[kidd]

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/Chiayiboy/taiwan_map.jpg

Lately, there has been the talk in the congress regarding to the relocation of Taiwan's existing capital from Taipei to central-southern region of the island for various reasons (density, security, economic, practicality..etc). Which of the following would u pick (up to 3 choices) to be the future capital of Taiwan if indeed happened? :cool:

------------Some related news:

遷都中南部 羅志明重申遷都高雄三部曲
中央社 2006-10-17 19:03

(中央社記者王淑芬高雄十七日電)朝野立委連署建議中央遷都中南部，台灣團結聯盟高雄市長參選人羅志明今天重申他的「遷都高雄三部曲」，主張將勞委會、體委會等與高雄相關的部會率先南遷，等到軟硬體及配套措施成熟，再配合行政區重劃推動高雄縣市合併，整合相關資源，再邁向遷都高雄的目的。




羅志明表示，政治及經濟中心分立已是時代潮流，兩年前他在立委選舉中就已將「遷都高雄、分都先行」列為主要政見。

他說，遷都茲事體大，短期內要遷都高雄有困難，所以他規劃「遷都高雄三部曲」，逐步實現遷都的目標。他指出，體委會約有三分之一的職員在左訓中心，南遷高雄並不困難；加上高雄市在爭取到二零零九世界運動大會之後，體委會移至高雄，還能夠直接協助世運會的籌辦，一舉多得。

還有，高雄是一個勞工都市，南部七縣市的勞工數遠大於北部，勞委會南遷能照顧南部上百萬的勞工，羅志明認為很符合真正的經濟效益。

羅志明表示，等上述部會南遷高雄之後再將高雄縣市合併，擴大港都腹地，將兩個城市的資源、土地、人力做有計畫的整合，使高雄縣成為高雄市的衛星都市，打通兩地交通即可形成機能更齊全、架構更具首都規模的生活圈，屆時即可推動遷都高雄的目的。

----------

首都南遷／陳明文：嘉義縣是最佳選擇　捨我其誰？
記者賴元煌／嘉縣報導 2006-10-17 23:21

嘉義縣長陳明文17日特別呼應70多位立委「遷都中南部」構想，提出嘉義縣是台灣首都的最佳選擇。





陳明文說，嘉義縣過去是台灣西南部的邊陲地帶，長期以來備受冷落，不但沒有國家級重大建設落腳，甚至連樂透彩都跳過嘉義。因為發展無望，導致人口外移嚴重，工商不振，農村凋弊等種種問題。


陳明文指出，2000年政黨輪替之後，已扭轉過去重南輕北的不公平現象，特別重視嘉義的建設發展，不管是五年五千億擴大公共建設，或是八年八百億治水特別條例，嘉義縣感受到中央建設嘉義的決心，特別是故宮南院落腳嘉義、2004國慶煙火在嘉義，以及2007國家燈會在嘉義的舉辦，更讓嘉義縣堂堂邁入50年來最好的黃金時代，嘉義人對未來也開始有信心，準備打造一個新的嘉義。


陳明文表示，為了讓嘉義縣重新被看見，為了分散國家政經資源長期集中在台北所造成的風險，為了實現台灣是主權獨立國家的目標，特別呼應70多位立委「遷都中南部」構想，提出新首都在嘉義縣的主張。


陳明文認為嘉義縣做為台灣新首都的競逐者，有3個條件非常符合國家新都要求。第一，嘉義縣的土地遼闊，產權單純清楚，為因應國家遷都的需要，所有辦公大樓和行政中心所需的土地可以立即提供，在時間和硬體建設的考量上，嘉義縣都是成本最低的選擇。


第二，嘉義縣西部濱海，東有高山，位於台灣中南部的中心位置，和台中和高雄等距；高鐵完工通車之後，到台北更是一個小時車程範圍之內，地理條件和區位適中，交通最為快速方便。


