Press Conference by the Chief Cabinet Secretary

JAPANESE

Q&As

REPORTER: Mr. Ichiro Ozawa of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) has stated his views concerning the disaster in which he criticized the Kan Administration for being irresponsible in its response and the lack of leadership from the Prime Minister, which he said could lead to a further worsening of the situation. How do you view this situation in which members of the ruling party do not understand the response made by the Government?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: Members of the Diet and members of the public each hold their own opinions and given that this situation in particular is one that is causing hardship and difficulty to so many people I think that in a certain sense it is inevitable that various criticisms may be raised. The Government wishes to take on board such criticisms and make every effort to further improve its response.

REPORTER: On a related note, what are your views on the reinvigoration of moves within the DPJ to bring down the Cabinet?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: My response to that question is the same as my response to the previous question.

REPORTER: Yesterday, the Prime Minister was quoted as having said that "the vicinity of the nuclear power plant will be uninhabitable for some time," which resulted in a tearful protest from the heads of the towns and villages and other people in the affected areas. There have been a series of comments, reportedly by the Prime Minister, including "Eastern Japan will collapse," and others, which have caused confusion among the public. Could you tell us why this situation is occurring and what can be done in response?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: After this had been reported, Special Advisor to the Cabinet Kenichi Matsumoto himself clarified his statement, and I have also heard directly from the Prime Minister that he made no such remark. There are many comments that purport to be quoting indirectly what the Prime Minister has said and there is a possibility that the nuance of what was said may be changed through this indirect reporting. This is particularly difficult to gauge for people who meet with the Prime Minister, and although people should be free to report on their exchanges, care needs to be taken when explaining the content of any discussion in this indirect way, in order to avoid creating a misunderstanding.

REPORTER: On a related note, yesterday, the Prime Minister updated his blog for the first time in a month. The Prime Minister explained that the reason he had not updated the blog for one month was because he had been busy dealing with the disaster response and that with large amounts of information being issued he had stopped updating the blog in order to avoid creating any confusion, thereby admitting that his own statements could cause confusion. I believe that this is his responsibility as a nation's leader to provide correct information for the people and therefore avoid confusion at the time of crisis. I cannot understand the reasoning behind why the Prime Minister's statements on his blog would cause such confusion, so I hope you can provide me with an insight into this matter.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I am aware that the Prime Minister has restarted his blog, but as I do not read or correct it prior to its publication, I only hear the details and specific contexts as mentioned by you now. I do not have a direct or accurate insight into the context in which it was written or its intention, and therefore, as it is not something I have said or written, in order to avoid exactly the kind of misunderstanding I have just spoken about, I would like to first read the blog in context from beginning to end.

REPORTER: In addition to the blog, do you think that the Prime Minister should not make statements as a means of avoiding confusion, or do you think that he should rather make statements actively to avoid confusion?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: One very important task of the Government is to thoroughly disclose all information and data. In addition, it is very important for the Government to provide the necessary messages in various formats for as many members of the public as possible. However, it is impossible for the Prime Minister to be involved in the issuance of all these various methods of information provision. For example, various means are being employed by the Cabinet to provide information, including wall-poster newspapers in evacuation centers and public announcements on the radio. These various tasks require a division of labor, but the Government is making every effort to convey all information that needs to be conveyed.

REPORTER: Returning to the issue of Special Advisor Matsumoto, although it may be the case that the Prime Minister did not make the remark in question, it was reported and this caused dissatisfaction and questions about the Government's intentions to be raised. Given this situation, does the Government intend to create an opportunity to explain its intentions to the local residents?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: It is truly regrettable that this remark has resulted in so much worry for the residents who have evacuated and those who will have to evacuate from the affected areas. The Government is in the process of strengthening its communication channels with the municipalities of the evacuated areas or those areas that are now being requested to evacuate and we must give serious consideration to the fact that these communication channels may not yet be necessarily sufficient. Given that this situation has arisen where the reported comment caused worry for the people affected, despite the fact that it did not represent the Government's intentions, the Government is in the process of considering ways to provide information for the local governments and residents affected, including future outlooks. These considerations will be completed in a few days time and they are not a response to the comment that was reported yesterday.

