Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s policy speech signaled his desire to take advantage of the predicament of being a minority government to initiate a shift to a new kind of politics.

But whether the ruling Liberal Democratic Party as a whole shares his awareness of the need for a different style of politics remains open to question.

Ishiba’s commitment to ensuring “deliberative discussions” that tackle key policy issues in an effective and meaningful manner will be tested in the Diet session.

On Nov. 29, Ishiba delivered his first policy speech after the Oct. 27 Lower House election that left the ruling coalition of the LDP and its junior partner Komeito without a majority in the chamber.

At the outset, he quoted a passage from the policy speech of the Tanzan Ishibashi (1884-1973) Cabinet in February 1957, which stated, “We will establish a practice of exchanging opinions frankly and spare no effort in mutual cooperation.” In concluding his address, Ishiba again quoted from the 1957 speech delivered by proxy, saying, “With only the welfare of the entire nation in mind, I want to ensure exhaustive deliberations.”

While the Ishibashi Cabinet’s message was originally directed at the then-opposition Socialist Party, Ishiba stated that it exemplified “the ideal form of democracy.” Based on the LDP-Komeito coalition, he said, he will carefully listen to the opinions of other parties and aim to “achieve the broadest possible consensus.”

The ruling alliance has already reached an agreement with the opposition Democratic Party for the People on economic measures. The DPP’s demand that the government consider expanded basic income tax exemptions and gasoline tax cuts was included in Ishiba’s speech in the exact wording from the agreement document. It is clear that this is a gesture to seek the DPP’s approval for the supplementary budget bill, which was approved by the Cabinet on Nov. 29.

However, if all that happens is that the three parties pre-determine everything and the Diet merely “rubber-stamps” it, nothing will have really changed from the past.

The massive extra budget includes many projects and programs of questionable necessity and effectiveness. Unless Ishiba also listens to the claims of opposition parties other than the DPP and incorporates their demands and views into the spending plan to improve the blueprint, his approach to politics will be far from the “ideal form of democracy” to which he refers.

Ishiba also acknowledged the ruling coalition’s defeat in the Lower House election as a “rebuke from the people” and stated that embarking on political funding reforms was a matter of necessity. He promised to reach a conclusion by the end of the year regarding the re-amendment of the Political Fund Control Law and disclosure of how Diet members spend the allowance provided to cover expenses incurred in research, publicity, public engagements and accommodation.

However, the specific proposals he mentioned hardly constituted fundamental reform as they were limited to the abolition of policy activity expenses that parties distribute in the form of political funds to their members, and the establishment of a third-party watchdog organization.

If he emphasizes the importance of broad cooperation with the opposition parties, Ishiba cannot ignore the call to abolish political donations by businesses and other organizations as demanded by the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan and Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party).

Ishiba did not show any sign of changing his unwillingness to clarify the facts of the slush funds amassed and used by LDP factions or the responsibility of those involved in the scandal. Does he truly believe that this is the way to restore the people’s trust in politics?

He should understand that the fragility of his administration’s power base can only be compensated for by gaining the support of the people.

This Diet session lasts for about three weeks, until Dec. 21. If decisions are rushed due to lack of time, the session will not qualify as a deliberative discussion. Should the deliberations on the supplementary budget be concluded in the usual one week or so? A necessary extension of the session would seem to be obvious.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 30