第三，嘉義縣治所在地，為台灣西部首例以文化、交通建設而形成之新興聚落，其緊鄰亞洲最大規模的長庚醫療專業區，又有國家級博物館故宮南部分院座落之優異條件，生活機能日趨完善，發展潛力無窮，是中央政府進駐的第一選擇。


陳明文說，政府如要遷都中南部，不妨以美國和澳洲為參考。美國將首都選在華盛頓特區(DC)，而不是設在紐約，主要的著眼點就在於政經分離，分散風險的考量。澳洲將首都選在坎培拉，更是台灣可以參考學習的思考模式。


他表示曾多次到坎培拉去參訪，發現該特區雖然貴為首都，但有著相當鄉村的感覺，整個區域多山，綠化情形良好，四周還有一些鄉舍與小鎮，和嘉義縣給人的感覺非常類似。


陳明文以堅定的語氣指出，嘉義縣是台灣首都的最佳選擇，這點是無庸置疑的。

------
2006.10.18　 中國時報
爭取遷都台中 議會拍板
馮惠宜/台中報導


日前中央政府釋出有意規畫遷都中南部，現正召開定期大會的台中市議會，十七日決議請台中市政府行文總統府及行政院，爭取遷都台中市。市長胡志強也表達爭取之意，他強調願意結合中部4縣市共同爭取，以帶動中部經濟發展。

一人一信 上書總統府


日前有70多名立委連署建議中央遷都台中，在台中市議會受到廣大回響，國民黨籍市議員楊正中昨天在定期大會中做臨時動議出臨時動議，提議由議員一人一信分別上書總統府、行政院、立法院建議大台中是最適合的遷都地點。

議員不分黨派 觀樂支持

多位議員發言支持遷都台中市，議員認為台中市不輸台北市，如能遷都台中市必能帶動台中市另一波建設高峰，各黨派議員都對遷都台中市表示觀樂支持，最後決議請台中市政府積極爭取請中央遷都台中市。

胡志強不但贊同，還表示可以無償提供用地，並願意結合中部4縣市一起向中央表達意願。他指出，中部有224公頃的水湳機場用地，及成功嶺、中興新村等腹地，都適合中央遷都用地，台中市是遷都的最佳地點。

[Coyett]

I voted for Yunlin. No need for meeting rooms or assembly halls, they could play all day at Janfusun Fancyworld! :)

http://202.39.225.132/uploadfile/scenic_spots/08082_3.jpg

[duabi]

I prefer Taichung/Nantou(Greater Taichung).

I think Tainan used to be Taiwan's capital because Dutch first landed on Tainan and developed the place, so that's why Koxinga chose to conquer it and used it as his kingdom's capital.

Taipei became the capital later because Taipei was closer to Peking and Tokyo(Manchu and Japanese Empire's capital). Well, it was also developing fast because of tea trade and Tamshui and Keelong harbour.
Kaohsiung almost became Taiwan's capital in late Japanese era because Japanese wanted to make it a Japan Empire's South Capital to rule the whole SEA.
KMT came and used Taipei because Taipei had the infrastructures done by Japanese to hold the whole government it brought from China.

In 2006...We Taiwanese can finally "think about" which place is better for Taiwan and Taiwanese.

[pierre-laurent]

my choices are 1. taichung, 2. tainan, 3. kaohsiung

taichung is my first choice coz its 's geograpphically in the center of the country(it's good to balance the developpment) and its infrastructures, transportation and weather're kinda good

tainan coz it's both a city of cuture and the oldest city of the taiwan history.

kaohsiung coz it's the 2de largest city and its good infrastructures(with an international airport and a metro system soon)

[Echang03]

I voted for Taichung because I'm from Taichung XD

But how realistic is this actually? I doubt it'll ever happen. (but i hope it does)

[superchan7]

Personally I don't think the capital should be moved at the moment. The political situation needs to settle down and some infrastructure improvements need to be made before such an important change.

For now I think Taipei is the only city that can handle the duty of being the administrative nucleus.

