The recent referendum held in Pinglin Township favoring the opening of a Pinglin exit on the Taipei-Ilan Freeway led to the resignation of Environmental Protection Administrator Hao Lung-bin and focused public opinion on the issue of advisory referendums. The possibility that during the March presidential election next year referendums will be simultaneously held on entry into the World Health Organization, the fourth nuclear power station, and the reform of the National Assembly is also drawing close attention from observers.

In mid-September Pinglin Township passed a referendum with a 98% margin favoring the opening of a Pinglin exit on the Taipei-Ilan Freeway in order to give a boost to the local economy. The Ministry of Transportation and Communications gave its approval to the results, while the Environmental Protection Administration was unalterably opposed, citing its fear that the Feitsui Reservoir, Taipei's main water source, would become polluted. The Administration further expressed its hope that in the future environmental protection cases that had already undergone environmental impact assessments would be placed outside the purview of the referendum process. Premier Yu Shyi-kun ruled against this opinion, saying "professional expertise should not be placed above democracy." Administrator Hau Lung-bin immediately tendered his resignation.

Soon thereafter, Chichi Township in Nantou County passed a referendum by a large margin opposing the construction of an incinerator, and received a positive response from the government. Currently other localities are lining up to threaten the use of referendums to give expression to local aspirations. For example, Hsihu Township in Miaoli County is seeking to have a Hsihu exit built on the Central Second Freeway, Wulai Rural Township in Taipei County is demanding that the government abolish the toll booths that collect environmental maintenance fees in the Wulai Scenic Area, Penghu County is demanding the opening of tourist casinos, etc. In no time at all the referendum seems to have become the convenient new favorite for solving deadlocked disputes.

As debate rages over the referendum issue, those inside and outside government agree on some things while holding divergent views on others. In terms of agreement, both sides realize that although democratic government is essentially "representative government," duly elected representatives and officials are sometimes unable to carry out fully and impartially the duties entrusted to them by the electorate. To correct the insufficiencies of "indirect democracy" one must thus rely on the "direct democracy" of the popular referendum. This is an important element in the deepening and reform of the democratic process.

Once they have the right to hold referendums, people will be moved to study issues carefully, weigh the pros and cons and make decisions whose consequences they will be responsible for themselves. This process will evolve to the point where their sense of alienation from government will significantly diminish, where they will no longer feel like "dogs barking after a fire engine." In the end, this will lead toward the building of a profound public forum and a vigorous civil society.

The legitimacy of the referendum as a whole is not in question, but the parties in and out of government disagree on whether referendums should first have a legal foundation, whether they should have the force of law, whether the government may initiate a referendum, and whether there should be some areas off limits to the referendum process.

The ruling party's position is that although the "Referendum Law" has already been sent to the Legislative Yuan, the debate will be long and drawn out because the ruling party does not hold an absolute majority. To avoid filibustering and obstruction in the legislature that would stifle the expression of the people's will, referendums can be held without benefit of legal foundation. These referendums need not be binding but can be regarded as "advisory referendums."

Since referendums are the embodiment of the popular will, if major political issues such as amending the existing Constitution, writing a new constitution, or even instituting changes in sovereignty-questions to be dealt with at the constitutional level-are placed outside the purview of referendums, referendums become nothing more than so-called "bird cage" referendums. This type of democracy is limited, incomplete and points up the fear of and resistance to the popular will.

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) argue that although referendums clearly reflect the people's will, the democratic standard is still representative government and professional administration. Referendums cannot be raised to higher political levels without limit, and they cannot be entirely without restrictions. In the first place, they maintain, people are driven by their own individual interests and are frequently unable to take the broad view in considering public affairs. This "me first" attitude exacerbates conflicts of interest. Secondly, to avoid referendum issues being controlled by special-interest groups, laws must be passed to regulate public announcements, provide for the balanced presentation of information and guarantee the free flow of information.

In addition, given the continuing threat from across the strait, Taiwan finds itself in a unique position. As a result, the KMT and the PFP believe that sovereignty, the country's name and the national flag, and the nature of the Constitution are all sensitive issues and should all fall outside the purview of referendums to avoid national unrest and division.

In the referendum battle each side holds tenaciously to its own position, but one thing cannot be denied. Local referendums, both small and large, might very well lead to a few administrative changes of direction and delays; but what is currently a truly serious situation, and something that is on the minds of both sides, are referendum issues at the constitutional level. It is especially the many recent statements by President Chen Shui-bian calling for the "birth of a new constitution" in 2006 and a nationwide referendum enabling all citizens to "assist the birth" that will take the referendum debate to a new and higher level.

The referendum debate will not be concluded overnight, yet compared with three years ago when most citizens viewed referendums as "floods and savage beasts," i.e., something to be feared and avoided, it is obvious that the pace of democratization has continued unabated. It is just that the popular will is like "flowing water"-it is changeable, now going one way, now another. In today's Taiwan, where there is still plenty of room for improvement in democratic institutions and where there still exist great differences on the question of national identity, both sides must proceed cautiously. Only in this way will they truly be able to seize the moment and usher in real political reform and a deepening of the democratic process.