Press Conference by the Chief Cabinet Secretary

JAPANESE

Q&As

REPORTER: In the committee meeting that you attended this morning, you stated that unless budgetary measures are taken soon, there are a number of issues that will emerge that will hinder the process of recovery. I took that to mean that the second supplementary could be submitted to the current session of the Diet. Is that understanding correct?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: There is no change to the comments I have made previously, nor has my thinking changed.

REPORTER: So what was the intent of your statement to the committee meeting?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: My intent was exactly as I stated it.

REPORTER: I asked Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Sengoku the same question this morning, concerning the prospects for the opposition parties submitting a no-confidence motion against the Cabinet this week. If such a motion is submitted, what do you think the Government's response will be?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I believe that the ruling parties would be able to comfortably vote down such a motion.

REPORTER: The opposition parties have stated that under Prime Minister Kan it is likely to be the case that recovery and reconstruction will be delayed. Do you think that if a no-confidence motion is submitted it will cause a delay to recovery and reconstruction? How do you view the no-confidence motion from the perspective of recovery and reconstruction?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: It is perfectly within the rights of the opposition parties to submit a no-confidence motion and there is nothing the ruling parties or the Government can say in response to such a decision by the opposition parties. However, I believe that in order to ensure that there is no delay to recovery and reconstruction, such a motion would be comfortably voted down.

REPORTER: Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Sengoku stated in this morning's press conference that whatever Cabinet may be in place it is not possible to take perfect response to such a disaster. The opposition parties are indicating that the longer Prime Minister Kan remains in office the longer the delays in recovery will be. What are your views on this opinion stated by the opposition parties?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: The opposition parties have their own positions on issues and I believe that they would make statements on the basis of such positions.

REPORTER: You have stated that in a disaster situation the power of the Prime Minister to dissolve the Diet is not something that is restricted. Today, in a press conference the governor of Iwate Prefecture stated that there are constituencies in Iwate where it is currently impossible to hold an election and that if a general election for the House of Representatives were to be held it would be tantamount to the dissolution of the Diet that disregarded the disaster victims. How do you perceive these comments?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: As the person responsible for interpreting the laws and ordinances pertaining to the Cabinet, I have provided a response concerning points relating to the Constitution.

REPORTER: With regard to the right to dissolve the Diet, setting aside constitutional restrictions, from your point of view as a person who has seen the disaster-affected areas for yourself, do you believe that it would be difficult to hold a snap general election, from the perspectives of the abilities of the disaster-affected local governments to respond and convenience for voters themselves? Or do you think that an election should be prioritized above all else?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: In the first place I believe that it would be difficult to change the Prime Minister under the current circumstances.

REPORTER: On a different subject, I refer to an issue from last week, when Mr. Tomio Kawata, a researcher, provided a report to a member of the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC), which stated that in multiple locations outside the 20km no-entry zone around Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, levels of radioactive cesium 137 in excess of 1.48 million becquerels per square meter had been detected. This is a level equivalent to the levels seen at Chernobyl that resulted in residents being prohibited from living in such areas. Given such observations, is it possible that the Government would consider expanding the 20km radius no-entry zone? Also, what measures will the Government be taking from now to deal with this serious soil contamination?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: First of all, the opinions of Mr. Kawata, as received in a report to the NSC were as follows. "The classification levels for contamination that were set at the time of the Chernobyl accident and the measures based on those levels provided safer measures in terms of protection from radiation, but when comparing these measures to the benefits they provided, they resulted in an excessive burden being placed on the lives of the residents and today it is assessed that there were problems with these measures in terms of optimization and justification. It would be preferable for Japan, which has based the classification of its levels on international guidelines to set new classifications that are balanced from the perspectives of optimization and justification." This is taken from the report of Mr. Kawata. For its part, the Government is engaged in thorough monitoring of the actual volumes of airborne radiation in various areas and has accordingly issued requests to set evacuation zones and planned evacuation zones on the basis of international standards, to ensure that there is no danger to the health of residents. Furthermore, as radioactive materials with a long half-life are present in the soil, if these remain over a long period the effects of radiation will also continue, so it is therefore necessary to proceed with decontamination and soil improvement measures. Already the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) is engaged in surveys and examination with a view to engaging in soil improvement in the village of Iitate, in parallel with the request to residents to implement planned evacuations. Basically I believe that with the current evacuation zones there are no concerns for an impact on human health and the Government will continue to make efforts to improve the soil, making reference to the recent report from Mr. Kawata, and without waiting for the incident situation at the power station to be brought totally under control, as we seek to achieve the return of residents to their homes as soon as possible.

REPORTER: So am I to understand that the Government believes that it is not necessary to expect the no-entry zone?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: Naturally we will continue to engage in thorough monitoring of airborne radiation volumes, but unless there is a sudden and demonstrable change in the situation, I foresee that there will be no problems with the zones as they currently stand. It is rather the case that the Government will continue to make efforts to bring the situation at the power station under control and seek to reduce the evacuation zones, after due monitoring of airborne radiation.

