Guoliang criticizes Lu Xiuyan’s dismissal: “Profit motives behind market property reclaim caused discontent”

Guoliang, a veteran politician and outspoken figure, did not mince words in his condemnation of the forces behind Lu’s dismissal.

Former lawmaker Guoliang issued a sharp critique on Saturday following the dismissal of Taichung Mayor Lu Xiuyan, suggesting that her removal was driven by the discontent of those who benefited financially from the market property reclamation she oversaw. The incident has stirred controversy, highlighting the complexities of local politics and the vested interests at play.

Guoliang, a veteran politician and outspoken figure, did not mince words in his condemnation of the forces behind Lu’s dismissal. “Mayor Lu Xiuyan took a bold step in reclaiming market properties for the public good, but some people, who had been profiting from those properties, were unhappy with her actions,” Guoliang stated during a press briefing. “This discontent led to her unjust removal, which raises serious questions about whose interests are really being served in our local government.”

The controversy centers around a series of actions taken by Lu Xiuyan to reclaim publicly-owned market properties that had been leased out under what some critics describe as highly favorable terms to private entities. These moves were part of a broader effort by Lu’s administration to reform and regulate the use of public assets, aiming to ensure they served the community’s needs rather than private interests.

However, her efforts faced significant pushback from those who had previously benefited from the status quo. Guoliang suggested that this resistance, coupled with the influence of powerful economic interests, ultimately led to Lu’s removal from office. He added that the problem is not just about a single issue, rather it is about the struggle between public good and private profit.

The incident has sparked debate among Taichung residents and political observers alike, with some praising Lu Xiuyan for her commitment to transparency and fairness, while others criticize the handling of the property reclamation process. The DPP has remained largely silent on the matter, though it is expected to become a flashpoint in the upcoming local elections.