Photo/Illutration Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba speaks at a meeting of the LDP’s political reform headquarters on Nov. 21. (Takeshi Iwashita)

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s proposal to fix the flawed political funding system is nothing but a mixture of small, insignificant changes that fall well short of the fundamental reforms that are needed.

Despite taking a drubbing in the Oct. 27 Lower House election that caused the ruling coalition to lose its majority, the LDP still seems to think it can get by with superficial measures. It has failed to tackle the challenge of revamping the ways political parties raise and use funds that lack transparency and have raised ethical concerns.

Fundamental reforms of political fund-raising, including restricting donations by companies and other organizations and eliminating opaque funds, are essential for restoring trust in politics, which has been tarnished by the funding scandal in the LDP.

The party has compiled a reform proposal to revise the amended Political Fund Control Law that was enacted in June. The amended law, which the LDP rushed through without a consensus from the opposition, is incomplete and leaves many loopholes.

The latest proposal is far from a fundamental reform and deals mainly with implementing items listed in the supplementary provisions attached to the June legislation.

The new LDP proposal includes the “abolition” of notorious “seisaku katsudo-hi” (policy activity expenses), or political funds that parties distribute to their members and lawmakers. They are not required to disclose how these funds are used.

The amended law had stipulated “disclosure after 10 years” for the expenses.

However, the proposal leaves room for non-disclosure to the public, contingent on third-party audits, in cases involving diplomatic secrets or the privacy of expenditure recipients. This should not become a new “black box” invisible to outsiders, allowing arbitrary implementation.

The proposal specifies the establishment of a third-party organization to check political funds, but it remains unclear whether its independence and neutrality will be guaranteed.

We cannot adequately evaluate the effectiveness of the envisioned watchdog without seeing the specific system design, including its roles and powers.

To enhance the effectiveness of “constant surveillance by the people,” which is the objective of the Political Fund Control Law, digitizing the income and expenditure reports submitted online is a logical step.

The current rule, which limits the data storage period to three years, should also be revised to allow for permanent verification.

The issue of donations by businesses and other organizations, which was left unaddressed in political reforms 30 years ago, was not addressed this time either.

Promises to review these donations following the introduction of political party subsidies funded by taxes have been ignored. How long do the ruling parties intend to continue the double-dipping of state subsidies and private donations from organizations?

Opposition parties, including the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, position the abolition of corporate and organizational donations as a key element of fundamental reform. We call for thorough bipartisan discussions on the issue to reach a resolution that satisfies the public.

Building a common ground for political activities inherently requires broad consensus from both ruling and opposition parties. The ruling coalition, having lost its numerical advantage, needs to return to these basics.

Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba stated, “Our party should lead in providing answers to the issues of political funds.” He also voiced his determination to achieve a fresh revision within the year.

However, if he fails to ensure reforms that dispel public mistrust, Ishiba is unlikely to gain support for continuing his administration.

Ishiba also needs to make fresh, more serious efforts to investigate the funding scandal, which was insufficiently probed. This includes re-investigating the facts and demanding that LDP lawmakers implicated in the scandal who have failed to explain the facts answer questions at the Diet’s Deliberative Council on Political Ethics.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 22