[duabi]

Personally I don't think the capital should be moved at the moment. The political situation needs to settle down and some infrastructure improvements need to be made before such an important change.

For now I think Taipei is the only city that can handle the duty of being the administrative nucleus.


I think we need to "plan ahead"... I am tired of hearing "#$#$.. has to be done first... or #$@#$ has to settle down first". If we plan ahead, then we will know what infrastructure improvements needed, so we also don't have to waste money on some infrastructures we dont need.

Take Sungshan Airport for example, if If closing it down is good for Taipei in the long term, then we can decide what to do with the land or do other things to improve the city. If not closing it down is the choice, then we should better upgrade the airport or have other plans to get a good use of the airport. If we don't plan ahead now, we will be wasting time and money.

If we know there is a possibility that moving the capital is good for Taiwan in the long term, then the sooner we discuss it the ealier Taipei or Taiwan will become a better place. Therefore, I think we should at least discuss whether it is good to move the capital or not. It is not the most important thing now, but it is also not the least important thing. I think if Taiwan wants to be better, we have to treat everything important. Whether it is about sewage or about the capital.

[Bobbert]

There is no reason to change the capital, especially sense Taiwan's population will start to decline in a few years because of the incredibly low birthrate.

[superchan7]

Sure, it's always good to plan and look ahead, but given the current social situation, I'm convinced that trying to move the capital city is just going to create an enormous mess.

People are just going to stir up another blue/green rivalry over anything that can have political implications. Not to compare directly, but I could imagine what people might think if the US tried to move its capital to Texas.

[duabi]

Sure, it's always good to plan and look ahead, but given the current social situation, I'm convinced that trying to move the capital city is just going to create an enormous mess.

People are just going to stir up another blue/green rivalry over anything that can have political implications..

The idea of moving the capital is not about "blue or green"/"china or taiwan"/"unification or independence", so I don't think it will create a mess politically. This topic has been brought up a few times in the past few years, there were no major conflicts between blue or green camp. Actually, relatively most ppl either they are in blue or green camp believe that it may be better for Taiwan. The most popular place "so far" is Taichung Area.


Not to compare directly, but I could imagine what people might think if the US tried to move its capital to Texas.

I believe, most ppl will against it because US tried to move its capital to Texa without much thinking as you stated.
Are you assuming that ppl talk about moving the capital in Taiwan without much thinking? In this case, I will be the first one against it too. However, if it is through a thorough discussio, and we are sure it will do more good to Taiwan. why not?


ps.
Maybe you don't know that Taiwan's capital at the "provincial" level is in Nantou( part of the greater Taichung Area).

[C-Kompii]

If you were to ask just about any place besides Taipei whether they would want to be the capital, of course they would say yes, and give you plenty of reasons why they think that way. Our current capital already lack the recognition it deserves internationally, and for now it is still the most fitting. The examples of US, Australia, Canada, Brazil, and to a lesser extent China and India aren't exactly ideal for Taiwan since they are vastly larger countries.

Trying to Move the capital now will generate too many disputes, and its not like we don't have enough of that already :haha:

Cheers,

-G'day-

[kidd]

I think it's a great idea to move our capital to central Taiwan - Nantou (or Taichung) in particular is my pick not only for its location but also budgeting concerns as duabi had mentioned the money saving scheme of utilizing its exisiting provincial facilities.

In terms of national crisis, such as war (god forbid), the damage would be minimized in many ways. I just don't think that its a good idea to have all the main governmental facilities/bureaus cramped at highly populated Taipei.

Last but not least, as the above news mentioned, some of the main governmental braches, for instance, the Department of Labor should definately be located at places such as the labor intense Kaohsiung due to its funtionality. :cool:

[pierre-laurent]

Sure, it's always good to plan and look ahead, but given the current social situation, I'm convinced that trying to move the capital city is just going to create an enormous mess.

