iVOD / 170933
本逐字稿內容由 AI 自動生成，可能包含錯誤、遺漏或誤譯之處。請使用者務必與原始影片音訊內容交叉比對，以確保資訊正確性。另可參考立法院日後釋出的正式公報以取得最終權威版本。
林月琴 @ 立法院第11屆第5會期社會福利及衛生環境委員會公聽會（事由：舉行「《氣候變遷因應法》碳費徵收、減量誘因及溫室氣體管理基金運用制度」公聽會）
| Start Time | End Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00,000 | 00:00:07,000 | 在場的專家學者還有我們的行政部門 |
| 00:00:07,000 | 00:00:11,000 | 那我想今天要談碳費 |
| 00:00:11,000 | 00:00:16,000 | 我想碳費的提升跟優惠的一個匯率的檢討 |
| 00:00:16,000 | 00:00:19,000 | 今天在場很多專家學者都會提到 |
| 00:00:19,000 | 00:00:20,000 | 我也很認同 |
| 00:00:20,000 | 00:00:22,000 | 那我要切入角度 |
| 00:00:22,000 | 00:00:25,000 | 就如同我剛剛前面開場提的 |
| 00:00:25,000 | 00:00:29,000 | 因為我自己來自社會福利工作者 |
| 00:00:29,000 | 00:00:31,000 | 那我一直在關心 |
| 00:00:31,000 | 00:00:34,000 | 針對環境議題的這個課題 |
| 00:00:34,000 | 00:00:35,000 | 我比較關心的是 |
| 00:00:35,000 | 00:00:39,000 | 到底下一代承擔多少的氣候成本 |
| 00:00:39,000 | 00:00:42,000 | 還有這是在碳費在收的時候 |
| 00:00:42,000 | 00:00:45,000 | 到底對於我們的弱勢勞工 |
| 00:00:45,000 | 00:00:48,000 | 跟從社會福利的角度來看的話 |
| 00:00:48,000 | 00:00:51,000 | 到底有多少人會受到影響 |
| 00:00:51,000 | 00:00:53,000 | 甚至我比較堅持的是 |
| 00:00:53,000 | 00:00:55,000 | 不遺落任何人的一個 |
| 00:00:55,000 | 00:00:57,000 | 這是一個公正轉型最基本的要求 |
| 00:00:57,000 | 00:01:01,000 | 同時也是我在政策規劃的價值立場 |
| 00:01:01,000 | 00:01:04,000 | 因為我始終認為把弱勢的人 |
| 00:01:04,000 | 00:01:07,000 | 放在政策設計的起點 |
| 00:01:07,000 | 00:01:11,000 | 最後守住的才會是多數人的生活安全 |
| 00:01:11,000 | 00:01:16,000 | 碳費是讓我們排放者付出代價 |
| 00:01:16,000 | 00:01:18,000 | 促使企業去檢探 |
| 00:01:18,000 | 00:01:22,000 | 可是如果成本去做轉嫁的時候 |
| 00:01:22,000 | 00:01:25,000 | 譬如說商品的價格提高 |
| 00:01:25,000 | 00:01:28,000 | 甚至電價提高 |
| 00:01:28,000 | 00:01:30,000 | 影響的是誰?影響的是弱勢 |
| 00:01:30,000 | 00:01:33,000 | 如果說在做收碳費 |
| 00:01:33,000 | 00:01:35,000 | 企業在做轉型的時候 |
| 00:01:35,000 | 00:01:37,000 | 某一些的高風險的勞工 |
| 00:01:37,000 | 00:01:38,000 | 所謂高風險的勞工 |
| 00:01:38,000 | 00:01:41,000 | 因為我們畢竟碳費的優惠 |
| 00:01:41,000 | 00:01:43,000 | 並沒有綁勞工的權益條款 |
| 00:01:43,000 | 00:01:47,000 | 所以會不會有減薪、裁員 |
| 00:01:47,000 | 00:01:49,000 | 甚至造成失業 |
| 00:01:49,000 | 00:01:51,000 | 所以最後這些的承擔 |
| 00:01:51,000 | 00:01:54,000 | 就會是勞工跟我們的弱勢家庭 |
| 00:01:54,000 | 00:01:55,000 | 所以我們不能只問說 |
