Press Conference by the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary

JAPANESE

Opening Statement by Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Sengoku

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I have one item to report to you, concerning the lifting of shipping restrictions. Today, in accordance with Article 20, Paragraph 3 of the Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness, it was decided to lift the restrictions on shipment of bamboo shoots that have been produced in the village of Hirata in Fukushima Prefecture. Instructions to this effect have been communicated to the governor of Fukushima Prefecture. For further details please direct your questions to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

Q&As

REPORTER: In an opinion poll conducted by Fuji Television and the Sankei Shimbun over the weekend, in response to a question "are you satisfied with the way in which the Government has responded to the nuclear power station incident?", 80% of respondents answered that they are "not satisfied." In addition, in response to the question "Do you trust the Government's announcements concerning the status of the power station and the levels of radioactive materials?", similarly 80% of respondents gave a harsh answer that they do not trust the Government's announcements. Surrounding the response to the power station incident and in particular the changing explanations from the Government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) concerning the injection of seawater, it seems that mistrust of the Government is rising. What is your view of the situation?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: This has been one of the largest incidents in the history of humankind and one that impresses upon us the need to learn significant lessons and it is essential that we work to regain the trust of the Japanese public and also of the international community, given the significance this incident has for the peaceful uses of nuclear power and power generation in general, and this entails the disclosure of accurate information and an appropriate response from the Government. It is for this purpose that the Nuclear Incident Investigation and Verification Committee has been established, which will engage in due investigation of the causes of the incident and the response to it since March 11, also giving consideration to the various test methods that were employed. The results of this investigation will be disclosed to the public and will form the basis for our future response measures and policies. Those are my thoughts on this matter.

REPORTER: On a related note, given the loss of trust in the current administration, do you think that it will be possible for this administration to continue and regain public trust?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: If you look at it from the other perspective, even if the administration were to change, the fact would remain that there have been many aspects of the incident at the nuclear power station that the Government has not been able to deal with fully, despite its best efforts. Even if the administration were to change it is over-simplifying the situation in the extreme to say that the incident situation would improve, as the response to the incident is no easy matter.

REPORTER: On a related note, it has come to light that there was a delay of approximately half a day in announcing the fact that the Unit 5 reactor at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station had temporarily lost its cooling functions. The lack of trust in the ways in which TEPCO releases information is leading to a lack of trust in the Government itself. What are your views on the structures in place at TEPCO?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Although I am not an expert, I believe that TEPCO, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) and the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) have each faced various problems and I think that they have all lacked a certain degree of sensitivity when considering the ways in which the incident will be regarded by the public and also by the international community.

REPORTER: You mentioned TEPCO and NISA, but what about the Government itself?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Although you use the term "the Government," without the actions of experts in the field, the Prime Minister's Office or the Government could not function smoothly. So if "the Government" is treated as separate entities and, for example, it was decided to launch measures to give NISA independence as a body, that would take time to achieve, would it not? It is natural that the Government takes responsibility for all areas of governance. While it is the Government that has responsibility, with regard to individual and specific issues it is expert bodies that must take action, because the members of the Government are not experts and if they were to give out indiscriminate instructions I believe that the situation would only deteriorate further. So if you are raising specific issues of the way announcements are made or the manner in which seawater was injected, these are matters that the Government has entrusted to expert bodies in the field. There are issues concerning the fact that such a system of governance had not been created to date and also with the perspective of administrative independence. If there are those who point out that it is for people in such positions to make accurate judgments and ensure that these judgments are disclosed promptly to the public, and that there have been mistakes in the design or operation of such systems, then it is the responsibility of the Government to correct and reform them or for the Government to question the responsibilities of the various people involved. There are many areas of the incident response operation processes that have not yet been started, which is something that is pointed out on a daily basis in the press. The fact of the matter is that the Government has entrusted operations in the field to expert bodies and we can only impress upon these bodies the importance of responding to various comments and sentiments and engaging in operations to deal with the situation appropriately. It is for this reason that Mr. Hosono and Mr. Mabuchi have been dispatched to engage in appropriate consultations with these expert bodies in the field.

