Mainland Affairs Council

MAC Regular Press Briefing

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

The MAC will assist NPM delegation in using simulation to make overall plans for exchanges between the two palace museums across the Strait and provide recommendations

QUESTION: With regard to the exchanges between the Taipei-based National Palace Museum (NPM) and the Beijing-based Palace Museum, Government Information Office Minister Su Jun-bin indicated in the morning of February 12 that the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) and the NPM will conduct further negotiations. What is the current progress of the negotiations? What recommendations has the MAC provided to the NPM?

DEPUTY MINISTER LIU:

■ The negotiations mentioned by Minister Su should refer to the fact that the MAC will assist the NPM in using simulation to make overall plans. The NPM hopes to come up with the best results in conducting professional exchanges of cultural relics, but in the course of such exchanges, it is unavoidable for the NPM to touch on certain sensitive issues. Therefore, Minister Su was hoping that the MAC could provide the NPM with recommendations and assist the NPM in conducting a scenario-building exercise of the events, so that the NPM will be more prepared in dealing with the approaching exchange activities and come up with the best results in such professional exchanges.

■ The Taipei-based NPM is an administrative organ and therefore is persistent in using its official name the National Palace Museum in carrying out exchange activities, with which the MAC is entirely in agreement. As for the exchanges of cultural relics, the MAC has also provided general recommendations. For example, there are certain requirements regarding the exchanges of cultural relics, which are stipulated in the Act Governing Relations Between People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area. Moreover, the MAC also hopes that we can provide the NPM with more relevant information in future exchanges. NPM Director Chou Kung-shin recently paid a visit to the Beijing-based Palace Museum mainly because the director at the Beijing-based museum has already visited Taiwan for exchanges. NPM Director Chou hoped that she could pay a return visit on the foundation of cultural relics exchanges. There was nothing sensitive in these affairs after all.

QUESTION: Which stipulation in the Act mentions about cultural relics? Moreover, the Palace Museum in Beijing indicated that the two entities are “One Palace Museum, Two Halls.” How do we address this matter in the future?

DEPUTY MINISTER LIU: What the director of Beijing’s Palace Museum stated must have been “One Palace, Two Museums.” What he meant was that there was only one Imperial Palace, but the treasure relics are now being stored in two separate museums: one in Taipei and one in Beijing. Article 39 of the Act Governing Relations Between People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area stipulates that, “Chinese historic relics of the Mainland Area permitted by the competent authorities to be imported into the Taiwan Area for public display or exhibition may be re-exported.” The third paragraph in the same article mentions that, “Rules governing the granting of permission referred to in Paragraph 1 shall be drafted by the competent authorities concerned and submitted to the Executive Yuan for approval.” Therefore, there is a legal basis for this matter. In the future any relic that has been permitted for importation shall be re-exported, and this is guaranteed by the law. We will continue to exert efforts to cherish and display the NPM’s precious historical relics.

Government will not consider allowing Taiwanese people to serve as CPPCC members at the present stage

QUESTION: What is the MAC’s opinion regarding Taiwanese businessmen in the Mainland serving as local representatives or “specially appointed members” of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC)? Will the issue of “deregulation” be considered?

DEPUTY MINISTER LIU: In accordance with the current stipulations under the Act Governing Relations Between People of he Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area, as well as relevant announcements, the CPPCC is considered to be a political body, and the MAC’s position on the handling of this issue has not changed. Concerning the present case, the MAC will investigate as soon as possible the field and scope of the so-called “specially appointed” CPPCC members to see if there is any difference in their role from the average members. As for the Taiwanese businessmen, if they need the assistance of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), the MAC will request the SEF to relay the relevant information based on the precedents and will make further investigations.