| 00:01:55,000 | 00:01:58,000 | 到底收了多少、減了多少的碳 |
| 00:01:58,000 | 00:02:01,000 | 更要問的是誰先受到衝擊 |
| 00:02:01,000 | 00:02:04,000 | 還有誰又能夠得到真正支持 |
| 00:02:04,000 | 00:02:06,000 | 因為我想這不是抽象的擔心 |
| 00:02:06,000 | 00:02:09,000 | 今年首期單費已經完成繳費了 |
| 00:02:09,000 | 00:02:11,000 | 我們現在看到簡報上 |
| 00:02:11,000 | 00:02:13,000 | 剛剛也是有報告說 |
| 00:02:13,000 | 00:02:15,000 | 已經收到49.7億元 |
| 00:02:15,000 | 00:02:20,000 | 總共有461廠、240家的企業 |
| 00:02:20,000 | 00:02:23,000 | 這個金額49.7億 |
| 00:02:23,000 | 00:02:28,000 | 依法去納入我們的溫管基金來運用 |
| 00:02:28,000 | 00:02:29,000 | 可是審計部也指出 |
| 00:02:29,000 | 00:02:31,000 | 截至到今年的4月10號 |
| 00:02:31,000 | 00:02:34,000 | 我們的氣候變遷運營法的施行 |
| 00:02:34,000 | 00:02:36,000 | 已經超過三年了 |
| 00:02:36,000 | 00:02:39,000 | 法定的國家公正轉型的行動計畫 |
| 00:02:39,000 | 00:02:40,000 | 還沒有完成 |
| 00:02:40,000 | 00:02:43,000 | 國防費的4月、5月間 |
| 00:02:43,000 | 00:02:45,000 | 啟動的兩階段的意見徵詢 |
| 00:02:45,000 | 00:02:47,000 | 最新公開的說明 |
| 00:02:47,000 | 00:02:51,000 | 是在終整個部門的政策後 |
| 00:02:51,000 | 00:02:52,000 | 嚴厲行動計畫 |
| 00:02:52,000 | 00:02:54,000 | 已經超過三年了 |
| 00:02:54,000 | 00:02:55,000 | 換句話說 |
| 00:02:55,000 | 00:02:57,000 | 碳費已經實際收取 |
| 00:02:57,000 | 00:03:00,000 | 減碳工具也走在前面了 |
| 00:03:00,000 | 00:03:01,000 | 可是誰會受影響 |
| 00:03:01,000 | 00:03:03,000 | 由誰來做協助 |
| 00:03:03,000 | 00:03:05,000 | 而且資源如何送達 |
| 00:03:05,000 | 00:03:07,000 | 跟成效怎麼追蹤 |
| 00:03:07,000 | 00:03:10,000 | 我覺得制度仍在後邊來做刻補 |
| 00:03:10,000 | 00:03:14,000 | 可是實際上這些搞爆弱勢家庭 |
| 00:03:14,000 | 00:03:15,000 | 已經在承擔 |
| 00:03:15,000 | 00:03:18,000 | 勞工朋友也在承擔 |
| 00:03:18,000 | 00:03:20,000 | 這個碳費收取之後的 |
| 00:03:20,000 | 00:03:22,000 | 到底有沒有幫助到他們 |
| 00:03:23,000 | 00:03:24,000 | 接下來我就要談的是 |
| 00:03:24,000 | 00:03:26,000 | 我們的碳費跟節能政策 |
| 00:03:26,000 | 00:03:28,000 | 到底能不能走到弱勢家庭家戶 |
| 00:03:28,000 | 00:03:30,000 | 因為台大風險中心也調查 |
| 00:03:30,000 | 00:03:33,000 | 844戶的經濟弱勢家戶 |
| 00:03:33,000 | 00:03:37,000 | 它有22.75%不知道加電節能補助 |
| 00:03:37,000 | 00:03:40,000 | 22.27%知道 |
| 00:03:40,000 | 00:03:42,000 | 卻因負擔不起區域費用 |
| 00:03:42,000 | 00:03:45,000 | 因為我們都有所謂的自付配殼款 |
