The Taiwan High Speed Rail Scandal: The Feelings of Ordinary Citizens

The Taiwan High Speed Rail Scandal: The Feelings of Ordinary Citizens
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 24, 2009

The Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation (THSRC) scandal has been the focus of recent public attention. According to the Control Yuan, over the past few years the Continental Engineering Corporation was awarded contracts worth 106.2 billion NT. The Evergreen Group was awarded contracts worth 76.4 billion NT. The Teco Group was awarded contracts worth 40 billion NT, and the Pacific Electric Wire and Cable Company was awarded contracts worth 30 billion NT. Assuming a 10 percent net profit, these projects have netted the original shareholders over 25 billion NT in profits. If we compare this figure to the amount these four original investors put in, they have already earned more than enough. Now that these original shareholders have earned more than their share, they want out. They have even affected an injured air. Their behavior is totally unacceptable. If we think of the THSRC scandal as a marriage, then the government was the father of the bride, one who saw dollar signs. This encouraged him to give his daughter to Continental Engineering Corporation. Now the THSRC's assets have become liabilities, and the daughter's honor has been compromised. Does the government really bear no responsibility?
The THSRC project has enabled the original shareholders to make a killing, then palm the losses off on the taxpayers. It has set a black-hearted precedent for future entrepreneurs to emulate. Businesses usually empty their coffers through an averaging process. Let's say that someone controls a conglomerate that includes Company A and Company B. He has total control over Company A, but less control over Company A's cash flow. He has greater control over Company B's cash flow. He assigns the profitable functions to Company A, and the unprofitable functions to Company B. When the profits from the two companies are averaged out, he makes a killing in Company A, and suffers minor losses in Company B. The conglomerate as a whole suffer losses, but he lines his own pockets. The law states that when someone hollows out a conglomerate in such a manner, he is guilty of breach of trust.

The major shareholders of the THSRC used a different method to cheat shareholders. First the original shareholders assigned the profitable operation to themselves. They lined their own pockets. Then they dumped the unprofitable operations on the government, forcing it to clean up their mess. The government has no choice but to take it over. In the end of course, the taxpayers are the ones who must pay through the nose. Some observers have characterized the THSRC as a meticulous plan to empty out the public coffers. These observers may only be speculating. But the evidence suggests their speculations are not groundless. Let us examine the evidence, one piece at a time.

First, when the THSRC bid on the project, it promised that "the government would not have to put up one cent, but would earn hundreds of billons in profits." Now it appears that promise was empty talk. Should the government allow iself to be played for a fool? Secondly, the promises made during its tender offer never became a binding part of the original shareholders' contract. Why not? Third, why did the original shareholders refuse to contribute to the numerous capital injections that followed? Were they truly committed to the marriage? Fourth, why are independent bank groups unwilling to make capital injections? Are they pessimistic about the company's future? Fifthly, all subsequent capital injections were made by quasi-public enterprises such as the Aviation Development Fund and the China Technical Consultants, Wasn't this a violation of the promise that "the government would not have to put up one cent?" Sixth, why has ridership fallen so short of the original estimates? Do the original shareholders really bear no responsibility? Seventh, it is a simple matter for a company calculate how much it must borrow to pay off the interest on its loans. Was the THSRC really unaware of how burdensome these interest payments would be?

Many doubts have surfaced. But most of these doubts were raised long ago. The Continental Engineering Corporation promised that the "government would not have to put up one cent, but would earn hundreds of billons in profits." Many expressed doubts. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications is now tearing its hair out in search of a way out. But observers are pessimistic. Intuitively speaking, if the THSRC still had a chance to make money, the original shareholders, foxy as they are, would be taking the lead, hope to rake in huge profits. The reason they are cashing in their chips and allowing the government to intervene, is that they consider the THSRC beyond hope. They have already milked the project for all it is worth. When the foxes abandon the corpse, can government officials really bring it back to life?

The government has been conned. It must now clean up the mess and ensure accountability. Cleaning up the mess means rethinking transportation policy and the public interest. Ensuring accountability means considering the feelings of ordinary citizens, not allowing con artists to get off scot-free. Ensuring responsibility must not be limited to punishing incompetent civil servants. Even more importantly, it means prosecuting those guilty of crimes such as breach of trust, embezzlement, and providing officials with false information. Sun Tao-chun owed less than 300 million in back taxes. Yet society denounced him mercilessly. Meanwhile the THSRC has left behind hundreds of billions in debt. Can it really be treated more leniently? Sun brought down the family business his father left him. The THSRC, on the other hand, undercut the credibility of the Republic of China government, and cheated millions of taxpayers out of their hard-earned money. It should be abundantly clear which is the more serious offense. Premier Wu is focusing his attention on the economic plight of the average citizen. Perhaps it's time he expressed concern over the average citizens' feelings about the THSRC scandal.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2009.09.24
面對高鐵爭議的幾點庶民感受
本報訊

