Photo/Illutration Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi speaks in the Lower House Budget Committee session on Nov. 7. (Asahi Shimbun file photo)

Deliberations in the Lower House Budget Committee have begun for the first time with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in attendance. 

While her responses to representatives of political parties in the plenary session appeared to be cautious, some of the replies in committee regarding foreign policy, national security, economic and fiscal policy during one-on-one exchanges with opposition lawmakers raised concerns.

This year marks the 10th anniversary of the passage of national security legislation during the second stint of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that made possible the exercise of Japan’s right to collective self-defense.

Those laws changed the interpretation of the Constitution that had been recognized by preceding Cabinets.

In the committee session, Katsuya Okada of the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan brought up a comment Takaichi made in the 2024 election for president of the Liberal Democratic Party.

At that time, she said that a naval blockade of Taiwan by China could be considered a “survival-threatening situation” that would allow the use of force based on Japan’s right to collective self-defense.

While Takaichi said that a judgment would be made after comprehensively assessing all information related to what had occurred, she added, “If it involves the use of force (by China), it could be considered a survival-threatening situation.”

She also said that the possibility of a military conflict surrounding Taiwan had become such a serious matter that consideration had to be given to a worst-case scenario.

A survival-threatening situation is defined as where there is a clear danger of the survival of Japan being threatened and of the right of the public to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness being overturned from its foundation, even if the military attack is aimed at another nation.

If that definition is strictly interpreted, the exercise of the right to collective self-defense would be severely restricted, but Takaichi’s view opens up a wider interpretation by the government.

She also made a troubling comment regarding the primary balance, which is an index used by the government to measure the fiscal health of the central and local governments.

Takaichi said her administration would retract goals for achieving a primary balance surplus in individual fiscal years and in the future confirm the direction of the balance over the course of a number of years.

Her response showed her true colors as she has long called for an aggressive fiscal policy.

But such a stance could be used as an excuse to swell expenditures and reverse any attempt to improve the nation’s fiscal health.

She added that economic policy would change with a new prime minister and Cabinet.
But is that her way of demonstrating her pledge to implement a “responsible aggressive fiscal policy?”

At the same time, in her committee responses, Takaichi apologized and deeply reflected on the Supreme Court ruling that defined as unconstitutional the government decision between 2013 and 2015 to reduce public assistance payments.

Takaichi has in the past made repeated negative comments about the statement issued under the name of Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama in 1995 on the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II, which acknowledged colonial domination and invasion of Asian nations and expressed remorse and an apology.

But in the committee, Takaichi said the historical recognition that had been handed down by all subsequent Cabinets had been in general carried over under her Cabinet and would continue in the future.

We call on the prime minister to live up to those words.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Nov. 8

Related News