| 00:03:45,000 | 00:03:47,000 | 而且未更換二手 |
| 00:03:47,000 | 00:03:49,000 | 老舊的跟損壞的加電 |
| 00:03:49,000 | 00:03:52,000 | 所以59.83%為租屋者 |
| 00:03:52,000 | 00:03:54,000 | 所以資訊跟支付能力 |
| 00:03:54,000 | 00:03:55,000 | 跟租屋的協調 |
| 00:03:55,000 | 00:03:58,000 | 能來把這些家庭擋在門外 |
| 00:03:58,000 | 00:03:59,000 | 那我要強調的是 |
| 00:03:59,000 | 00:04:01,000 | 未來修法我的修法方向 |
| 00:04:01,000 | 00:04:03,000 | 還是基於碳費收入有限 |
| 00:04:03,000 | 00:04:08,000 | 就應該優先投入最難自行調適的人 |
| 00:04:08,000 | 00:04:10,000 | 國外不是沒有經驗 |
| 00:04:10,000 | 00:04:11,000 | 我想剛剛湯主任也講了 |
| 00:04:11,000 | 00:04:12,000 | 國外的很多經驗 |
| 00:04:12,000 | 00:04:13,000 | 那我們這邊你看 |
| 00:04:13,000 | 00:04:14,000 | 美國加州規定 |
| 00:04:14,000 | 00:04:16,000 | 碳交易的拍賣收入的 |
| 00:04:16,000 | 00:04:18,000 | 氣候投資至少35% |
| 00:04:18,000 | 00:04:21,000 | 會要再提供給誰 |
| 00:04:21,000 | 00:04:24,000 | 提供給優先族群來受益 |
| 00:04:24,000 | 00:04:25,000 | 那這些人是誰 |
| 00:04:25,000 | 00:04:26,000 | 不利處境的社區 |
| 00:04:26,000 | 00:04:28,000 | 和低收入的社區 |
| 00:04:28,000 | 00:04:30,000 | 和低收入戶的家庭 |
| 00:04:30,000 | 00:04:33,000 | 那韓國也在2026年的 |
| 00:04:33,000 | 00:04:35,000 | 4月7號完成修法了 |
| 00:04:35,000 | 00:04:39,000 | 那將支持氣候危機的脆弱族群 |
| 00:04:39,000 | 00:04:42,000 | 納入到氣候應對的基金的用途 |
| 00:04:42,000 | 00:04:45,000 | 所以我覺得並規定 |
| 00:04:45,000 | 00:04:47,000 | 國家跟地方政府應該掌握 |
| 00:04:47,000 | 00:04:49,000 | 去處境提出應應的 |
| 00:04:49,000 | 00:04:52,000 | 氣候災害及延伸的資源 |
| 00:04:52,000 | 00:04:54,000 | 那我到現在還是看不出來 |
| 00:04:54,000 | 00:04:57,000 | 我如果剛剛講勞工會受到影響 |
| 00:04:57,000 | 00:05:00,000 | 那我們對於各產業減碳受衝擊的 |
| 00:05:00,000 | 00:05:03,000 | 勞工清測跟評估有出來了嗎 |
| 00:05:03,000 | 00:05:07,000 | 甚至我覺得今天優先補助企業 |
| 00:05:07,000 | 00:05:08,000 | 甚至有些 |
| 00:05:08,000 | 00:05:10,000 | 就企業主張要優先補助 |
| 00:05:10,000 | 00:05:12,000 | 在企業的減碳技術裡面 |
| 00:05:12,000 | 00:05:15,000 | 那到底勞工跟弱勢補助 |
| 00:05:15,000 | 00:05:17,000 | 會不會在你基金分配的時候 |
| 00:05:17,000 | 00:05:19,000 | 就變成是邊緣化 |
| 00:05:19,000 | 00:05:20,000 | 所以我看到台灣的 |
| 00:05:20,000 | 00:05:22,000 | 氣候變遷因應法 |
| 00:05:22,000 | 00:05:24,000 | 有把調適跟公正轉型列為基金用途 |
| 00:05:24,000 | 00:05:28,000 | 可是沒有訂定任何對弱勢的保障 |