REPORTER: In response to the actions of the Government it is expected that the opposition parties will implement full-fledged moves to submit a no-confidence motion against the Kan Cabinet towards the end of the week. What are your views on this scenario and as an acting representative of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) what are your thoughts about the potential for rebellion within the ranks of the DPJ itself?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I have been busy with other matters of late and have not kept up to date with political moves and therefore I am unaware of the reasoning and basis for such activities. Therefore, my frank view is that I cannot really comment on this matter.

REPORTER: However, it has been pointed out that the lack of unity within the DPJ has been one of the reasons for the delay in implementing disaster reconstruction. What are your views on this point?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I believe that with a leap of logic it would be possible to ascribe any issue as being linked to the delay in implementing disaster reconstruction. I do not believe that disaster reconstruction is being delayed at all. I believe that in the face of this once-in-a-thousand-year great tsunami the officials at municipal and prefectural governments as well as national public servants in central government have been working extremely hard to create response plans and implement measures on the ground. Volunteers are also engaged in a hard work in a variety of areas and are giving their best efforts in every sense. In other words, although the members of the press have discussed the various merits of big and small government to date, I think that if you use your imagination you will be able to easily see just how big a response has been required in terms of mobilizing public sector personnel and preparing equipment to provide administrative services capable of responding to a tsunami disaster of this scale. Accordingly, while I share with all members of the press the desire to see debris cleared away, temporary housing constructed, medical facilities rebuilt, and legal consultation structures completed as soon as possible, the tremendous human resources that are required for these operation means that they cannot be realized over night, even with people urging that it be done here and now. The work of the civil servants is the same. When you consider the number of civil servants in the various municipalities and compare that number to the number of people currently living under extremely difficult situations in evacuation centers and the number of houses that were washed away in the tsunami, I think you can easily understand the situation. In such a situation there is nothing that can be done other than to ask these civil servants to give their best efforts. I would like you all to travel to the affected regions and see the situation in municipalities where the disposal of debris is delayed and understand the reality for yourselves and write about it in your articles.

REPORTER: Returning to the issue of the no-confidence motion against the Cabinet, in your position as someone responsible for assistance to the disaster victims, do you think that now is really the time and place for such a motion to be proposed?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I wonder about the timing of such a motion myself, particularly from the perspective of all the disaster victims, including those living in evacuation centers and others who have been forced to move away from their home towns and families to other prefectures or to other locations within their own prefectures. I think that it is important to bear the perspectives of such people in mind.

REPORTER: On a related note, if members of the ruling party were also to agree with this no-confidence motion, it would create an abnormal situation in the Diet. If such an abnormal situation were to arise, what do you think would need to be done to respond to it, as an acting representative of the DPJ?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I believe that Secretary General Okada of the DPJ is dealing with all responses to this matter and I think that is the most appropriate course of action.

REPORTER: Excuse me if my question slightly overlaps with the previous question, but I would like to ask a question which I've asked the Chief Cabinet Secretary a number of times. The delays in the distribution of donations to the disaster victims are often reported. Could you share with us your opinions on the present situation or about this issue in general?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Everybody is working hard. By now, the prefectures should have received 70 billion yen if I'm not mistaken or one-third of the donations. The disaster victim submits an application, which is then reviewed, and if the deposit request made to the bank or post office goes through, the amount should be deposited into the personal account of the individual. I do not know what proportion of the people have received the donations as of now. However, due to the work involved on the part of the municipalities that I mentioned a moment ago, I believe a larger proportion of the people may have not yet received the donations. To address this situation, more manpower needs to be brought in. However, I gather that as the situation now stands, it is hard for the municipalities to find the time and effort to do this. From what I've heard, with regards to the 1 million yen in basic assistance which is being provided in accordance with the Act Concerning Support for Reconstructing Livelihoods of Disaster Victims, two thousand several hundred requests have been processed and about 10,000 requests have been made as of the end of last week. And we estimate that there are about 100,000 households which are eligible. If everyone had an identification number, I believe the process will move a little more quickly and simply. However, the current system is all based on applications. A person makes a request to the municipal government, and that request is then forwarded to the prefectural government. This is the current procedure, and therefore, a lot of time and effort are involved. In this sense, and I will try mentioning this to my colleagues, but in this sense, I believe the identification number system which is being deliberated right now is indeed a very clear-cut system, and in many ways the Japanese system of applications does not match up to the speed that everyone has in mind in the present era. One example is the payouts of donations or the payouts of the assistance for reconstructing the livelihoods of disaster victims. Another example is the payouts of condolence money in the case of natural disaster. Under this system, the national government, the prefectural government, and the local government respectively share the cost and provide, I believe, 5 million yen to the families of those who passed away. As to why March, April, May - over two and a half months later, despite people submitting the applications, this is the present situation when such a vast number of people have lost their lives, I believe this is probably because the Great East Japan Earthquake was different from the Great Hanshin Awaji Earthquake which had an urban epicenter. The situation of the damage and devastation caused by the large tsunami along the 500km coastline is decisively different from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake.