REPORTER: With regard to the planned evacuation zones, you have said in the past that you wish to complete these evacuations by the end of this month, which is actually tomorrow. What is the status of progress with evacuation from these zones?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This is something that has caused particularly hardship and worry for the local residents. The Government is providing maximum support, but I have received reports that it is difficult to achieve the total evacuation of all residents from the planned evacuation zones. However, in areas within these zones where there is a particular danger of the annual exposure to radiation exceeding 20 mSv in the near term, and also for families with children, the Government is proceeding with operations to consult with such people and expedite their evacuation.

REPORTER: With regard to the order issued by a school principal that people should stand to sing the national anthem, the Supreme Court has issued a ruling that such an order does not infringe the Constitution. What is the Government's view on this matter?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I am aware of the ruling itself, but I have not acquainted myself yet with the content and reasoning behind the ruling. However, this is a ruling of the Supreme Court, the ultimate court in the judicial branch of Government. This court has the authority to make constitutional judgments and the Government will therefore accept the content of the ruling with due respect.

REPORTER: In an opinion poll conducted by Fuji News Network (FNN) and the Sankei Shimbun, you have come out in top position as the most suitable candidate to be the next Prime Minister. How do you view this result?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: As I have always said to date, I would like to refrain from making direct comments about individual opinion polls as actual public opinion and the opinions in opinion polls are not necessarily the same, although polls are an effective method of assessing public opinion. I will refrain from further comment so as not to cause misunderstanding.

REPORTER: In the same poll conducted by FNN and the Sankei Shimbun, 80% of respondents indicated that they did not trust Government announcements. However, at the same time, your popularity rating as the Government spokesperson has risen rapidly. How do you account for this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: With regard to the specific figures mentioned in the opinion poll, my comment is the same as before and I do not need to repeat it again. However, as for the cases that have come to light where past statements made by the Government and organizations such as Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) with which the Government is involved have very regrettably turned out to be mistaken, I believe that it is only natural for the members of the public to have doubts about whether the statements made can be trusted. However, at the same time the Government leadership at the Prime Minister's Office is making every effort to disclose accurate and timely information to the public and we are confident that we are making our best efforts to provide accurate information. By further improving the way in which information is collected, organized and announced, the Government will seek to gain the trust of the public.

REPORTER: I have a somewhat related question, although it isn't about atomic power. Yesterday, the Reconstruction Design Council opted to meet not publicly, but behind closed doors. I feel that there is no particular reason that an organization established to create public policy should perform their work in private. How do you view this issue?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I think that they are probably planning on announcing a summary of the meeting later. I understand that the Chair decided to do this from the perspective of wanting to receive absolutely frank opinions from each Council member. That said, I feel that naturally, the details of these meetings, as well as the proceedings, must be announced to the public, based on the rules for managing official documents and information disclosure. Even if everything is not announced simultaneously, it all must be announced.

REPORTER: I would like to ask about the total reform of the tax and social security systems. I have heard that on June 2, the overall picture for social security reform will be announced, and a new consultative body will be established between the Government and ruling parties. How are deliberations for this proceeding? What exactly are the implications of establishing this new consultative body?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: First, I am aware that a proposal will be released in the not-too-distant future. However, with its release we will see the start of much discussion. At the moment, I think we are at the stage of putting together the proposal, and thus, I do not have access to enough information to make any concrete comments. There are reports that this may be followed by the establishment of a new discussion group, but the plan basically is to proceed with discussions within groups that have already been established, as we have of course been doing for some time. As for any forums that might differ from the current format in which everyone gathers together each time, the target for this is sometime around June. So right now, we must work hard and dedicate ourselves to the associated arrangements. I have received reports suggesting that there may be no need for a forum to deliberate in a manner different than the way we are doing this at present.

REPORTER: I would like to ask briefly about the Reconstruction Agency. Earlier, during the House of Representatives Special Committee on Reconstruction from the Great East Japan Earthquake you mentioned "clerical work for the special zones" as an example of the authority and duties which could be placed under the responsibility of the Reconstruction Agency. Were you referring to the limits related to the so-called 'special zones for reconstruction?' Do you believe that, if this is assigned to the Reconstruction Agency, then the actual authority for decisions will be transferred to either the minister for reconstruction or the head of the Reconstruction Agency, rather than the Prime Minister? Or will it be clerical work alone?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I think that it may be better instead, to ask the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) that question. My response related to the kinds of things possible for the Government based on the opinions of each of the parties. Of course, we will actually consider the Reconstruction Agency before long, but if it is established, will the organization, namely the Reconstruction Agency, or the Reconstruction Council, be in parallel with the various ministries, or will it be an organization headed by the Prime Minister? If so, it seems like it would be somewhat weak as an "Agency," but, the head of the organization is the Prime Minister, that is to say, the head of the Cabinet. In this sense, the characteristics of the agency will end up being decided by the personality of the Prime Minister. This may give the organization substantial political influence. If it ran in parallel with Ministries, then it would be on par with the various Ministers, and this would lead instead to administrative work with weakened influence. Thus, considering a range of areas including administrative law, or rather, the state of public administration, if we set up an influential office under the same concept as the current headquarters, then I believe the best option would be to establish such an office which corresponds to what we now define as an "Agency," and that we may, accordingly, be able to eliminate the vertical administration. However, I would like to act based on a range of discussions in the Diet.