Press Conference by the Chief Cabinet Secretary (Excerpt)

JAPANESE

Q&As

REPORTER: I have a question concerning a comment made by the Prime Minister during the weekend about bringing the incident at the nuclear power station to a conclusion. The Prime Minister made a statement to the effect that including the decommissioning of the nuclear reactors the entire process would take several decades, which was the first time for him to refer to efforts to bring the incident to a conclusion in a long-term perspective. What is your reaction to the statement by the Prime Minister?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: In specific terms, Chairman Kondo of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission is leading efforts with the participation of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) and electricity utility operators to engage in various internal considerations considering the ways of dealing with the situation. I am aware that a stage has not yet been reached when an outlook regarding a specific work schedule towards the decommissioning of the reactors can be clarified. The first priority is to work to achieve the current Roadmap, and while engaging in operations laid out under this Roadmap the processes for future operations will be considered in parallel. Given that situation, although I have not confirmed any instructions given by the Prime Minister, I believe that what he said was that the process towards final conclusion and decommissioning would be one that would take a certain number of years.

REPORTER: Four months have passed since the disaster and the nuclear incident, and now there are an increasing number of residents of Fukushima Prefecture in particular who are worrying how long it will be before they can return to their normal lives, particularly in light of the Prime Minister's comments about the long-term aspects of the incident. What impact do you think the comments of the Prime Minister will have on the people who live in the immediate vicinity of the nuclear power station where the incident took place? What kind of explanation does the Government intend to provide to these residents?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: These are two separate issues that are not directly linked, one being how much time it will take for decommissioning of the reactors, and the other being when the residents in the vicinity of the nuclear power, who have been confronted with so much trouble and inconvenience, will be able to return to their normal lives. I think it is necessary for the Government to explain once again in a detailed manner about this situation. Under the current Roadmap, if we proceed to step 2, in which no new radioactive materials are being released and the various risks fall significantly, based on the volumes of integral radiation dosages and degree of contamination, it will be perhaps possible to determine which areas can be made accessible again and how long it will be before local residents can return to their normal lives. In that sense, I repeat that I believe that what the Prime Minister said about a certain amount of time being required was in regard to the final processing of the nuclear reactors, and therefore was referring to a different subject. This is something about which we must provide detailed explanations.

REPORTER: I believe that the Prime Minister made his comments in the national meeting for party secretary generals, but whichever way you look at it from the perspective of the affected residents, even if the Prime Minister was referring to something else, I believe that such a statement should have been made in a forum that was more accessible to the people of Fukushima who are the ones actually affected by this incident. What are your views?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I think that the Government should bear in mind your observation concerning the need to provide an explanation to the people directly affected by this incident, who are facing great difficulties and inconvenience, as well as to the public as a whole.

REPORTER: With regard to the Government's unified view concerning safety assessments, have you conveyed the details of this unified view to the governor of Saga Prefecture who was requesting such details, or to the mayor of Genkai town? Or, how will you convey such details to the people concerned from now on ?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: In specific terms, I believe that Minister Kaieda and NISA will provide such explanations. At the current point what needs to be decided is whether to make a formal report now about the Government's unified view on this issue, or to wait until the specific assessment items, particularly for the primary assessment, have been drawn up by NISA and confirmed by the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC), so that we can then provide a detailed report about how the assessment will be undertaken. It is Minister Kaieda who is currently making efforts to liaise with local bodies and I believe that it will be Minister Kaieda who will make a decision about the timing of a report to local governments.

REPORTER: With regard to the Government's unified view, which you announced this morning, what was the purpose of terming it a "unified" view? I believe that your statement was intended to show that the Government's concept toward nuclear power stations has been consistent and unchanging throughout.

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: Frankly speaking, there have been criticisms that different statements were coming from different Government representatives. Given this criticism, it was necessary to convey clearly that the various Government ministers are all of one mind and share the same policy.

REPORTER: With regard to the unified view you announced this morning, can we take it that the measures you announced are a precondition for restarting operations at nuclear power stations and that they represent new standards? In other words, are we to understand that, although there are some people who are saying that they do not apply for the restarting of operations at some nuclear power stations, they will be positioned as new standards that are required for restarting operations?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I think that the documents that were distributed to you this morning make this clear, but NISA is already in the process of confirming the safety of nuclear power stations in a more stringent manner than previous measures, and these measures have already been implemented in a number of locations. Given that there are concerns being raised by the public and residents living in the vicinity of power stations, the Government has decided to implement safety assessments based on the rules that were announced this morning. The primary assessment is the one that will be used to make a decision on whether or not to restart operations at power stations. This information is detailed in the documents that were distributed to you.