People are just going to stir up another blue/green rivalry over anything that can have political implications. Not to compare directly, but I could imagine what people might think if the US tried to move its capital to Texas.then in your logic, tawan should stop doing whatever and commit suicid collectively... btw i think the economic captal or most developped city of a country is not necessarily its adminitrative capital. washington is not that large on a scale of a super power as usa, right? ;)

[superchan7]

I don't know about strange things like "suicide." Is that what will happen if the capital stays in Taipei? I only felt that the other cities' infrastructure has yet to catch up with Taipei, therefore there is no better city suited to lead the entire Taiwan.

There are countries that have administrative capitals in smaller cities (USA, Australia, Vietnam). There are countries that have administrative capitals in their largest and most economically important cities (Japan, South Korea, Thailand, France, UK).

My point is not to follow one or the other, because things that work in other countries should not be assumed to work in mine or yours. The simple concept of "moving" a capital is something rarely done and involves difficult city planning and consideration of all social and economic effects on the country and its governance. One example of a failed effort to move an administrative capital is South Korea.

Given these logical observations, I came to the conclusion that in the current situation, trying to move the government out of Taipei can (and probably will) spark tension between followers of different political sides.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a certain political "side" propose this idea in the first place? It would certainly place them in a more favourable support base...

[pierre-laurent]

as you said, it will certainly not be easy to move the capital and each country is a particular case. of course to change in order to change has no sense, but i still think there will be advantages to move the capital especailly in order to balance the island's general infrastructure, urban and economical developpment. concentrating so many functions and budget in an unique area(taipei city), it's merely insane for whole nation (btw, now france also tries to decentralize its state orginisms without changing capital of course, but the idea is there all the same.). plus, this project harvests some support from both green and blue populations and politicians, so i think this problem shoudn't totally be analyzed as a new friction point beween bleue-green peoples. but on the other hand ,you're right, this matter should be discussssed again more by the public opinion. in the end, i really think taichung is able to become taiwan's new capital infrastructrally meaning.

[kidd]

I don't know about strange things like "suicide." Is that what will happen if the capital stays in Taipei? I only felt that the other cities' infrastructure has yet to catch up with Taipei, therefore there is no better city suited to lead the entire Taiwan.

haha, just a little misunderstanding there between u two, my friends. Perhaps some of us truely believe that in case 96/97 missle crisis were to re-occur due to whatsoever reason in the future. For the past few years, the PLA has reiterated the possibility of using 斬首計劃,'斬首'signifies presidential office and the taking down of Taipei. I guess in this case, it is suicidal to have Taipei as our capital in defence of Taiwan's democracy.

Leading TW wise, I believe we have Taipei as the financial district, Taichung as the high-tech district, Kaohsiung is the main exporting seaport capital...and many more ..depend on how one looks at. I honestly don't know what function does D.C. have other than administrative stufs in leading the USA.

There are countries that have administrative capitals in smaller cities (USA, Australia, Vietnam). There are countries that have administrative capitals in their largest and most economically important cities (Japan, South Korea, Thailand, France, UK).

My point is not to follow one or the other, because things that work in other countries should not be assumed to work in mine or yours. The simple concept of "moving" a capital is something rarely done and involves difficult city planning and consideration of all social and economic effects on the country and its governance. One example of a failed effort to move an administrative capital is South Korea.)

I think the effect would not be as detrimental. Afterall, greater Taichung (my pick) is only really an hour away from north or south by HST unlike USA or other nations. Remember, Taiwan is not a big island.

Given these logical observations, I came to the conclusion that in the current situation, trying to move the government out of Taipei can (and probably will) spark tension between followers of different political sides.

I beg to disagree on this one. Hence, many of us chose greater Taichung area which translate into almost 50/50 green and blue supporters. It actually brings more unity to taiwan imo.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't a certain political "side" propose this idea in the first place? It would certainly place them in a more favourable support base....

The idea was brought up long ago even before TSU proposed. In fact, as duabi mentioned that even KMT had chosen the provincial government facilities to be located at greater Taichung area - Nantou 中興新村 for best control and accessibility both north and south.

