Photo/Illutration Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba speaks at a Lower House Budget Committee meeting on March 4. (Takeshi Iwashita)

The initial budget for fiscal 2025 cleared the Lower House on March 4.

This marked the first time in 70 years that the initial budget amount was reduced by the Diet.

But there also was a great deal of interparty negotiations outside the Diet, which was a far cry from the exhaustive budgetary deliberation that was expected under the minority coalition government.

Questions about the relevance of individual budgetary items and their funding sources have also remained unanswered. We urge every political party to remind itself of its responsibility to improve the quality of the national budget.

The budget was approved by a majority vote of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, its junior coalition partner, Komeito, and the opposition Nippon Ishin (Japan Innovation Party).

Major revisions to the government plan included Nippon Ishin’s demand for a 110 billion yen ($733.3 million) increase in expenditures to make up for the elimination of the income ceiling to realize tuition-free senior high school education, and a 620 billion yen decrease in revenue from substantially raising the non-taxable income level as discussed with the Democratic Party for the People (DPP).

As a result, an additional revenue source in excess of 700 billion yen became necessary, and the amount was put together by taking 250 billion yen from the reserve fund, 280 billion yen from non-tax revenues, and by juggling the special account for local allocation tax.

Ultimately, the government’s initially proposed budget of 115.5 trillion yen was shrunk by 340 billion yen.

However, this “reduction” is only in appearance. Money in the reserve fund is meant for use in unexpected emergencies such as natural disasters, which means that in the absence of such calamities, the right thing to do is to spend it on reducing government bond issues.

As for non-tax revenues, they just consist of a medley of fees collected from extra-governmental organizations and refunds from vaccination-related foundations. In other words, they are all temporary revenues and can hardly be considered as stable revenue sources.

With regard to tuition-free senior high school education, numerous concerns have been raised, including the likely deterioration of public senior high schools.

But the LDP, Komeito and Nippon Ishin intend to increase fiscal subsidies by several hundred billion yen in fiscal 2026.

The parties say they will “secure stable funding through administrative and fiscal reforms.” However, they are relying on future “expenditure reforms” for budget increases related to defense and policies regarding children. How are they going to scrape out the needed funding?

The higher non-taxable income level benefits a majority of taxpayers and this strongly suggests "dole-out politics." And because the policy’s purpose itself was never clear to begin with and the negotiations among the parties concerned kept going off track, the resultant system is skewed.

During the budgetary deliberations in the Diet, a new attempt was made at examining each agenda with the government ministry or agency in charge.

The Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) challenged the bloating of mushrooming foundations, but the government remained reluctant to consider reductions, and only very little of the examination efforts were reflected in the resultant draft budget.

The ruling coalition welcomed “individual deals” with Nippon Ishin and the DPP to secure a majority. There is no question that the ruling coalition made light of deliberations in the Diet.

Nippon Ishin and the DPP clearly prioritized the promotion of their own policies over securing the revenue sources for the overall budget, thereby failing to act as responsible political parties.

And the CDP, too, should be questioned for demanding a permanent gasoline tax reduction.

Which policies should be prioritized and how best to allocate the budget under the fiscal constraints?

If the Upper House does not address these questions in all seriousness, it does not deserve its nicknames of “the chamber of reconsideration” and “the chamber of good sense.”

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 5