REPORTER: Does this mean that the Government, in its position of authority, will create an opportunity to explain the situation regarding the evacuations to those people in the areas affected?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: In actual fact, the Government has established local emergency response headquarters for the areas affected by the earthquake and tsunami, as well as those affected by the nuclear power plant accident. These local headquarters have been engaged in liaison with the relevant local governments and residents and have been providing information. However, based on serious reflection that these liaison measures may not have been sufficient, the Government is currently engaged in considerations about what system would be best to communicate the necessary information in a thorough and proper manner.

REPORTER: On a related note, have the heads of the local governments in the affected areas been informed that the Prime Minister did not actually make the reported comment?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I am not directly aware of what means and by what route such a notification has been made, but I will confirm the status and if such a notification has not been made, it will be necessary for the Government to provide a formal notification.

REPORTER: I have another question about the way in which Special Advisor Matsumoto provided information yesterday. I would like to ask whether you think that the Government should reflect on the way in which the information was subsequently corrected. Yesterday, in your press conference you stated that "I have not confirmed the exchanges and what was said to reporters, so I cannot comment." I would like to ask why you had not confirmed the facts at that point, because if you had done so, would it not have been the case that you could have provided an explanation? Also I would like to ask why the Prime Minister did not offer an explanation himself, as he was the person directly involved and hearing an explanation directly from the Prime Minister would have made it easier for the public to understand.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: With regard to your first question, I heard about Special Advisor Matsumoto's comments directly before my press conference yesterday, literally in the moments before it was due to start, and I did consider delaying the press conference. However, I did clearly state in the press conference yesterday that the Government did not share the view contained in the comments by Special Advisor Matsumoto reporting what the Prime Minister had supposedly said and neither did the Prime Minister share this view. Those were my frank comments at that point yesterday, because I wanted to start the press conference on time and not delay the members of the press further. Subsequently, I heard that Mr. Matsumoto had announced himself that he had not conveyed the Prime Minister's remarks accurately and had corrected his comment. With regard to the point about how such corrections should be made and by whom, I think that there are various opinions about this. Today, I asked the Prime Minister once again about this issue and confirmed that it was not based on fact, which I have reported to you today.

REPORTER: I think that the nuance of statements and differences in the way they are perceived is a part of political life. Does the Government believe that it is the responsibility of the Prime Minister not to come to the fore more often and convey such statements himself?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: With regard to the way in which the Prime Minister should convey his thoughts to the public directly on behalf of the Government, I recognize that there are a number of opinions. The question of which method is best overall is constantly being considered on a daily basis, taking into account various opinions and cases like the one that has just been mentioned.

REPORTER: Returning to the first question on the response by the DPJ including Mr. Ozawa, I understand that the Government is doing the best that it can, but the ruling parties now seem to be causing quite a ruckus in the midst of work to respond to the incident at the power station and earthquake. How do you think the ruling parties should be acting?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: My answer remains unchanged. I think the public will judge these statements or comments or those who make them, as well as the work done by the Government. The Government is currently exerting every effort to fulfill its role of responding to the nuclear incident and earthquake.

REPORTER: Right, I understand that, but what I am asking is about the responsibility of the ruling parties to the people of Japan.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I think the people will judge the ruling parties as they see fit.

REPORTER: Related to that, from your point of view, do you see the ruling parties and the Government as being able to work together as one in dealing with the disaster?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This is not just a matter of the ruling parties or the Government. We are grateful for the cross-party cooperation we have received in moving Diet deliberations forward, and the many opinions and pieces of information we have received at various junctures.