Yeah, I agree that relocation of capital is a major concern to the entire Taiwanese. It is not be seen as just a political power shift as many sees it. The focus should be for a better and more efficient capital to better serve the general public.

A side note:

Growing up in the south, kaohsiung has been our role-model for decades. taipei really has little impact to our daily lifes let alone being the leader as the capital. Many of us believe that certain infrustures, kaohsiung actually surpasses taipei as the leader for the country and it's true these days! Hence the annual 南部七縣市首長論壇 with Kaohsiung as our leader.

This creation of southern capital ideology and the seperation of politic belief was the direct result of the negelect by the KMT government outside of Taipei prior to 2000. I sincerelly hope that Taiwanese can be united. Hence, greater Taichung gets my vote! Ok, that's it!

Got to do some works, see u guys next week~ ^o^V

[kidd]

台中早期趣味故事

　　許多居民都不把台中視為重要的歷史重鎮。與中國歷史相較下，台中百年的歷史只是一剎那罷了。仔細探究，其實可以發現台中早期有趣的事情，在台灣的發展史上扮演著重要的角色。

　　台灣在1885年清朝的時代正式成為中國的領土，台中也是在這個時期劃分出來。當時的總督劉銘傳指定台中為首都。1887年開始台中的規劃，包括建立八個城門。然而在1892年時，劉銘傳總督破產回到台北，使這項工程被中斷，只留下四個完整的城門。不幸地，台灣前任總督決定留在台北，台北才成為首都。

　　雖然經過這些轉變，但台中還是比台北早八個月，在1900年1月9日正式成為台灣發展計劃中的第一個首都。更有趣的是，原先的計劃案裡台中與東京有直接的關聯。1895年，掌控島上行政事物的日本殖民官員，曾經僱用英國籍的男性威廉‧巴頓 (William Barton) 先生針對台灣許多城市進行調查。先前，巴頓設計過東京的都市計劃案，隨後被要求進行台中的規劃。在計劃中包括今天的台中公園與中正路附近的市中心，為加強陽光的照射與確保公共衛生，所有道路都呈現45度角。

　　當時日本人對台灣的印象是一個髒亂、到處都有疾病的地方。為了吸引日本人來台灣居住，必須花心思設計一個舒適的地區，而台中的市中心就是特別規劃給所有日本殖民行政官員、教師、警察等日本人居住的。

　　直到1908年時，這些地方建設達到一定的程度，連日本的皇太子也蒞臨台中，參加現在的台中火車站開幕典禮以及參觀現在依然頗負盛名的「望月涼亭」，之後還有李察‧尼克森(Richard Nixon)，包勃‧霍普(Bob Hope)與瑪格麗特‧柴契爾 (Margaret Thatcher)等重要人物蒞臨台中。

　　這個曾經一度成為台灣首都的城市，在威廉‧巴頓 (William Barton) 的精心規劃下逐漸開始繁榮茁壯，至今已有103.3萬的人口，成為亞洲第135大城市，世界第262大城市。

[argon007]

If I select, I would select Hsinchu for National Science Coucil and Ministry of Environment and Heath.
because there are Hsinchu Science Park and Hsinchu Biology and Medical Park (Taiwan University Hospital chupei subhospital). so it is suitable to move to Hsinchu for these two ministry.

[PuyoPiyo]

I voted for Kaohsiung just because I like that name. I know it is dumb but just that lol..

[kidd]

遷都？ 台中、嘉義、高雄都舉手

聯合新聞網╱記者楊湘鈞、林河名、羅嘉薇 2006-12-27 02:57

高鐵通車日期已是屈指可數，政壇「遷都中南部」的呼聲一時甚囂塵上。難道空間革命輻射所及，可能催化台灣政治權力中樞的移動，甚至鬆動南綠北藍的政治板塊？

學者認為，南來北往更便利，將使民眾的溝通更直接、更頻繁，會改變台灣人民觀察政治的方式。「不論北南，若有大型政治活動，民眾搭個高鐵就可去參加，結束後再搭高鐵回家，不必考慮住宿問題。他們對政治的理解，不再受限於媒體的二手傳播。」台大政治系副教授江瑞祥說。

