安身立命真奢侈

　　台灣的土地問題已病入膏肓，不論是市地或農地皆相當嚴重。究其問題的根源乃是土地已經成為炒作的對象，它不被視之為安身立命所需的生活資產、自然資源及溫馨家園。

　　以都市地區來論，地方政府與財團派系相互合作，經由都市計畫的變更，便可輕易使得土地變成了黃金。透過這種方式，主政者僅需付出非常低廉的成本，就可平白創造許多財富，並收編大批地方政治勢力。

　　非都市地區的問題更顯嚴重。由於非都市土地沒有嚴謹的規劃及土地管理體系，在彈性的開發許可制度運作之下，政治力更容易穿透，地方政府首長的意志與利益成為非都市土地開發的主要依歸。

　　在這個有錢有勢者競逐的金錢遊戲中，中央政府必須創造出法律制度，讓土地炒作的進行「一切合法」。立法院下個會期將再度審查的法案中，例如產業創新條例、農村再生條例及國土計畫法等皆是。

　　例如 產業創新條例絕非僅涉及重大的減稅課題而已，它更包含了土地炒作的第十章「產業園區之設置管理」。農村再生條例也不遑多讓，名義上是為了照顧窳陋破敗的農村，但卻隱藏著第三章「土地活化」。至於國土計畫法則是掛著八八風災的羊頭，條文中充斥的是國土的重新分類及開發許可制的擴大運用，敢問，究竟有幾條是真正要進行國土復育？

　　在土地炒作的另外一面，我們看見的是老農的土地被政府強制徵收或重劃；我們也看見科學園區及工業區內明明仍有眾多閒置及低度利用的土地，但是政府卻仍積極要開發新的科學園區及工業區；環境影響評估僅是跑程序的虛晃一招，居民的健康風險根本棄之不顧；都市內仍有一大堆閒置的空屋，但房價卻仍是節節攀升，絕大多數人都買不起房子，政府卻僅是蜻蜓點水的祭出豪宅稅，根本不把一般人民安身立命的需求看在眼裡。

政府浮濫徵收民地

　　筆者再舉中科四期為例。開發案當初在民眾抗議聲中及許多重大影響事項皆尚未 釐清之前，如同環評的審查，內政部區委會也通過了 中科四期的 審查，這樣的結論及其嚴重忽略公民參與的行政程序，再度重創政府公共政策制定的正當性及合理性。

　　在區委會某次開會時，來自彰化的阿公阿嬤們當場泣訴自己家園即將遭受政府蠻 橫徵收，未來生活將無所依靠，聽者無不動容，同感哀戚。土地徵收是國家非常重要的公器，一般先進民主國家皆不隨便使用，往往將其列為最後、非不得已的手段，因為其將產生非常嚴重的效果。但是，反觀我國長期以來卻是進行非常浮濫的土地徵收，政府動不動就祭出土地徵收的公權力，土地徵收竟成為政府施政的最優先手段，這在宣稱為實施民主制度及保障私人財產權的台灣，實在是最大的反諷。

　　須知土地徵收的啟動一定要有公共利益的前提，公共利益的獲取是需要有嚴謹的行政程序及地方住民的充分參與，經由這些程序來尋求彼此最大的共識，但是，現行運作的非都市土地使用管制體制及土地徵收條例卻有著太多的缺漏與不足，公共利益一詞反倒成為權力擁有者（如地方政府）剝奪私人財產權及生存權的最佳藉口與利器。可悲的是，地方住民及土地擁有者在法令制度上竟然毫無反對的權力，法規中雖有公聽會、協議價購、及土地徵收審議委員會的審查，但本人要誠實及非常痛心的告訴社會各界，這些都是口惠而實不至！

　　地方住民與土地有著相當深刻的連結，他們對於農地也有著與政府及財團不一樣的詮釋，農地不應純然由經濟面向來對待，農地其實是當地住民安身立命及心靈認同的空間，尤其是對於那些七、八十歲的老人家而言，農地實在是太重要了，保有農地，生活及生命就有希望，他們的生活及生命也就得以存續。台灣農村雖大多已呈現老化的現象，但是這些老人家仍應享有生存的基本權利，這不應因提升經濟產值的口號而被剝奪。

　　政府理應深入調查中科四期的興建對當地社會、人文、及人民福祉所產生的影響，並且要尊重當地住民的生存選擇權利，而且也應根據相關行政程序法令，啟動公共利益的評估，至少要舉辦嚴謹的聽證會，如此才不會形成社會更大的撕裂與衝突 。筆者真心呼籲政府： 我們有否可能終止這個輪迴，讓老農可以繼續擁有土地，並安享餘年？

以上二篇論述曾分別刊登於自由時報 2010/02/05 及 2009/11/13 自由廣場 ，並收錄於作者「土地關懷」部落格 http://sjhsu51545.blogspot.com/ 。

Looking at land value the way a farmer does

The Ministry of the Interior's Regional Planning Committee approved the fourth stage of the Central Taiwan Science Park last Thursday, despite much public protest and a number of important factors not having been clarified, such as the environmental impact assessment. The approval of this development project and the disregard for public participation in the administrative process once again raise serious questions about both the legitimacy and rationality of the government's public policymaking.

At the committee's previous meeting, teary-eyed senior citizens from Changhua County voiced grievances over the government's planned brutal expropriation of their land, complaining that they would have nothing with which to make a living. All in attendance were touched and could feel their sorrow.

Land expropriation is a very important state measure. Most advanced democracies are reluctant to use it, and see it as a last resort because of the serious consequences. In Taiwan , however, land expropriation has long been abused. The government exercises this right at every turn, making it the favored method for policymaking. This is a great irony in Taiwan , a country that claims to adhere to democracy and to guarantee the right to private ownership.

We must understand that the initiation of land expropriation must be predicated on the public interest, and the fulfillment of the public interest requires strict administrative procedures and the full participation of local residents to reach the widest possible consensus.

However, the Non-urban Land Use Control Regulations ( 非都市土地使用管制規則 ) and the Land Expropriation Act ( 土地徵收條例 ) are seriously flawed, turning the “public interest” into the best excuse and the sharpest tool for those in power — such as local governments — to deprive people of their right to own private property and their right to survival. The sad thing is that current legislation gives local residents and landowners no right to oppose expropriation. Despite legal requirements for public hearings, price negotiation between the government and landowners and reviews by the local land planning committees, these are all empty promises.

Local residents are closely tied to the land they call home, and have a different take on farmland from that of the government or big business. Such land should not be viewed from the economic aspect alone, because the safety and lives of local residents depend on this land and they identify with it on a spiritual level. It is exceedingly important, especially for those who are now in their 70s or 80s. They feel that if they have their land, there is hope that their lives and livelihoods will continue. Most Taiwanese farming villages are dealing with aging populations, but these elderly residents also have the fundamental right to survival, and this right should not be sacrificed on the altar of economic production value.

It goes without saying that the government should thoroughly investigate the impact that the fourth stage of the science park would have on local communities, culture and public welfare, and it should also respect the right of residents to choose. The government should evaluate the public interest based on relevant administrative procedures and regulations, and at the very least hold public hearings. This is the only way to avoid further social division and confrontation and to guarantee the rights and interests of the public.

The government should postpone the fourth stage of the science park until these issues have been resolved.

Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the Department of Land Economics at National Chengchi University .

TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG

這篇英文版是自由時報姊妹報 Taipei Times （ http://www.taipeitimes.com/News ） EDDY CHANG 翻譯後刊登於 2009/11/19 / Page 8 ， 並收錄於作者「土地關懷」部落格 http://sjhsu51545.blogspot.com/ 。