EDITORIAL: Election manifestoes

Next month's Upper House election offers an opportunity to advance Japanese politics another step forward.

The ruling Democratic Party of Japan and the main opposition Liberal Democratic Party announced their campaign manifestoes on Thursday. Both parties are promising to radically reform the nation's tax code, which would entail raising the consumption tax rate, through nonpartisan talks.

This is really a big change. In the past, if one party showed any inclination to seek a hike in the consumption tax rate, the other party would have immediately launched a partisan attack, precluding constructive debate on the issue. This pattern has repeated itself innumerable times.

For many years, the major parties avoided pursuing any unpopular policy that would put a bigger burden on voters. This politically irresponsible behavior left the nation with combined long-term central and local government debts of 860 trillion yen ($9.4 trillion), or 180 percent of gross domestic product, at the end of the current fiscal year.

Just as the government's fiscal crunch has come to the point where fresh borrowing surpasses tax revenue, the euro crisis triggered by the debt mess in Greece has roiled financial markets around the world.

Japan's two main parties appear to have realized, at long last, that they can no longer keep turning a blind eye to the situation.

The LDP has proposed raising the consumption tax rate to 10 percent from the current 5 percent. Prime Minister Naoto Kan responded to that initiative by saying, "We will consider it as an option," and then went a step further by voicing his hope that consensus on the issue within the government will be reached by the end of the current fiscal year.

Raising the consumption tax should not be viewed as a cure-all for the nation's budget ills. It should be seen as a step toward mending the nation's frayed social security system to create a sense of security among people and stoke economic growth. It is an issue that has direct bearing on the basic "design" of the government.

A forum for nonpartisan discussions on the tax issue should be created immediately after the election to point the way forward.

For too long, Japanese politicians have been preoccupied with pandering to voters to win ballots. Hopefully, this election will bring about a radical shift in politics of patronage to a more honest type of activity in which politicians are candid about the need for the public to take on unavoidable burdens.

Apologize for reneging on campaign vows

There are also signs that the two main parties are narrowing their differences on the issue of social security, which is inseparably linked to debate on a new revenue source.

The LDP has proposed scrapping the childcare allowances and creating a new subsidy program for child-rearing support that would allow local governments to choose from policy options, such as building new daycare centers and providing free school lunches, according to the needs of local communities.

The DPJ has given up providing childcare allowances at the level it initially promised. It now says that local governments will be able to use any increase from the current amount to provide services to support childcare to match conditions in each area.

However, the LDP argues that the money for allowances would be better spent on efforts to create jobs. The DPJ has also opted to capitalize on growing demand for childcare and nursing care services to promote job growth. The DPJ focused its campaign for last year's Lower House election on childcare support. Now, the LDP is making the case that improving childcare services would be a better way to achieve the goal than expanding allowances. The DPJ countered that it will also try to create jobs by promoting childcare services.

The debate shows a virtuous cycle in which propositions from both sides made in competition for public support help improve the quality of policies. The DPJ's proposals concerning the consumption tax and childcare allowances represent a drastic change to the party's key election promises last year. The party will find it hard to avoid being criticized for violating its campaign pledges.

To win voter support for these changes, the party needs to offer a candid apology and provide a thorough explanation of the background that caused it to renege on its promises. It also needs to demonstrate what it has learned since coming to power.

In this age of globalization, the policies of the two main parties are inevitably strikingly similar. Increasingly, their differences will be over the order of priority and nuances.

That will be good for the evolution of policies through competition between the two parties. We should welcome this change.

Tradition versus new ideas

Despite this trend, however, there are still some sharp disagreements between the DPJ and the LDP. Some of their policy proposals are diametrically opposite to each other.

The DPJ, for instance, vows to change "the shape of the nation," while the LDP pledges to protect "the shape of our nation."

The LDP cherishes traditional values and stresses its "conservative" credo. Specifically, the opposition party's manifesto says it will oppose the bill to allow married couples to use different surnames. It says it will also oppose moves to give foreign permanent residents in Japan the right to vote in local elections. By doing so, the document says, the party will protect local communities and family bonds in this nation.

In contrast, the DPJ believes traditional community ties and family bonds have become so weak that it is no longer possible to depend on them. The ruling party envisions creating a new society where people will build ties with each other through various activities, such as participation in nonprofit organizations. According to this vision, members of society would redefine their relationships as they assume new social responsibilities, including public services that have traditionally been in the realm of the government.

In another example of a major policy difference, the LDP puts a revision of the Constitution at the top of its election promises, while the DPJ's manifesto doesn't refer to the issue.

The DPJ has dropped the promise it made before last year's election to put higher priority in budgeting on the well-being of people than on public works projects. Instead, the party's manifesto just promises "a review" of public works spending. Still, the party's stance toward such spending is markedly different from that of the LDP, which proposes front-loaded investment in social overhead capital.

As the manifesto-driven election campaign has become established amid an accelerating trend toward a two-party system, the DPJ and the LDP have been looking for issues that highlight their differences. And, as their positions on key issues have converged, the two parties have developed a tendency to create discordant issues by taking positions opposed to those of the other side in deliberate moves to underscore their differences.

It is not easy for either of the two parties to clarify the point at issue while refining their political tenets and principles and developing specific policy agendas based on them. The tough task of figuring out where the two parties agree and where they disagree and making election decisions accordingly is left to voters.

Competition and cooperation

The narrowing of policy differences between the two major parties is certain a alienate a number of voters. That is where smaller parties can play a vital role. It is their job to offer alternatives to disaffected voters.

New Komeito proposes a new form of welfare assistance to tackle problems such as mental illness, child abuse and solitary death.

The Social Democratic Party pledges to put greater importance on providing support and relief for Okinawa Prefecture, home to a big chunk of the U.S. military presence in Japan, than to showing "consideration" to the U.S. forces. The People's New Party, the DPJ's junior partner in the ruling coalition, calls for spending 100 trillion yen in three years on measures to stimulate economic growth.

One big question facing the major parties in this era of coalition governments is the kind of relations they should build with smaller groups. Under the current DPJ-People's New Party ruling coalition, the DPJ's initiative to raise the consumption tax rate would hit an immediate roadblock as the PNP is opposed to the idea.

A grand coalition of the DPJ and the LDP would make a mockery of this new age in politics, which offers the opportunity of frequent power transfers. Japanese political parties, both the major parties and smaller blocs, have not become familiar with the art of seeking compromise on policy issues while competing for a public mandate. The election in July will be a good learning opportunity.

--The Asahi Shimbun, June 18