成大都計系教授姜渝生認為，只要相互接觸夠多、夠久，必然有益於消除對立，如此或有可能打破北藍南綠、濁水溪分界、閩客分居等傳統政治藩籬。

「若政治面真的因為高鐵而產生變化，較可能的發展是南部台北化。」江瑞祥進一步分析，接觸台北更多的南部人很容易被都市化，就像台北被全球化一般。

近來熱烈討論的遷都之議，背後思考就是利用高鐵來平衡區域發展差距、降低南部民眾與首都的疏離感。十月底高鐵台中站啟用典禮上，台中市長胡志強倡言「遷都大台中」。很早就如此主張的台聯立委何敏豪表示，中部腹地遼闊，如果國會及最高行政機關遷到中部，其他政府部門散居北部、南部，可以讓台灣形成北、中、南三大政經中心。民進黨立委蔡同榮提案遷都中南部，很快爭取到跨黨派立委連署。

甫就任的高雄市長陳菊支持首都南遷高雄，嘉義縣長陳明文也不落人後：「嘉義在高鐵通車後，到台北只要一個小時車程，當然有資格作新首都。」

姜渝生贊成行政機構的地點分布可從功能性思考，例如原住民委員會，應該設在距離原住民聚居最近的地方；農委會、經濟部工業局也沒必要設在台北。

可能哪天台灣人會發現，首都被打散或從台北搬走了，而這一切轉變始於高鐵通車。

[kidd]

遷都台中？ 胡志強：大贊成

民視 2007-01-16 12:45

台灣的首都是否可能遷都中南部？目前已經有民進黨立委蔡同榮發起連署，將提案遷都中南部，台中市長胡志強舉雙手贊成說，如果可以遷都台中，對台灣的平衡發展將是一大利多。台灣首都遷都台中可不可行？台中市長胡志強以務實、有利，形容這個構想，台中天氣好、地理適中、空間大。人文環境有自然科學博物館、美術館，規模具國際標準的棒球場，還有7期重劃區內即將興建的大都會歌劇院等大型建設，鄰近的中部科學園區及台中港國際商務往來頻繁，對於邁向國際化多了地理上的便利性，胡志強提出3個地點，適合遷都台中。水湳機場遷建清泉崗之後，224公頃大的腹地規劃已經帶動附近房價看漲，民眾期待遷都台中會讓地方更繁榮。為了推動遷都，立委蔡同榮將發起連署提案，換個首都，換個新氣象，而中南部的民眾也都很期待。

-----
V/C: http://news.yam.com/view/mkvideopage.php/20070116839938

[kidd]

首都南遷 陳明文推薦嘉義縣

民視 (2007-01-22 21:17)

　　南台灣各縣市掀起爭取首都南遷風潮，嘉義縣長陳明文22日舉美國和澳洲為例，強調政經分離的規劃，是台灣目前可以思考的模式，至於遷到哪裡好呢?陳明文說嘉義縣最適當，而目前高鐵經過的太保和故宮南院落腳的樸子，兩個市長已經暗自角力起來了。2005年底，故宮南院正式落腳嘉義縣的樸子市，2006年12月，廣播金鐘獎首度南下嘉義縣舉辦，而2007年的今天，嘉義縣則是準備迎接2007年台灣燈會，嘉義縣逐漸發光發亮，現在他有更大的企圖心，爭取首都南遷。陳明文眼中，嘉義縣剛好位在台中和高雄兩大都會區中間，高鐵通車後，距離台北也不遠，加上又有廣大面積的台糖土地可以規劃利用，現在光是縣治所在的太保，和故宮所在的樸子，已經躍躍欲試，互相角力起來。不論是太保或是樸子，嘉義縣強力主打建設綠色首都牌，希望爭取國都落腳，讓有北回歸線經過的嘉義縣，更亮眼。