{"error":false,"id":["170867"],"data":{"IVOD_ID":170867,"IVOD_URL":"https://ivod.ly.gov.tw/Play/Clip/1M/170867","日期":"2026-08-07","會議資料":{"會議代碼":"院會-11-5-21","會議代碼:str":"第11屆第5會期第21次會議","屆":11,"會期":5,"會次":21,"臨時會會次":null,"種類":"院會","標題":"第11屆第5會期第21次會議"},"影片種類":"Clip","開始時間":"2026-08-07T09:03:54+08:00","結束時間":"2026-08-07T09:07:04+08:00","影片長度":"00:03:10","支援功能":["ai-transcript"],"video_url":"https://ivod-lyvod.cdn.hinet.net/vod_1/_definst_/mp4:1MClips/ad61ae81034090adacb8ae3d8c0180e9c4497246c196aedf79dd53ee1cf2b7e51027fd842694b5725ea18f28b6918d91.mp4/playlist.m3u8","委員名稱":"林倩綺","委員發言時間":"09:03:54 - 09:07:04","會議時間":"2026-08-07T09:00:00+08:00","會議名稱":"第11屆第5會期第21次會議（事由：一、討論事項：本院內政委員會報告審查內政部函送國家住宅及都市更新中心115年度預算書案等6案。二、8月7日上午9時至10時為國是論壇時間。三、8月7日下午5時至6時為處理臨時提案時間。）","transcript":{"pyannote":[{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":2.6634687500000003,"end":6.3590937499999995},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":6.7134687500000005,"end":11.607218750000001},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":12.68721875,"end":23.554718750000003},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":23.84159375,"end":27.891593750000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":28.296593750000003,"end":62.384093750000005},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":62.67096875,"end":75.20909375000001},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":75.74909375,"end":85.35096875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":85.45221875,"end":114.32534375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":114.98346875,"end":143.11409375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":143.48534375,"end":149.57721875000001},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":149.81346875,"end":160.39409375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":160.57971875,"end":175.96971875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":176.07096875000002,"end":176.10471875000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":176.15534375000001,"end":186.12846875000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":187.95096875000002,"end":189.77346875}],"whisperx":[{"start":0,"end":6.4,"text":"院長 復會同仁 媒體朋友 全國民眾 大家好"},{"start":6.4,"end":11.78,"text":"黑箱決策護航業者 食安官員下台負責"},{"start":11.78,"end":15.88,"text":"獨有事件延燒至今 國人最想知道的是"},{"start":15.88,"end":18.18,"text":"油品到底流到哪裡"},{"start":18.18,"end":23.56,"text":"誰決定只下架含量達20%以上的加工產品"},{"start":23.56,"end":27.900000000000002,"text":"政府又為什麼遲遲不把決策過程說清楚"},{"start":28.299999999999997,"end":31.4,"text":"7月4號食藥署召開專家會議後"},{"start":31.4,"end":36.2,"text":"決定針對使用問題油達20%以上的加工產品"},{"start":36.2,"end":37.94,"text":"擴大預防性下架"},{"start":37.94,"end":41.64,"text":"定於20%的則未全面下架"},{"start":41.64,"end":44.14,"text":"但這項重要的食安決策"},{"start":44.14,"end":48.32,"text":"整個社會問了一個月相關的紀錄才終於公開"},{"start":48.32,"end":51.