population has to turn out for the vote to be binding. Absentee voting has major political implications for local elections, especially with so many individuals outside Taiwan living in China. That's why the premier immediately supported it. Interestingly, the lead in this particular little play was assigned to Chu, who needs to raise his profile if he wants to be the Presidential candidate in 2016.

Lin Yi-hsiung, along with many others, points out that the referendum is a joke, just a political game. It means that the KMT government will be opposing a referendum put forward by KMT legislators. LOL. President Ma is supporting construction of the plant. The KMT plans to submit the referendum proposal to the legislature this week. The propaganda blizzard is already starting:
Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said on Friday that he would resign if the government loses the vote and construction of the plant is halted, adding that if construction is halted it could lead to bankruptcy for state-owned Taiwan Power Co (Taipower, 台電) as well as cause other problems such as power shortages.
It might lead to power shortages, if the government decides never to build another power plant of any kind. Like that is really going to happen. Once again, let me remind the reader that twenty years ago we heard this crap about economic collapse, power shortages, Mad Max on the streets, etc. Still the same garbage two decades later. Remember this from 2000?
Proponents of the plant, the plans for which date back 20 years, have argued that the facility in northern Taiwan is urgently needed for national security and to help sustain continued economic growth. Taiwan imports 97 percent of its energy needs. They also argue that ditching the project would be a tremendous waste of taxpayers' money. State-owned Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) has already spent $1.6 billion on the project. The implications for Taipower are severe: If it is substantially financially weakened, it will be much more difficult to privatize it, as the government plans.
Same themes: economic growth, financial damage to Taipower. The "credibility" issue was also a factor back then -- Taiwan must buy big power systems from abroad to maintain its credibility with other nations -- so expect that one to be revived for the current debate too.

Note that the article above says Taiwan has no long-term plan to deal with nuclear waste -- it still doesn't. Does that lack suggest that the government expects the plant will never be built?

Commercial Times called for everyone to be rational about it. Good luck with that.

A key source of mobilizing the public should be celebrities. I hope we see a steady flow of them in the months to come. TT has a report on celebrities coming out against the nuke plant.

Wording of the referendum is going to be crucial. Can't wait to see it....

The referendum has a number of useful political functions -- still waiting on your analysis, M!. One among them is making other urgent issues disappear. For example, the government is also working on pension reform, of interest to the bureaucracy and government employees, one of the KMT's most important constituencies. Remember, the government has done very little on the stock transaction tax and nothing at all on the land tax, as well as income tax on the wealthy. Down the memory hole as each new "crisis" wipes long-term issues out of the headlines.

Some comments on safety and construction...

A group opposed to the plant points out that it is vulnerable to historical-sized tsunamis and that the wall to protect it is too low. Moreover, the government has conducted no surveys of historical tsunamis in the area. The TT reports:
In response to the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) contention that Tsai supported the plant’s construction when she served as vice premier, the former DPP chairperson said the KMT was manipulating past events to fit its own purposes.

Tsai, who served as vice premier between 2006 and 2007, said the then-DPP Cabinet’s approval of the nuclear energy plant’s construction was based on Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) pledge to finish construction within the year.

After the approval was given, there were repeated accidents, construction delays, requests for additional budget allocations and the construction was never completed, she said (source).
Accidents, delays... quakes and tsunamis. Chernobyl was actually cited in the original funding for the plant, according to this article. From Wild At Heart's Shadow Report:
...Like Fukushima Island, the location of the 2011 Japanese nuclear disaster, Taiwan is situated at the juncture of the Phillippine and Eurasian Tectonic Plates. Islands along this geologically active seabed bulge frequently experience high-magnitude earthquakes -- from 1991 to 2006, there were an average of 18,500 earthquakes per year, with 49,919 in 1999 alone. There are faultlines near all four of Taiwan's nuclear plants. Chinshan and Kuosheng plants are located near Mt. Datun, a dormant volcano, and the Lungmen plant is exposed to the activity of 70 underwater volcanoes, with geologists warning that volcanic eruptions are a potential threat to nuclear safety. In 1867, the Keelung-Chinshan Tsunami -- the most deadly in Taiwan's recorded history -- affected areas dangerously close to the present-day locations of the Chinshan and Kuosheng plants. In 1771, 85-meter-tall waves inundated Japan's Ishigaki Island, 200 kilometers off Taiwan's northeastern coast. Taiwan's Ministry of Economic Affairs notes in its Central Geological Survey that faultline and underwater volcano activity is expected to accompany the observed expansion of the oceanic trough northeast of Taiwan, making tsunamis a likely occurrence in the area. This is of great concern because geologists believe that tsunamis pose a serious threat to nuclear plant safety. The Chinshan and Kuosheng plants are also located along the potential path of rock- and land-slides....
From one of Dennis Engbarth's old pieces:
According to DPP Legislator Tien Chiu-chin, the ‘Nuclear Four’ project suffers from a long list of concerns, including over 700 arbitrary design changes without GE’s permission, insufficient earthquake protection to withstand a seven magnitude earthquake, proximity to recently discovered active undersea volcanoes and faults. She also said the plant is suffering from poor management by Taipower, which is directly managing construction, unlike the previous plants which were supervised by GE and Westinghouse.
To get some idea of the natural threats, see this old post. See too this report which said that the key safety systems were being treated like waste dumps. This plant is a disaster waiting to happen. Of course, if anything happens, the government's evac plan for Taipei is YOYO: you're on your own. There is no plan. OECD experts in Taiwan for safety review of plants.
______________

Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Gov't to Allow Referendum on Nuke Plants

Wow! The KMT government agreed to a referendum on the fourth nuclear plant in Gongliao, probably the dumbest public infrastructure project in Taiwan history. It even made the international news (AP). After noting that the government had agreed to the referendum, the Taipei Times reported:
According to the plan, a referendum on halting construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant will be initiated by the KMT caucus tabling a motion next month in the legislature, KMT caucus whip Lai Shyh-bao (賴士葆) said.

Lai said the plebiscite could be held in August as the Referendum Act (公民投票法) stipulates that a referendum must be held no sooner than one month and no later than six months after its proposal.

If the completion of the plant failed to win approval, there was the risk of huge compensation payouts for breach of contract, higher electricity costs, power shortages and even an adverse effect on economic growth, Jiang said.
Hahaha. The KMT government is already hard into fear mongering, the same tired nonsense. The government claimed twenty years ago that power shortages and economic growth effects would occur if the plant were not built, and it has never varied from that line. Obviously these things never  happened. It was lies at the beginning, and it is still lies. There are plenty of other ways Taiwan can generate power. Not to mention reduce demand through improved conservation...

Frozen Garlic has a long, excellent post on many of the issues. First, I think many of us are as shocked as he is that the KMT would submit a major project to the overall review of the public when it knows that in any fair referendum the Party position in favor of nuclear power will be defeated. In these two paragraphs he strikes to the heart of the matter:
Why is the KMT so politically committed to nuclear power? Most importantly, they have committed enormous piles of money to this project over the past two decades. They cannot simply walk away with nothing to show for it. The DPP would beat over the head relentlessly for years and years. How many schools, hospitals, roads, public housing, MRT lines, or flower festivals were sacrificed for 4NPP? It would be strong evidence that the KMT had a flawed vision for the future and had stubbornly insisted on imposing that flawed vision on an unwilling population. The KMT has been attacking the DPP for a decade over the 2001 showdown. When the DPP stopped construction, they broke numerous contracts and had to pay heavy financial penalties. Of course, the project was then resumed, so that money was just wasted. However, if the plant never opens, this argument gets reversed: the DPP tried to save Taiwan an enormous amount of money, and the KMT wasted 10 more years of construction budgets. For the KMT, reversing course is simply not an option.

There are also other reasons the KMT wants nuclear power. One way to understand the KMT regime is as a construction state, much like the LDP’s Japan. The ruling party hands out lots of construction contracts and turns these contracts into political support. Some aspects are legal, some are hazy, and some are outright illegal. However, it is pretty effective. 4NPP has been a 20 year gravy train of contracts to hand out. (I hope I’m wrong about this. Contracts used for this purpose often lead to shoddy public works. This prospect terrifies me.) Many manufacturers support nuclear power. To be clear, they don’t care where the electricity comes from, but they can’t stomach the prospects of insufficient or unreliable power. Many of the exporters that drive Taiwan’s economy want 4NPP opened because they believe it will provide steady and reliable electricity for the next few decades. The KMT also listens closely to Taipower, the state run electricity company. Taipower is deeply embedded in the KMT’s power structure. The Economics Minister is a former Taipower executive, and the head of the Taipower workers’ union is a member of the KMT’s Central Standing Committee. Taipower wants 4NPP. It can be pushed and prodded to reluctantly try out the odd alternative energy project, but 4NPP is Taipower’s crown jewel.
The 4th nuke plant has been a massive source of patronage funding, as Froze points out above. So why would the KMT be willing to court defeat like this?

Well, two reasons. First, as a friend point out to me, the construction budget for the plant is pretty well spent. This means that the project has done its intended job -- the contracts have been handed out to the KMT's patronage networks in the construction-industrial state. There's little left to plunder. This means it can shut down with minimal economic effect on KMT supporters. As the TT noted in another article:
Among the conclusions were that, before the referendum is held in August, the government would not request any more budget for the plant, not load fuel rods in the plant’s first reactor and halt all construction projects other than those that have been contracted out.

