predetermined conclusions on any application, or any ‘black-box operations’
(lack of transparency).^19
Meanwhile, Legislator Su Huanzhi called a press conference entitled
‘Perspectives on Qigu’s Binnan Industrial Complex’ at the Legislative Yuan.
Su emphasized that opposition to construction of the fifth and sixth naptha
crackers and the fourth nuclear power plant was the DPP’s long-term and
consistent environmental position. If the Binnan project were approved, it
would be a significant reversal of policy for the party, weakening its
credibility.
Legislator Su Huanzhi led the anti-Binnan movement without the direct
support of his political party. As we shall see, he was a policy entrepreneur
who used the issue to bolster his political career. The Tainan County
magistrate Chen Tangshan, also a DPP member, took an ambiguous stance
toward the Binnan project. Cherishing good relationships with the business
community, Chen refused to adopt a clear anti-Binnan stance. The DPP
adopted a soft position and urged further discussion and debate, as seen in the
resolution adopted at the central party policy making level. The anti-Binnan
ENGOs soon realized that the DPP was an unsteady pillar of support for its
campaign.
The EIA process, 1995–2000
The first EIA meeting about the Binnan project was held in 1995. The EIA
process was the start of institutional and extra-institutional struggles between
anti- and pro-Binnan groups. From 1995–2001, more than 66 meetings were
held.
As the Binnan project would bring economic benefits to the poor Qigu
region, in April 1995, supporters convened the first (and organizational)
conference of the Association for Promotion of the Rights of Qigu Residents
(APRQR) at the Qigu elementary school. Led by Tainan County legislator
Fang Longsheng, APRQR sought to mobilize Tainan County legislators as
well as leaders of 23 villages in the region.
Heated confrontations between advocates and opponents of development
occurred outside the formal EIA process. The first face-to-face hostile clash of
groups occurred during the initial EIA field inspection in August 1995. Both
groups marshaled supporters and rented more than 100 tour buses to travel to
Taipei to demonstrate their power. The two groups conducted street
demonstrations outside the first EIA meeting at the EPA headquarters in Taipei
(November 1995). Such demonstrations accompanied the 66 EIA meetings
from 1995 to 2001.
The EIA opinions on the Binnan case did reflect continuous compromises
and revisions. In November 1995, the EIA preliminary report required
developers to submit alternative locations in the region to take into account
Politics and biodiversity conservation 201