92,"text":"本席要問食安決策有什麼不能讓人民知道的"},{"start":51.92,"end":54.22,"text":"如果有充分的科學依據"},{"start":54.22,"end":56.56,"text":"就應該第一時間公開說明"},{"start":56.56,"end":58.260000000000005,"text":"如果是行政裁量"},{"start":58.260000000000005,"end":61.260000000000005,"text":"更要交代是誰決定依據為何"},{"start":61.260000000000005,"end":62.660000000000004,"text":"由誰負責"},{"start":62.660000000000004,"end":66,"text":"如今會議內容曝光更讓外界質疑"},{"start":66,"end":70.5,"text":"決策過程竟然出現第二層加工產品全面下降"},{"start":70.5,"end":75.7,"text":"將會牽連到第三層第四層的產品的考量"},{"start":75.7,"end":77.6,"text":"食安單位最應該擔心的"},{"start":77.6,"end":81.14,"text":"應該是人民會不會吃下有疑慮的食品"},{"start":81.14,"end":84.28,"text":"而不是下架會牽連多少業者"},{"start":84.28,"end":85.52000000000001,"text":"食安問題"},{"start":85.53999999999999,"end":89.32,"text":"政府的第一順位永遠應該是國人的健康"},{"start":89.32,"end":91.16,"text":"整個社會沒有辦法接受的是"},{"start":91.16,"end":95.06,"text":"整件事情從通報下架到資訊揭露"},{"start":95.06,"end":98.52,"text":"一再出現標準不清責任不明"},{"start":98.52,"end":101.22,"text":"同樣是自主檢驗發現原料異常"},{"start":101.22,"end":104.84,"text":"政府對不同業者是不是適用同一標準"},{"start":104.84,"end":107.19999999999999,"text":"原料是不是屬於食安規範下"},{"start":107.19999999999999,"end":109.44,"text":"應該主動通報的範圍"},{"start":109.44,"end":111.56,"text":"不能因為涉及公營事業"},{"start":111.56,"end":114.94,"text":"台糖就出現了另外一套標準"},{"start":115.02,"end":118,"text":"更嚴重的是食安風暴延燒至今"},{"start":118,"end":121.84,"text":"真正該負責的人沒有負起政治責任"},{"start":121.84,"end":123.8,"text":"行政院食安辦主任"},{"start":123.8,"end":126.88,"text":"本來應該站在全民食安的第一線"},{"start":126.88,"end":129.44,"text":"結果如果會議中優先考量的是"},{"start":129.44,"end":132.04,"text":"下架是否會牽連更多業者"},{"start":132.04,"end":135.88,"text":"而不是如何完整遵回有疑慮的產品"},{"start":135.88,"end":138.22,"text":"就是嚴重的角色挫製"},{"start":138.22,"end":140.46,"text":"食安辦應該是要為人民把關"},{"start":140.46,"end":143.56,"text":"而不是為替業者來擔心"},{"start":143.58,"end":145.88,"text":"食藥署長同樣不能置身事外"},{"start":145.88,"end":147.92000000000002,"text":"20%標準的行程"},{"start":147.92000000000002,"end":149.92000000000002,"text":"決策推遲公開"},{"start":149.92000000000002,"end":152.16,"text":"食藥署有不可推卸的責任"},{"start":152.16,"end":154.22,"text":"本席要求食安辦主任"},{"start":154.22,"end":156.9,"text":"食藥署署長為決策適當"},{"start":156.9,"end":159,"text":"和資訊不透明負責"},{"start":159,"end":160.7,"text":"應該辭職下台"},{"start":160.7,"end":162.76,"text":"人民要的是完整的真相"},{"start":162.76,"end":165.24,"text":"透明的資訊跟政治責任"},{"start":165.24,"end":167.68,"text":"不再不是中央一再的甩鍋"},{"start":167.68,"end":169.4,"text":"該下台的就該下台"},{"start":169.4,"end":171.12,"text":"該負責的就該負責"},{"start":171.12,"end":173.28,"text":"行政院不能再用政治攻防"},{"start":173.3,"end":176.3,"text":"來掩蓋食安治理的失能"},{"start":176.3,"end":178,"text":"食安沒有政黨色彩"},{"start":178,"end":179.54,"text":"更沒有蓋牌的空間"},{"start":179.54,"end":180.74,"text":"不要再蓋牌"},{"start":180.74,"end":181.98,"text":"不要再拖延"},{"start":181.98,"end":183.94,"text":"人民要的是安全的食品"},{"start":183.94,"end":186.44,"text":"不是政府一個又一個的藉口"}]}},"supported_relations":[],"relations":[]}