REPORTER: A moment ago, you said that you did not think the reconstruction from the earthquake was behind schedule. However, for example, at the meeting of the House of Representatives Special Committee on Reconstruction from the Great East Japan Earthquake earlier today, Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Akihiro Ohata announced that temporary housing will not be completed by the end of May, the target date. From the perspective of the disaster victims, isn't this indeed a delay of the disaster reconstruction work?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Yes, but didn't Mr. Ohata say that the goal will be achieved in about a week? From what I've heard, the initial plan which necessitated the construction of I believe 80,000 units by the end of July has been reduced to some fifty thousand units. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism has also said that all of the units will be able to be constructed. Therefore, I do not believe what you said a moment ago serves as evidence that there is a significant delay in the disaster reconstruction work, which is the responsibility of the Government. And as you all know, in the areas where the construction of temporary housing is indeed delayed, I understand that most of the delays are caused by the delay in securing residential land in the mountain areas. Therefore, in areas where there are mayors who are very organized, all temporary housing units have been built, enough housing has been provided, and people have started to move in and live there. The next challenge is maintaining the mental health of those who live in temporary housing or the issue of solitary death. Quite a number of areas have moved on to these next stages. As many as 100 municipalities were devastated by the disaster. All have different numerical figures, different level of devastation, different level of manpower, and the words may come out wrong, but the mayors of the municipalities each have a different level of capability. Depending on where you look, you may have the kind of situation you just talked about.
Therefore, you say that the reconstruction work is delayed, but this is a little like the sayings, "it is easy to not see the forest for the trees" or "one thing suggests all the rest." Your claim is very extreme.

REPORTER: Slightly related to what you just said right now, I believe you are saying that the Government is doing a fair job of tackling the issues. However, that said, various opinion polls show that the Cabinet approval rating is low. Are you saying that this is because the people "do not see the forest for the trees"?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I believe it's not entirely impossible.

REPORTER: So that means that you would like the Japanese people to see the overall picture before evaluating the Government's efforts?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: You should see the scale of the disaster and the sheer lack of manpower in each municipality that I have been mentioning. I feel that there is, in a way, too many media reports based only on hearsay, saying, "See? This is why we think the Government isn't doing its job." This is why I would like everyone to read the "Handbook on the Reconstruction of Livelihood in Disaster-Affected Areas" and the "Handbook for Business Owners in Affected Area to Reconst Handbook." Have you read them?

REPORTER: No, I have not.