The government said the first reactor at the plant is 95 percent complete, while the second reactor is 92 percent complete and that most of the uncompleted projects have been contracted out.
Putting it up for referendum after its contract potential has been exhausted certainly tastes like n admission that the construction of the plant was never about obtaining its power output....

The other thing, is well, pretty damn simple: this project has to die, and everyone knows it. It is not safe in any meaningful sense of the word. Not only are there potent natural threats in the form of quakes and tsunamis, but over the last couple of years there has been a study stream of articles on all sorts of man-made problems with the plant. Nor can the budget handle it, nor is there a place to put the waste. Completing it and running it as a nuclear power plant would be transcendentally stupid.

As Froze points out, the KMT can't simply halt the plant, they are too invested in nuclear power. So their solution is simple: Stop Me Before I Kill Again. Let the public kill it instead, thus showing the Benevolence of the Great KMT which can reap some of the propaganda benefits of looking like it actually supports democracy. And then they can arrange for the DPP and its environmentalist allies to take the blame, just as environmental opposition was made the excuse to kill that dog of a naptha cracker in Changhua last year (pics + info).

One of the exciting possibilities here for so many of us looking at the possible excising of this hideous tumor of the construction-industrial state is that the KMT's willingness to kill this project means there might be a possibility of meaningful changes in Taiwan's referendum laws. The last important local referendums were on gambling on the Offshore Islands. To get those passed, the KMT rammed through changes in the 2003 Referendum Law:
TN goes on to observe that the KMT built an impossibly high barrier to the passage of the referendum with the infamous "double majority" law that requires that the vote consist of a majority with at least 50% of voters having voted. What they did was cheat: in January the KMT rammed through a clause in the offshore gambling statute deleting the requirement that 50% of voters must vote in the referendum for it be valid. An article on it in Gambling Compliance describes...
The reason the law requires a Double Majority is simple: the KMT can defeat any referendum simply by instructing its voters to boycott the Referendum vote. Since the KMT was eager to get gambling in the offshore islands, it relaxed that law for the sake of the referendums in Penghu and Matsu. It isn't likely that the KMT Administration will push for relaxing the Double Majority requirement, but it is nice to be able to contemplate that possibility. The DPP has promised to try and push for relaxing the Double Majority requirement (here).

In this case a number of options remain to the KMT:
  • If they relax the 2003 Double Majority law for the sake of the nuke plant referendum, it can go down to almost certain defeat, despite the blizzard of propaganda likely to come from the usual culprits. 
  • If they don't, it will still likely be defeated since nuclear power is unpopular, so long as the KMT does not instruct its people to boycott the referendum. 
  • They can also defeat it by instructing their people to boycott it. 
Remember too that the government can arrange that its position be supported by presenting referendum text that is total gobbledygook so no one knows how to vote, a favorite strategy of anti-democracy moves. Thus, there are many ways the plant can still be finished if the government wants.

Once a referendum is defeated, eight years must pass before it can be brought up again.

I think the most likely outcome is (1) assuming the laws are relaxed. It would be interesting to see whether a majority would turn out in the case of (2), which is highly unlikely and whether, if not, the KMT government would commit to be bound by the outcome even if a majority did not turn out. Since the referendum will likely come this summer, the next few months should be fun to watch.

PS: There's a whole political angle a friend will be writing on soon, not discussed here. Look for it!
___________________
Daily Links:
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Monday, April 19, 2010

ECFA Referendum: Eastasia was never at war with Oceania

Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein had been at work!

Today the Administration broke necks all over Taiwan as thousands of readers did double-takes over the following headline (Taipei Times):

Ma never opposed referendums: Wu

The paper reported:
Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) yesterday said he and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) had never opposed referendum bids launched in accordance with the law and denied that the government had changed its stance on holding referendums.
It summarized with due restraint:
Given that Ma has said on numerous occasions that a referendum on an ECFA was unnecessary because the proposed agreement would not touch on political issues, King’s comments were perceived by some as a change of stance on the issue of an ECFA referendum by the Ma administration.
Meanwhile, from back when Oceania and Eastasia were still at war, Taiwan News reported on March 27, 2010:
President Ma Ying-jeou declined to agree that the controversial proposed "cross-strait economic cooperation framework agreement" with the People's Republic of China should be ratified by national citizen referendum Friday, saying that "referendums should not be used to decide each and every matter."
Ma added that the pact would be submitted to the legislature as a treaty, clearly bypassing the whole referendum approach. In May of last year Ma said in Belize, as my man A-gu noted on his surpassingly excellent blog:
The quote in Chinese is reported by the Liberty Times as follows: 「我一向都主張台灣的前途必須由二千三百萬台灣人民來決定,涉及主權議題才需要公投」"I have always held that Taiwan's future is to be determined by Taiwan's 23,000,000 people; only topics related to with sovereignty need a referendum."
As far back as you go...