| 00:05:28,000 | 00:05:30,000 | 甚至沒有要求地方政府 |
| 00:05:30,000 | 00:05:33,000 | 依弱勢的受益那個程度評分 |
| 00:05:33,000 | 00:05:34,000 | 所以我認為 |
| 00:05:34,000 | 00:05:36,000 | 我覺得嚴定補助機制的時候 |
| 00:05:36,000 | 00:05:40,000 | 應該把對不利處境群體的實質 |
| 00:05:40,000 | 00:05:42,000 | 支持列為評分的項目 |
| 00:05:42,000 | 00:05:44,000 | 而且碳費的支應的調適計畫 |
| 00:05:44,000 | 00:05:46,000 | 也應該公開我們的服務對象 |
| 00:05:46,000 | 00:05:48,000 | 甚至資源流向跟風險改善 |
| 00:05:48,000 | 00:05:51,000 | 應該讓碳費優先保護 |
| 00:05:51,000 | 00:05:53,000 | 最容易受到衝擊的人 |
| 00:05:53,000 | 00:05:55,000 | 才是符合氣候增益 |
| 00:05:55,000 | 00:06:00,000 | 而且也能夠提升我們的公共的信任度 |
| 00:06:00,000 | 00:06:03,000 | 那目前大家看到 |
| 00:06:03,000 | 00:06:07,000 | 115年度我們的溫室氣體的管理基金 |
| 00:06:07,000 | 00:06:10,000 | 編了1億4500萬元 |
| 00:06:10,000 | 00:06:12,000 | 來補助地方辦理氣候工作 |
| 00:06:12,000 | 00:06:16,000 | 減碳的永續加元跟高溫的防護地圖 |
| 00:06:16,000 | 00:06:18,000 | 公開的第二劑補助 |
| 00:06:18,000 | 00:06:21,000 | 也可見現是跟計畫跟撥補的金額 |
| 00:06:21,000 | 00:06:23,000 | 可是我們還是看不出來 |
| 00:06:23,000 | 00:06:25,000 | 就是服務的多少脆弱人口 |
| 00:06:25,000 | 00:06:26,000 | 風險是否下降 |
| 00:06:26,000 | 00:06:29,000 | 企業單同時也有同樣的問題 |
| 00:06:29,000 | 00:06:32,000 | 402廠已核定了自主的減量計畫 |
| 00:06:32,000 | 00:06:35,000 | 並取得優惠的費率 |
| 00:06:35,000 | 00:06:37,000 | 依法每月4月底應該要 |
| 00:06:37,000 | 00:06:39,000 | 提交前一年的執行報告 |
| 00:06:39,000 | 00:06:42,000 | 環境部應該在年底前去完成查核 |
| 00:06:42,000 | 00:06:44,000 | 可是我們現在看到平台 |
| 00:06:44,000 | 00:06:47,000 | 應該要主要公開的核定目標費率跟措施 |
| 00:06:47,000 | 00:06:49,000 | 都還沒有公開我們的年度報告 |
| 00:06:49,000 | 00:06:52,000 | 個別措施的預估減量 |
| 00:06:52,000 | 00:06:56,000 | 投入的成本跟首年度的查核的結果 |
| 00:06:56,000 | 00:06:58,000 | 所以公民團體還是很難 |
| 00:06:58,000 | 00:07:00,000 | 從這邊去看到 |
| 00:07:00,000 | 00:07:04,000 | 我們的減碳是不是如期的再發生 |
| 00:07:04,000 | 00:07:06,000 | 也就是達到目標冷媒 |
| 00:07:07,000 | 00:07:10,000 | 所以我覺得今年7月底發布的補助辦法 |
| 00:07:10,000 | 00:07:14,000 | 為名列我們的公正轉型的審查條件 |
| 00:07:14,000 | 00:07:17,000 | 而且還明文排除自主減量計畫 |
| 00:07:17,000 | 00:07:21,000 | 我覺得貸款信用保證與利息貼補要點 |
| 00:07:21,000 | 00:07:24,000 | 還是難以停留在草案 |
| 00:07:24,000 | 00:07:26,000 | 所以我們希望環境部這邊 |