台灣高鐵公司的案子最近顯然是輿論的焦點。依監察院的資料顯示，過去數年大陸工程承包了一○六二億工程，長榮集團承包七六四億，而東元電機與太電集團亦分別包到四百多億與三百多億。如果以百分之十的淨利粗估，這些工程至少也給幾家原始股東賺到了兩百五十餘億。這個數字較之於前述四家原始出資者的金額，其實已經綽綽有餘。高鐵幾位原始股東在賺飽之際宣稱要走人，還一副受盡委屈的表情，確實讓人難以接受。以婚嫁打個比方：政府當年就是看到原始股東誘人的回饋禮金，才把工程「嫁給」大陸集團。如今，聘金變負債、女兒也被人糟蹋了，當初騙婚的人難道就沒事了嗎？

像台灣高鐵公司這樣「先讓大股東賺飽，再讓全社會埋單」的事件，也算給經營企業者，樹立了一個黑心案例。一般企業掏空通常是水平式的：某甲所控之企業集團有Ａ、Ｂ兩家公司，甲皆有絕對的控制權；但甲在Ａ公司現金流量權較小，在Ｂ公司現金流量權較大，於是就把賺錢的生意交給Ａ公司做，但虧本生意則丟給Ｂ。兩相加減，某甲大賺Ａ而小賠Ｂ，結果是企業集團可能虧損，但某甲口袋滿滿。在法律上，這是某甲對企業集團的掏空與背信行為。

但台灣高鐵的營運模式與一般的水平掏空不同，是循時間垂直式的。高鐵原始股東「先將」賺錢的生意由自己承擔，將口袋塞滿鈔票；「然後」再將虧錢的營運留給政府承接爛攤子。後面不得不接收的政府顯然是有口難言，而最後承擔苦果的，當然還是全體納稅人。外界將高鐵今天的爛攤子描述成一個設計精良的掏空計畫，雖然是個假說，但是，支持這項假說的背後證據，卻一點都不模糊。且讓我們一項一項拿出來檢視。

第一，當年高鐵公司投標時「政府零出資、千億回饋金」的承諾，現在看起來簡直是空話。台灣政府該這樣被人耍弄嗎？第二，當年投標的承諾，事後竟然沒有辦法成為約束原始股東的契約內容，這是為什麼？第三，為什麼高鐵原始股東事後多次增資自己都置身事外？是否凸顯出自己對未來婚姻的心虛？第四，為什麼各獨立銀行團後來皆不願增資，是否表示他們也對未來不樂觀？第五，如果幾次重要的增資都是由航發會、中技社等泛公營機構奉命投入，這難道沒有實質違反「政府零出資」的承諾？第六，為什麼當初預估的乘載量與現在會差那麼多？難道原始股東都沒有責任？第七，一家公司借錢所負擔的利息預估，其實是非常簡單的財務分析。為什麼事前竟然無法預見今日的沉重利息負擔？

以上這麼多疑點，其實不是今天才有人提起，而是早在大陸工程提出「政府零出資、回饋一千億」時，民間就或多或少、陸陸續續地開始質疑。交通部現在正為這些坑坑洞洞煩惱，希望能找出一條生路，但外界咸感悲觀。直觀而言，如果高鐵未來確實還有賺錢的機會，那麼這一群比狐狸還精的原始股東，當然會身先士卒，自己去享受果實。他們之所以兩手一攤，讓政府插手救援，大概一則表示高鐵未來營運病入膏肓，二則表示他們獲利的「階段性任務」已經完成。當狐狸們撒手棄屍時，政府公務員還能扮大羅金仙嗎？

面對這樣一個騙婚疑案，我們認為政府必須同時在「善後」與「究責」兩方面雙管齊下。善後是交通政策與民生福祉的考量，而究責則是照顧庶民情感、不讓騙婚者置身事外。我們所謂究責，倒不只是侷限於懲處公務人員的顢頇無能，而更要著重此事可能涉及的背信、掏空與使公務員為不實登載等種種不法。孫道存欠稅不到三億，就被社會Ｋ到不行，但台灣高鐵背後卻是千億的大窟窿，豈能小覷？孫氏搞垮的是他父親留下來的家業，但台灣高鐵卻是糟蹋了台灣政府的ＢＯＴ威信與人民的納稅錢。兩相比較，孰輕孰重應是清楚分明。吳院長既然注重庶民經濟，是不是也該關切一下庶民的感覺呢？