Feb 20, 2009:
TT: You said during the presidential campaign that all major government policies must be supported by public consensus and that referendums are one option in soliciting public opinion. Are you now ruling out referendums as an option?

Ma:
Do you think direct transportation links are a major issue? Many polls show that 60 percent of the public supports the initiative, but do you think it is necessary to hold a referendum?

A referendum is an option, but it is not the only option. Referendums are time-consuming and expensive. A referendum costs about NT$300 million [US$8.8 million], or NT$500 million to hold. It also takes time to promote. If the government were to hold a referendum for every major policy, it would be very hard for the government to operate. We simply cannot hold a referendum because some people are against a government initiative.
Wait -- let's see that on the instant replay:
We simply cannot hold a referendum because some people are against a government initiative.
Now if my wife said me that "we simply cannot go to India" or "we simply cannot have beef for dinner any more" or "we simply cannot put up with your bicycling" I would assume she was against trips to India, beef, and biking. So would most people, I suspect.

What about Ma's team? Taiwan's rep offices hosts the same arguments as Ma constantly makes (1) it isn't necessary and (2) nobody hold referendums on FTAs. From its FAQ:
Q18. Why not hold a referendum?
A18.
In signing the ECFA, the two sides will not at all touch on the sovereignty issue; they will be entirely focused on matters of economic cooperation. Therefore, holding a referendum will not be necessary. Also, whenever countries around the world have signed free trade agreements (FTAs) or similar regional trade agreements, there have been virtually no instances of referendums being held.
Sounds like opposition to me! If the government is not opposed, why keep saying it is "unnecessary"? As late as April 3 the Presidential Office spokesman was reiterating these same points in response to the DPP's demand for a referendum. The Central News Agency (CNA), the government news agency, also reported that Ma opposed the referendum:
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) on Thursday reiterated his opposition to a referendum on the government’s planned economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China, saying it was not necessary because no political items would be included in the proposed agreement.
Ok, so maybe it's just a pan-Green thing to read the constant iteration of Ma's "referendum is unncessary" as active opposition. So how do Ma's own supporters understand him? As opposing! China Post, the pro-KMT English paper, noted in June of 2oo9, in its own (not CNA) report:
Despite President Ma Ying-jeou's objection, the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is all set to initiate a referendum on an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) between Taiwan and China.

Ma told the press in Belize last Friday he is opposed to the referendum the opposition party is planning to call. A referendum must be called if the issue involves sovereignty, the president said. There shouldn't be “too many referendums,” he warned.
One can only ask, as the DPP did last May:
“Why did the government agree to a referendum on legalizing casinos in Penghu, yet opposed a referendum for an issue relating to national interests such as on the ECFA?” Chao said.
But the lies and hypocrisy are not the whole story. As the DPP/TSU campaign in favor of a referendum grew -- and public support for it mushroomed, meaning that the Administration was taking a political beating -- the Ma Administration began quietly setting up this policy change. For example, MAC Chairman Lai Shin-yuan said in March of this year, more than 30 days ago. Lai is parroting the Administration line:
Given that the ECFA is solely an economic pact, it should be discussed on rational grounds through a sound democratic mechanism so as to establish consensus among all segments of society. In other words, for the government, any agreement signed with Beijing must satisfy three fundamental conditions: need, public support and legislative monitoring.

Yet, considering such a pact involves highly technical issues, it is inappropriate and unnecessary to resort to a referendum. But any move to initiate the ECFA referendum would be respected by the executive.
The whole "referendum is unnecessary" line was created to enable the Administration to engage in displays of opposition to democracy without any direct statement of opposition. Sweet. But nobody believes them, after months and months of repeating the "unnecessary" line, because everyone understood what the Administration has made utterly clear.

A serious policy reversal for the KMT as the DPP referendum drive scores a major political victory. As I noted in a post on Taiwan News' rip of Ma's opposition to the referendum a few weeks ago:
Stimulating a debate over a referendum on ECFA has been a sharp political move by the DPP. Not only is it an example of the positive pro-democracy policies of the DPP -- a rebuttal to the pan-Blue talking point that circulates as conventional wisdom in Taipei that the DPP has no policies -- but also shows how the KMT Administration is inherently anti-democracy, patronizing, and out of touch with the public.
Still true. Now go out and win the referendum, guys.
_______________________
Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!