| 00:07:26,000 | 00:07:29,000 | 是不是應該針對後續企業 |
| 00:07:29,000 | 00:07:31,000 | 跟地方補助的計畫公告 |
| 00:07:31,000 | 00:07:32,000 | 跟審查跟成果報告 |
| 00:07:32,000 | 00:07:35,000 | 都應該納入衝擊盤點 |
| 00:07:35,000 | 00:07:38,000 | 勞資跟利害關係人協調 |
| 00:07:38,000 | 00:07:39,000 | 勞動力轉型計畫 |
| 00:07:39,000 | 00:07:42,000 | 以及脆弱人口的收益指標 |
| 00:07:42,000 | 00:07:45,000 | 所以政府不能說只證明錢花了 |
| 00:07:45,000 | 00:07:47,000 | 更要讓社會看見減了多少 |
| 00:07:47,000 | 00:07:52,000 | 誰受到影響誰又能夠真正得到保障 |
| 00:07:52,000 | 00:07:53,000 | 最後我們還是期待 |
| 00:07:53,000 | 00:07:55,000 | 因為這個我已經質詢過 |
| 00:07:55,000 | 00:07:57,000 | 也跟環境部溝通過 |
| 00:07:57,000 | 00:08:01,000 | 是不是邀請國際委員來審查 |
| 00:08:01,000 | 00:08:04,000 | 因為的確我們的國際的處境 |
| 00:08:04,000 | 00:08:05,000 | 事實上受到限制 |
| 00:08:05,000 | 00:08:10,000 | 可是CRC CRPD都還是邀請國際委員來審查 |
| 00:08:10,000 | 00:08:11,000 | 這有什麼好處呢 |
| 00:08:11,000 | 00:08:13,000 | 因為第一個你可以邀請公民團體 |
| 00:08:13,000 | 00:08:16,000 | 一起來跟你確定整個的 |
| 00:08:16,000 | 00:08:18,000 | 目前的整個的狀況 |
| 00:08:18,000 | 00:08:21,000 | 第二個事實上也可以有國號部會 |
| 00:08:21,000 | 00:08:23,000 | 因為今天環境的治理 |
| 00:08:23,000 | 00:08:26,000 | 並不是只有單一的環境部 |
| 00:08:26,000 | 00:08:28,000 | 氣候的編遷的這些事實上 |
| 00:08:28,000 | 00:08:30,000 | 是要各部會一起來做 |
| 00:08:30,000 | 00:08:34,000 | 所以我認為這個應該要去執行 |
| 00:08:34,000 | 00:08:36,000 | 部長也有承諾說 |
| 00:08:36,000 | 00:08:39,000 | 接下來要邀請國際委員來做審查 |
| 00:08:39,000 | 00:08:42,000 | 所以本會期我大概也請部長 |
| 00:08:42,000 | 00:08:44,000 | 要先挹注資源來推動事辦 |
| 00:08:44,000 | 00:08:46,000 | 既然部長答應的話 |
| 00:08:46,000 | 00:08:49,000 | 我覺得應該要先去處理經費的問題 |
| 00:08:49,000 | 00:08:51,000 | 接下來我們會請環境部 |
| 00:08:51,000 | 00:08:54,000 | 要給我們明確的時程辦理的組織單位 |
| 00:08:54,000 | 00:08:57,000 | 跟經費規模來逐步補齊法規 |
| 00:08:57,000 | 00:09:00,000 | 建立政府正式回應跟後續追蹤 |
| 00:09:00,000 | 00:09:02,000 | 因為我覺得這不是單一次的國際活動 |
| 00:09:02,000 | 00:09:05,000 | 我們是希望能夠成為長期運作的 |
| 00:09:05,000 | 00:09:07,000 | 氣候治理的制度 |
| 00:09:07,000 | 00:09:09,000 | 那就要麻煩環境部 |
| 00:09:09,000 | 00:09:11,000 | 以上謝謝 |
| 00:09:11,000 | 00:09:14,000 | 好謝謝林育行召集委員的發言 |
| 00:09:14,000 | 00:09:18,000 | 下一位請台灣大學公衛學院 |
| 00:09:18,000 | 00:09:20,000 | 專門助理教授尚教授 |