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Please do. You will see that we have developed a system to a great extent. However, when there has not yet been any specific execution of these systems, it is natural that the Japanese people, or the disaster victims would feel that they cannot trust that the Government is doing its job. For example, while the first supplementary budget is 4.01 trillion yen, I believe that if things are not done properly, we would end up with a significant amount of leftover money. For example, even to deal with the rubble, there is an extra budget of 350 billion yen for the Ministry of the Environment whose annual budget for waste treatment is only 50 billion yen, and that is only with regard to the first supplementary budgets. And, what they have done in the past to process, or mature, such budgets was to do it under subsidies first through the prefecture and then municipalities. And they are being told to do this for twenty years' worth of rubble, and are being told "At your town, please clean up 100 years' worth of rubble," or "Please go ahead and work away with this amount of money that we have prepared." This is what has been happening up until the end of April, for example. And they are thinking, "What shall we do?" "How can we best deal with this?" or "What are we supposed to do with such a large amount of money?" and as a result, are unable to get to work. They are finally getting to the point of setting up provisional storage places for the rubble. Some municipalities have stored eight percent, others 15, 30 or 40 percent. They must then put the rubble through intermediate and final processes before they can finish, right? The question is whether or not the municipalities have the capabilities to get that far. If not, they say, "Let us entrust the prefectural government to do it in our place." And so the prefectural government would say, "Okay, leave it to us." However, the prefectural governments are hardly equipped with the necessary experiences of having done such work, and therefore, they are finding themselves wondering, "What do we do now?" This is where things stand at present. I am not saying this is good or bad. And, as long as this process of dealing with the rubble issue does not move forward, there is no next step. Anybody can see that. And it seems that the problem lies in the fact that the scale of the disaster is way beyond the capabilities of the municipal governments. In actuality, nearly 10,000 people are still missing. We have never experienced a disaster of such a scale since Japan became a modern nation. I cannot make a sweeping comment since Japan has also experienced war but at least since the time which this country achieved rapid economic growth, which was around 1965-70, I believe this is the first time. And this is why Japan should all the more be prepared against risks based on, for example, a military perspective like the one held by the United States. Whether or not to establish a system of risk management based on the view that no one knows when a nuclear weapon will be dropped or when a war will erupt, is an issue that this country is currently facing. And I believe this is an issue that is heavily related to the matter of costs and that it will actually become a matter of whether to prepare "reserve" civil servants, or to double the number of civil servants at the local levels. But one of the recent tendencies has been to say, "We can look to the market to take care of problems and so we can keep reducing public services offered by civil servants." There has been a large merging of public services during the Heisei period and the number of regional civil servants has definitely dropped. This was the situation under which the recent disaster hit, and therefore, we must now make considerations from such a viewpoint as, what exactly the meaning of "public service" is. As you are all aware, those who put forth great efforts in the disaster were members of the Self-Defense Force, Japan Coast Guard, the Police Force, and the Riot Police. They have been lauded highly by the Japanese people and the disaster victims expressed great appreciation for them. However, what I am saying is, we are taking preparatory measures while feeling that we would prefer that there be no emergency situations, and while consistently asking ourselves what it means to spend our peoples' tax money during times of peace in preparation for emergency situations, whether it be on the Riot Police or the Coast Guard. We have a situation in which the personnel at such organizations are continuing their training during peace times largely unbeknownst to the Japanese people, but in times of emergency, their work is suddenly up for evaluation. And I believe the major question is whether or not to always be prepared in case emergency using human power in the form of general public or administrative services.

REPORTER: Changing the topic, last week I believe that you participated in a meeting of the faction you belong to in the DPJ. I would like to hear what your opinion is about an alliance between the DPJ and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: To say my general opinion on the subject, I have been of the basic belief from the beginning that this is a period in our history which we can only overcome through grand coalition and coordination with the opposition parties, particularly since the House of Councilors in particular is controlled by the opposition.

REPORTER: Why is that? Do you only think that because of the divided House of Councilors?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Don't you think we are having trouble passing laws? We must do something about this. My basic opinion is that we are taking too long to make a decision on each individual bill and Japan doesn't have the time to spare.

REPORTER: While overseas the Prime Minister has said that he has a lot he would like to discuss with former Presidents of the DPJ. I think that this will also help to resolve the current situation within the Party, but what do you think? From your perspective, do you think that a meeting with Mr. Yukio Hatoyama or Mr. Ichiro Ozawa will lead to a resolution of the situation? Do you think a meeting is called for?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: This is the Prime Minister's idea. He is considering asking a large number of people about their opinions and having a discussion. We are currently in what is in some ways a period that might be called a national crisis, and in this period I think it would be good to have a lot of people come participate in a discussion with a calm and open mind and then have the Prime Minister present his policies. Asking people for their opinions seems like a good idea.

REPORTER: It was reported by some media outlets this morning that there is talk among the Government and ruling parties of establishing a new series of meetings to work for the reform of tax and social security systems. I would like to ask about the state of such discussion and whether it is true that the Government intends to raise consumption tax to 10% by 2015. As the chair of the DPJ's Committee on Fundamental National Policies, I would like to know your thoughts on the reform of social security and tax law.