REPORTER: In a meeting between the ruling and opposition parties on the disaster yesterday, Special Advisor to the Prime Minister Goshi Hosono said that the planned evacuation zones were still tentative and would remain so until the Prime Minister makes a decision about them, and that the Prime Minister would begin consulting local governments to make such a decision. I think that this implies that these zones may change depending on the opinions of local municipalities as we move forward. Furthermore, the explanations of this statement from the Government have been ambiguous and differ depending on who is asked. Have the areas to be marked as planned evacuations zones been made clear within the Government or not?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: As head of the Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters, the Prime Minister will issue the final instructions on this to the mayors of the cities, towns and villages of the region. This decision will surely be made based on the situation in the region. We need to decide the exact way in which evacuations will be carried out, and other factors having to do with the post-evacuation situation; for example, the extent to which people will be allowed to reenter these zones after the evacuation. This issue does not just affect people; there are also many heads of livestock in the region. We will establish an overall plan that looks at the exact situation in the region and considers the opinions of locals with regard to the steps to be taken for evacuation and what should be done afterwards. Based on this plan, final instructions will be issued. We will use this kind of process to make a decision about the details of a concrete plan, in consideration of the situation in each region and the opinions of locals.

REPORTER: The recent discussion about such a plan - or rather, those instructions - has surmised that evacuation will be ordered area by area and possibly in stages. It is being said that the timeframe for each evacuation will change depending on the local situation. Does what you just said mean that the Prime Minister will only issue instructions, once all of plans are packaged together?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: For this plan as well, we hope to make a decision that weighs the situation in each area against the perspective of ensuring safety. We have not made any final decision yet.

REPORTER: About the aim of completing evacuations in the planned evacuation areas in one month, do you mean one month since you made the announcement about the areas the other day, or one month from the Prime Minister's order on this in general? Which is correct?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This is a general timeframe. It isn't like everything will be safe if evacuation is completed within one month from a certain date. In the course of deliberating on our total plans, we will decide on concrete plans and give instructions, allowing for some flexibility on timeframes to the extent that safety is not compromised.

REPORTER: One more point - on a different topic, yesterday the Prime Minister met with President Shizuka Kamei of the People's New Party. It has been reported that a decision has been made to establish reconstruction implementation headquarters from now on led by the heads of each ruling party. Has the Government verified this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: As the meeting was between the Prime Minister and the head of the People's New Party, a group we have an alliance with, there is the potential for a lot to come of this, but as of right now, no concrete instructions have been issued.

REPORTER: Concerning the planned evacuation zones, you said a moment ago that you will draw up a plan based on the opinions of locals and the situation in each area. While this process of establishing planned evacuation zones continues, no one is sure what will happen to the residents of areas affected by the disaster, and it seems as if we only heared a lot of comments about it, instead of seeing progress on the issue. These comments include the statements made by the Prime Minister and Special Advisor Matsumoto yesterday. I think this is causing a tremendous amount of confusion. What do you think about this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: First of all, the Prime Minister never said anything like what has been reported, although at the end of the day, I recognize that we must face the fact that many people are anxious about the current situation due to the reports of what you mentioned. Let me report this once again: a mid-term outlook can only be announced after the situation at the power station is brought under control, and further verifications of safety will take place along with various monitoring operations. However, first, if we do not order at least a temporary evacuation, there is a possibility that the health of those in the area will be affected. I will repeatedly and carefully explain this again: particularly those areas closest to the power station are receiving the most radiation. I can only ask that you please understand that for places like Iitate Village, which is a current issue, we are responding to the situation from the perspective of ensuring safety and based on the opinions of those in each area, and we will continue to do so while fully consulting with the municipalities in these areas.

REPORTER: The first meeting of the Reconstruction Design Council will take place this afternoon. I would like to ask once again what you expect will be discussed in the Council?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: A number of very knowledgeable people, including the chair of the Council, Makoto Iokibe, will gather for the discussion. I do not think that I should say anything too concrete about what the Council will discuss, but I would like for everyone in the country who is supporting us and everyone around the world who is watching the situation in Japan and offering us assistance to understand after this meeting: 'this is how Japan will reconstruct itself; although many perished in the earthquake and many suffered through extremely difficult times due to the disaster, Japan and the Tohoku will become even better than they were before the earthquake.' I hope to see debate that will allow people to foster such expectations.

