DPP Joint Regional Governance Buried Under a Mountain of Garbage

DPP Joint Regional Governance Buried Under a Mountain of Garbage
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 27, 2015

Executive Summary: The Yunlin County garbage crisis shows that green camp "joint regional governance" is nothing more than empty rhetoric. Political advantage trumps administrative cooperation. A storm of criticism has forced Yunlin County Chief Li Jing-yung to change his tune and declare that the Linnei Incinerators "will never go into operation". Li said he was willing to make incinerator operation an "option". This problem is the touchstone for Tsai Ing-wen's joint regional governance, and shows that green camp joint regional governance is easier said than done.

Full Text Below:

The Yunlin County garbage crisis shows that green camp "joint regional governance" is nothing more than empty rhetoric. Political advantage trumps administrative cooperation. A storm of criticism has forced Yunlin County Chief Li Jing-yung to change his tune and declare that the Linnei Incinerators "will never go into operation". Li said he was willing to make incinerator operation an "option". This problem is the touchstone for Tsai Ing-wen's joint regional governance, and shows that green camp joint regional governance is easier said than done.

So-called "joint regional governance" based self-government and urban planning is nothing new. The UK has promoted it for over a century. The idea is to share resources and economic benefits within a given geographical region. But Tsai Ing-wen convened a joint regional governance meeting in April. She boasted that "Thirteen green-ruled counties would jointly resist the central government". This is clearly contrary to the spirit of joint regional governance.

Taiwan has made use of joint regional governance for some time in regional planning. This optimizes land use and addresses the limitations of county and city level comprehensive development planning. It unites interdependent neighboring counties, and enables them to share benefits rooted in geography, population, natural resources, and economic activity. The regional planning system has been around for years. The regional planning system was obviously not motivated by any desire to "resist the central government".

Yunlin county's about face on incinerators, reveals the political calculations behind the green camp's joint regional governance proposal. Former County Chief Chang Jung-wei outsourced Linnei Incinerator construction. Successor Su Chih-fen cited EIA and bribery as justifications for tearing up the contract. The incinerators would "not go into operation, but merely held in reserve". Li Jing-yung declared on the eve of the election that it would "never be put into operation". Unfortunately Yunlin originally commissioned Kaohsiung, Chiayi, and Ilan counties to handle incineration on its behalf. These are all green camp ruled cities and counties. Why are they now citing reasons not to continue doing so? Garbage is now piling up in Yunlin. Besides cost, one reason is other counties think Yunlin should use its own incinerators, which it built but refuses to put into operation. They think this is unreasonable.

Also, some townships in Yunlin have refused to implement county government orders. They refuse to collect garbage from ordinary citizens, while collecting industrial waste on the sly. The result is garbage piling up in the streets. This shows the evils of local government parochialism. Yunlin refuses to clean up its own mess. It wants to pass the buck to the central government. it wants the central government to solve the problem on its behalf. This is clearly unacceptable. If the DPP is serious about joint regional governance, why isn't it coordinating with Tsai Ing-wen to solve the problem?

Last year the green camp won 13 seats in the nine in one county and municipal elections. They immediately established a joint regional governance platform. This platform includes a DPP Central Committee joint governance office, as well as key staffers appointed by green camp county chiefs and city mayors. But so far, county chiefs and city mayors have done nothing except besiege the central government. They demand money and power. Li Jing-yung persuaded six counties in central Taiwan to sign an agreement banning the burning of bituminous coal. He led a fight against the central government and industry, but has done nothing to advance joint regional governance. He has no plans to cooperate with anyone in industry, in order to increase employment.

Conceptually, joint regional governance is a good idea. Its aim is to transcend the limitations of administrative districts. Its aim is to enables regional governments to seek out neighboring districts with complementary resources, and shatter the model of top-down central government rule. For example, the Chinese National Federation of Industries recently revealed that Taiwan suffers from shortages in six areas, including power shortages which cannot be solved at the county level. Other issues, such as central Taiwan hogging water resources, can sometimes be resolved through counties coordinating their resources. This is the intent of joint regional governance.

Social housing is also part of Tsai Ing-wen's joint regional governance proposal. But the population of counties and municipalities impose objective limits. Detailed calculations of public infrastructure capacities are required. The same is true for urban planning, which must respond to local living environments. The actual needs of local populations should determine the appropriate sites for social housing. City government operations include many "dirty jobs"" that must be dealt with. These include household garbage collection. Garbage collection is of course the responsibility of counties and municipalities. After all, "no border crossings" is fundamental to waste management. It must not be conducted at the expense of others. Yunlin has incinerators it is not using. It refuses to pay market prices for incineration. This smacks of chicanery.

Another example is measures taken against mosquitoes carrying Dengue fever. The premise is that each administrative district must establish firewalls. These firewalls may be information security firewalls or construction material firewalls. They are all intended to prevent the spread of undesirable elements. Each district is charged with its own epidemic control, with preventing a wildfire. These too are problems that cannot be solved by zone defense. Joint regional governance cannot solve such problems. It will not advance the common interest of neighboring regions. It could even drag neighboring regions down.