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I haven't heard anything about it besides that it will be a "meeting." I haven't even heard when it will be held or how members will be decided.

REPORTER: I would like to ask a question on an entirely different subject. Concerning the working team under the TEPCO Financial Investigation Committee, what is the state of preparation regarding this team, and by when will it start its work?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: A secretariat for the Committee is currently being set up. If possible, I hope to have a casual meeting to exchange greetings and have a little discussion on the work of the Committee sometime this week.

REPORTER: I would also like to ask about the energy policy. The Prime Minister said at the OECD and G8 that he wants to fit 10 million houses with solar paneling. However, when asked about this, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Banri Kaieda, who would be in charge of this, said that he had not heard anything about it. Is it correct to understand then that the Prime Minister made his comment without speaking to the minister in charge of the matter first?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: I haven't heard anything yet about how we will make that happen. If you are going to dream, dream big as they say; or rather, when you talk about your dreams make sure they are impressive. Whether or not Minister Kaieda heard about it - why even bring up that much? It's better that we just put our heads together and work toward a single direction, don't you think?

REPORTER: Even if that is the Prime Minister's big dream, it must be backed up by technology. Is it all right then to understand that the Prime Minister has made an international commitment to the G8 and OECD on this?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: There's technical backing. Don't you think he is considering the opinions of a wide range of people?

REPORTER: But if he isn't...

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Well, it isn't like a concrete work schedule for this has already been drawn up by the bureaucracy. Nothing like that has happened before.

REPORTER: But when he says things like this without consulting with Minister Kaieda it gives some the impression that the energy policy is something that he is thinking about himself, excluding the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)...

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: You know that's not true. The entire Cabinet must consider Japan's energy strategy as a core issue moving forward. I think this should be obvious. It does seem to me that the Prime Minister thinks there was a problem with giving METI and the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy a monopoly on energy policy. That's just my guess though.

REPORTER: On a separate topic, you were once Chief Cabinet Secretary yourself. What do you think about the way Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano conducts himself in the Prime Minister's Office, and how do you judge his overall job performance?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: Well, he's doing pretty well, don't you think?

REPORTER: In what way?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: No, I mean overall. I mean, look at him. He's risen to the point where he's now the number one candidate for the next Prime Minister. And I think that this is because the public feels he's done a good job in his current role. And then there's all of you - look how you take opinion polls and then tell us all about how we aren't being well evaluated. On the other hand, Mr. Edano's approval ratings are always pretty good. All I can really say is that in this case the public is a good judge of things, don't you think?

REPORTER: As the end of the current session of the Diet, June 22, is coming close, nonpartisan Diet member caucuses and other groups are saying that the Diet should not be closed, that unless the Diet is open year-round this year, laws related to the response to the earthquake cannot be promptly enacted. What are your thoughts on this?

DEPUTY CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SENGOKU: As a general issue, this has been pointed out many times, and many are talking about it now in particular given the major issues of dealing with the earthquake and bringing the situation at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station under control. The principle of even having Diet sessions has often been criticized by the Japanese public, although some may criticize me if I say it is bad now that I am in a position within a ruling party since as an opposition party member I frequently resorted to the tactic of boycotting Diet deliberations until the end of the session. We must not let such procedures occur in the Diet. Although the Diet deliberation on the Basic Act on Reconstruction started a while ago, a matter for which the Prime Minister and the Chief Cabinet Secretary are required to attend the Diet Committee meeting, realistically speaking, in particular in the case of the Prime Minister, if the Cabinet members are summoned to the Diet year round and have to answer questions - although this too is an important job - they will have no time left for other work. I think such a situation is rare among foreign countries, especially advanced nations. This issue of what the best form for the Diet is, including the issue of whether it should have sessions, must be candidly discussed among the Diet members. And now that we are facing the issue of dealing with the earthquake disaster and nuclear incident, which I mentioned earlier, we must sit down to discuss this as a general matter, and decide what should be decided as needed. The issue, together with how the ruling and opposition parties should cooperate, is the most important political issue we face. As such, I think there is a certain rationality to the opinion you mentioned.