REPORTER: Concerning the decision to classify the nuclear incident as a Level 7 event, Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Fukuyama said in a BS Fuji television program that some reflection should be made on the fact that the announcement was made so late. Do you think that the delayed classification has had no impact on either the human health for those living in the surrounding area or the series of response measures made for the incident? Or do you think the opposite is true? I want to know your opinion.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I have been explaining this since yesterday, and I want to offer an explanation once again, rephrasing some comments I made yesterday that may have been somehow misleading. In March, the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) estimated the amount of radiation from the nuclear power station using the System for Prediction of Environment Emergency Dose Information (SPEEDI), based on monitoring results from three locations. I, too, was informed of this calculation by the NSC and other bodies. According to their estimate - although I don't remember the exact figures - I was told in March that the amount of radiation in the area may reach the order of 10^16Bq as announced lately. But I was only informed in the evening of April 11 that the estimate was fairly reliable and that this required the classification of Level 7. As the figures were confirmed to be quite reliable, we decided to escalate the crisis level. I want to point out that the demarcation of evacuation zones and responses to the nuclear incident were based on the worst-case scenario - when the analyses and estimations were reported to me in March that radiation in the order of 10^16Bq could be emitted, these figures, although not verified as reliable, were immediately reflected into our response measures. Therefore, I don't think the late announcement meant that our response was delayed.

REPORTER: Professor Robert Geller, a seismologist from the University of Tokyo, published an article in the British science journal Nature, pointing out that Japan's long-term forecast systems are "flawed" and have not been adequate in predicting earthquakes producing more than 10 fatalities in the past 30 years, including the Great East Japan Earthquake. He also called for an immediate stop to the continued use of such systems. How does the Government view such criticism? Does the Government have any intentions of reviewing future medium- to long-term earthquake forecast systems?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: First, with regard to differences in expert opinions among the various parties, I do not think that it would be appropriate to offer a comment directly from a political position rather than from the position of an expert. However, even if there is not necessarily a consensus among all the experts, from the viewpoint of safety (disaster prevention), my opinion is that we should approach the situation based on the assumption of a potentially high level of risk.

In that sense, while it appears that we have been mostly commended for having managed to keep the majority of people safe from the damage the tsunami caused at the nuclear power plant, we have to be honest in acknowledging that necessary preparations were not taken despite the fact that some members of the community, even within the Diet, had pointed out the potential dangers of a tsunami. Taking into consideration the differences in opinion among the experts as well as other factors, we will, of course, carry out reviews on the existing earthquake countermeasures if necessary. However, these opinions are part of ongoing scientific discussions. The Government will take the claims published by experts into consideration when making decisions on political and administrative measures.

REPORTER: In relation to a previous question, the evacuation plan calls for residents to move within one month of an order being issued. Is that timeline effective from the time of your announcement about this, or from the time orders are issued? I did not understand your earlier explanation. Does that refer to one month clearly your announcement, or a month after orders are issued?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: The nature of these matters is not one allowing for a certain date to be stipulated. Moreover, even in areas within the planned evacuation zones, because there is a certain range in the magnitude of accumulated radiation doses, the one-month aim is, literally, just that, an aim to have evacuations completed in one month. The Government will consult with local residents on various concrete plans and post-evacuation measures before proceeding to instruct residents to evacuate as quickly as possible, beginning with areas that face a particularly high level of risk. That is what we had in mind when we established the one-month aim. That is why I had explained that a one-month timeline does not mean completing evacuations by a specific date.

REPORTER: I think that a lack of clarity on whether the one-month timeline begins from the time when orders are issued, or from the time of your announcement, may be putting local governments and residents in a difficult position.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: While we have not gone to the extent of discussing, with the local governments, plans to evacuate by a certain time in a certain manner following certain concrete plans yet, we will nevertheless consult with local residents and issue orders based on plans that are, to a certain degree, specific and detailed. I think that indications of a timeline for our plans will be presented when instructions to follow the plans are given.