Joint regional governance can make better use of local infrastructure and resources. That is undeniable. It can combine administrative organization and human resources, increasing development potential or competitiveness. But joint regional governance must solve problems jointly, and not just pick fights with the central government. Otherwise positive change will be impossible. The DPP has praised joint regional governance to the skies. But it has turned a blind eye to Yunlin's garbage incineration problem. That is why one knows the DPP has marched down the wrong path.

垃圾山上，失能的區域聯合治理

2015-10-27 聯合報

雲林縣垃圾危機難解，暴露綠營的「區域聯合治理」徒託空談，政治氣味高於行政合作。在面對外界撻伐後，曾宣示「永不啟用」林內焚化爐的雲林縣長李進勇終於改口，願將啟用林內焚化爐列入「選項」。這個問題，正是蔡英文「區域聯合治理」的試金石，凸顯綠營對區域治理的知易行難。

「區域聯合治理」在地方自治、都市計畫都不是新鮮事，起於英國而推行已不止百年，其理念是區域內地理、資源、經濟活動等的利益創造與共享。但蔡英文四月召開「區域聯合治理」平台首次會議，不避諱地標舉「串連十三綠色執政縣市以抗衡中央」之意，已違背區域聯合治理的精神。

「區域共治」在台灣早有類似機制，那就是區域計畫制度。這是基於國土利用最佳化，考慮縣市綜合開發計畫之侷限而設計，旨在聯合鄰近縣市，依地理、人口、資源、經濟活動等相互依存與共同利益，訂定出區域發展計畫，已推動多年。可以確定的是，區域計畫制度完全沒有「聯合地方對抗中央」的設想。

雲林考慮啟用焚化爐的轉折，暴露了綠營區域治理的政治算計。前縣長張榮味委外籌建林內焚化爐，蘇治芬繼任後以環評及行賄等理由解約，焚化爐「備而不用」，李進勇更在選前就提出「永不啟用」的政治宣示。問題是，雲林原委託高雄、嘉義、宜蘭等縣市焚燒，這些都是綠營執政縣市，為什麼如今都各以藉口不再代燒，而造成雲林垃圾壓頂的窘境。其中原因，除了價格談不攏，正是其他縣市認為雲林自己有焚化爐卻不用，太不合理。

此外，雲林部分鄉鎮拒絕縣府調度，拒收民生垃圾，卻偷收事業廢棄物，造成街頭垃圾堆積如山，也反映了地方本位主義作祟。雲林自家爛攤子不收拾，卻想把問題賴給中央，要求代為解決，當然是行不通的。反過來看，如果民進黨的「區域聯合治理」是玩真的，為什麼不設法透過這個平台請蔡英文協調解決？

綠營去年九合一選舉拿下十三席縣市長後，隨即成立區域聯合治理平台，不僅黨中央設有聯合治理辦公室，各縣市長也指派核心幕僚加入。但運作迄今，只見縣市首長聯手圍攻中央，要錢要權，乃至由李進勇率中部六縣市簽署禁燒生煤協議，和中央及業者纏鬥，卻未見發揮任何聯合治理的效能，或者任何在產業、就業上互通有無的合作計畫。

在概念上，區域聯合治理是不錯的想法，目的在促使各地跨出「行政區」的侷限，自主尋求鄰近區域的資源互補，打破凡事聽命中央指揮調度的窠臼。舉例而言，工總日前說台灣投資環境亮出「六缺」紅燈，其中如缺電自非縣市層級可以解決，但如中部搶水之事，有時則可透過縣市協調彼此挹注資源，這才是區域聯合治理的原意。

再如，社會住宅是蔡英文列入區域共治的課題，但縣市人口容納量有客觀條件的限制，必須詳細計算公共設施承載量，經過都市計畫的「地方生活圈」配置，再看地方人口移動的實際需要，選擇適當的社會住宅區位。又如，都市運轉中會生出許多「嫌惡」事項，必須由地方自己解決。像家庭垃圾，縣市當然要負責解決，畢竟，「不越境移轉」是廢棄物處理的根本精神，不能以鄰為壑。何況，雲林有焚化爐而不用，又不願根據市場價格支付代燒費用，這恐怕就有耍賴之嫌。

再如登革熱病媒蚊的防治，其概念是行政區各設「防火牆」。不論是資訊安全的「防火牆」，或建物的「防火區隔」，都是在避免「嫌惡」源頭的流動，自家負責疫情控制，不讓野火竄燒燎原；這類情況，也不是區域聯防所能解決。試圖以「區域共治」來化解，不但不能創造共同利益，反而可能將其他地區一起拖下水。

無可諱言，區域共治可強化地方建設之整體資源，聯合運用行政組織和人力資源，拓展單一縣市發展潛力，擴大城市競爭布局。但是，一旦區域聯合治理用錯方向，如果目標只是為了聯合杯葛、施壓中央，而不是為了共同解決問題，那就很難為區域帶來正向改變。民進黨把區域聯合治理喊得震天價響，卻對雲林垃圾這樣火燒眉毛的問題視若無睹，就知道它走錯了方向。