REPORTER: With regard to the radioactive cesium that has been detected in cattle from Fukushima Prefecture, it appears that the source of the contamination is straw used for feeding. What is the Government's view on the implementation of checks on all cattle from the perspective of public food safety and do you intend to implement checks on livestock other than cows?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This is an issue that is causing a great deal of concern, and measures have been implemented to date to ensure that feed for livestock is managed appropriately and that contaminated feed is not provided to livestock. However, regrettably it seems that rice straw that was lying in rice paddies at the beginning of April was harvested as a last resort. Further checks and confirmation must be implemented to determine whether this has occurred in other locations. With regard to checks on all cattle, the relevant ministries and agencies are currently engaging in considerations about what can be done and how to further improve safety and peace of mind.

REPORTER: What about measures for other livestock other than cattle?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This recent incident concerned the feed given to cattle, and the cause is thought to have been the use of rice straw that had been lying in rice paddies. With regard to the various food sources for livestock, consideration must be given to whether or not there is a possibility of contamination of these food sources. This is being coordinated by the relevant ministries and agencies, and consideration will be given to the issues including whether or not to check all food sources for livestock.

REPORTER: In the meeting of ruling party leaders this morning, leader of the People's New Party, Mr. Kamei, made a proposal to the Prime Minister concerning the creation of guidelines for the third supplementary budget, and the Prime Minister is said to have responded positively to this proposal. What instructions have you received from the Prime Minister concerning this issue, and what will the schedule be from now for the creation of guidelines for the third supplementary budget?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: As of today I have not received any specific instructions, but following the recommendations of the Reconstruction Design Council the Reconstruction Headquarters in response to the Great East Japan Earthquake has been established, and under this Headquarters efforts are being made to create a Basic Policy on Reconstruction. The content of this basic policy will be linked to budget allocation under the third supplementary budget, and therefore diligent efforts are being made towards the compilation of the basic policy.

REPORTER: I have a point of confirmation concerning the new safety standards. In the case of the primary assessment, what sort of standards will be set for determining the tolerance and resistance of power stations? Will they be unified standards or will they be decided individually depending on the site where the assessment is being implemented?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: This is a technical matter and not one that requires a political judgment. Technical experts at NISA will create a proposal and the appropriateness of this proposal will then be confirmed by experts at the NSC, which will make a final judgment, from the perspective of an independent body.

REPORTER: With regard to the differences between the primary and secondary assessments, regardless of whether nuclear power stations are currently in operation or not, given that we are in a situation directly after the incident at Fukushima, I believe that in the vicinity of other power stations people will be concerned about why the secondary assessment, which is greater in scope and requires greater time is not being implemented as an initial measure. What is the Government's response to such concerns?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: I believe I answered this question in the morning press conference, but the primary assessment is specifically for nuclear power stations that have completed regularly scheduled checks, which in their own right are very exacting and specific. On the basis of these checks the safety of these power stations will be confirmed in the primary assessment. However, for power stations that are currently in operation the secondary assessment will be implemented. The purpose and objectives for these two assessments are therefore different, and the situations at the power stations where they will be implemented are also different. The basic premise is that the power stations that are subject to primary assessment have just completed a series of very precise and exacting checks already, so there is a possibility that their situation is different in nature to other power stations. Ultimately, the decisions concerning the assessments will be made by experts, in particular the NSC, which is an independent body.

REPORTER: According to your response in this morning's press conference, the primary assessment is being implemented at power stations where regularly scheduled checks have been completed. If that is the case, then what is the difference with the case of secondary assessments? The power stations that are currently in operation may have just finished a regularly scheduled check or such checks may have been completed a year ago or six months ago. What is the difference between the two?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: With regard to secondary assessments, the policy has been decided in view of the incident at Fukushima. I believe I provided an answer this morning but with regard to the frequency of such assessments we will be referring to the implementation of tests in Europe, where they have just begun and where progress on their implementation is being made. Also, the specific method and modalities for implementation will be decided based on the deliberations of the Investigation and Verification Committee on the Accidents at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Station of TEPCO. I believe that it is possible that the matter you have mentioned will also be given consideration in this process.

REPORTER: So are you saying that it was first decided to give consideration to the secondary assessment and the idea for the primary assessment was something that emerged afterwards?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: No, it was the case that both types of assessment were considered in parallel.

REPORTER: You have just given a response concerning whether or not the Government's unified view will become the basis for the standards for assessment. Are we to understand that this unified view will bind the next Cabinet, or that in the future when a new Prime Minister is in place the policy and methods of implementation could change depending on the decision of the new Prime Minister?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: In principle, it would not be possible to engage in government administration if the items decided by the Government, the Cabinet, or the various responsible ministers were not carried over when the Government and Cabinet change. I believe that the Cabinet decisions made during the administration of the Kan Cabinet over the last one year and the decisions made by ministers during that time would, in principle, form the starting point for actions by a successive Cabinet. This is true at any time when the Cabinet changes.

REPORTER: However, in the recent case, Minister Kaieda provided an explanation to Genkai town, after which, based on instructions from the Prime Minister, the policy was changed. Is this not likely to happen again?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY EDANO: The policy that was announced yesterday was compiled by Minister Kaieda, Minister Hosono and myself and received the approval of the Prime Minister and therefore represents the consensus view of the ministers concerned.

(Abridged)