Editorial: Japan must not delay pension reforms as Diet passes system revision bill
Measures to stabilize people's post-retirement livelihoods must be steadily implemented in Japan.
A bill to revise Japan's public pension system has passed the House of Representatives and is now expected to become law. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Komeito coalition had earlier reached an agreement with the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) to add provisions in supplementary clauses to boost basic pension levels.
Initially, the government considered incorporating the benefit enhancement plan directly into the bill, but backed down due to resistance from within the LDP. Criticism arose over plans to utilize reserve money from the Employees' Pension Insurance system, with opponents labeling it "a misuse of funds." Some LDP figures also expressed concern that implementing the measure would temporarily reduce pension benefit levels and negatively impact the party's hopes in the summer House of Councillors election.
If left unchanged, the current pension system will see basic pension payments decrease by approximately 30% in about 30 years, raising concerns that the number of people expected to face insufficient pension benefits will increase, particularly among the so-called "employment ice age generation," who struggled to find stable employment throughout the post-bubble economy malaise.
Given such projected outcomes, the CDP demanded that basic pension-boosting measures be reinstated, a request the LDP eventually agreed to. We can appreciate that the political parties succeeded in reaching consensus as the end of the current Diet session approaches.
Still, implementation of these measures comes with certain conditions. The pension-boosting policies would be introduced only if the outlook for pension finances, set to be released in 2029, projects a decrease in basic benefits.
Postponing pension reforms and relying too heavily on hopes of economic growth improving pension finances risks future repercussions. Political parties must work rigorously to ensure these pension-enhancement steps are definitively realized.
The establishment of solid resources has also been deferred. Currently, half of basic pension benefits are funded through taxes. Over 2 trillion yen (about $13.86 billion) in additional public expenses will be required in the future, yet detailed discussions were avoided ahead of the July upper house election.
Unless Japan experiences a substantial expansion in tax revenue at current rates, tax increases inevitably await. Securing public acceptance will take considerable time. Failing to begin serious deliberations promptly cannot be considered a responsible attitude.
This revision of the pension system includes additional measures, such as improving coverage for part-time workers and reviewing rules that currently reduce Employees' Pension Insurance benefits for elderly people who remain employed.
Despite this revision impacting the daily lives of the public significantly, considerable delays in submitting the bill resulted in insufficient time for Diet discussions. Responsibility clearly rests with the governing parties.
Although the three-party talks involving the LDP, Komeito and CDP succeeded in shaping amendments, the Diet ought to formally create platforms enabling participation from all parties. Both ruling and opposition parties must avoid exploiting pension issues for political purposes, but focus instead on ensuring the pension system's viability and sustainability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yomiuri Shimbun
a day ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Private Flight Near Senkakus Triggers Response from China, Causes Headache for Japan
Yomiuri Shimbun file photo The Senkaku Islands are seen in Ishigaki, Okinawa Prefecture, in September 2013. The government is struggling with how to respond to flights by Japanese private jets around the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture, where one such flight recently led to a Chinese aircraft intruding into Japanese airspace. On May 3, a Japanese civilian aircraft ignored a government request to refrain from approaching the islands and flew near them. In response, China dispatched a helicopter and used the incident as a pretext for intruding into Japan's airspace. 'If a private aircraft lacking sufficient response capabilities takes a pleasure flight over the area, a civilian could be harmed. We took what we felt were necessary measures to prevent this,' said Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya on Wednesday, referring to the request that the government issued. He was speaking at a meeting of the House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee. While explaining that Japanese private jets are in principle free to fly in Japanese airspace, Iwaya stressed that the government had asked for self-restraint to prevent unforeseen circumstances. Given the possibility for tension, the government does not want aircraft to approach the islands if it is not essential for them to do so. At the meeting, Yuichiro Wada, a Japan Innovation Party member in the lower house, argued that if the government's request creates the impression that the islands are a disputed area, it could undercut Japan's position that 'there is no territorial issue surrounding the Senkaku Islands.' In response, Kosei Murota, a councillor for the Cabinet Secretariat, touched on the routine intrusion into Japan's territorial waters around the islands by China's coast guard, and said that, 'In exercising our sovereignty, it is also our duty to protect the safety of the Japanese people.' Murota also asserted that a request for self-restraint 'would not undermine Japan's sovereignty.' The pleasure flight was planned by an 80-year-old Japanese pilot who said he 'wanted to encourage Japan Coast Guard officers who are working hard.' The flight was discussed by the Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry, the National Security Secretariat and the Cabinet Secretariat's situation response office, and they decided to ask the pilot to refrain from flying near the area, but he refused to comply. On the afternoon of May 3, as the man's small plane approached the islands, a helicopter took off from a Chinese coast guard ship sailing in Japanese territorial waters and violated Japanese airspace. The helicopter returned to its ship after about 15 minutes, apparently waiting for the man's jet to leave the area. China subsequently claimed that it had dispatched its helicopter to expel the Japanese civilian aircraft from 'Chinese airspace.' The incident marked the third airspace violation by China around the islands, but it was the first time China demanded a Japanese aircraft leave the area. 'Beijing will likely extend its 'salami-slicing tactic,' in which it gradually changes the status quo by force, from the sea to the sky,' said Shigeki Muto, former commander of the Air Self-Defense Force's Air Defense Command. 'By repeatedly violating Japan's territorial waters and airspace, China aims to give the international community the impression that it has effective control over the Senkaku Islands.' The government will likely discuss whether to continue calling for self-restraint from private flights or to introduce legal restrictions. However, according to the Civil Aeronautics Law, no-fly zones can only be issued for areas that pose an evident physical danger, such as places where radar systems are deployed by U.S. forces in Japan and there is a risk of instrument failure onboard aircraft. That makes it difficult to create regulations that are binding. 'We will carefully study what measures will leave China with no excuses for illegally entering Japan's territory,' said a government official.
The Mainichi
2 days ago
- The Mainichi
Editorial: Japan must not delay pension reforms as Diet passes system revision bill
Measures to stabilize people's post-retirement livelihoods must be steadily implemented in Japan. A bill to revise Japan's public pension system has passed the House of Representatives and is now expected to become law. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Komeito coalition had earlier reached an agreement with the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP) to add provisions in supplementary clauses to boost basic pension levels. Initially, the government considered incorporating the benefit enhancement plan directly into the bill, but backed down due to resistance from within the LDP. Criticism arose over plans to utilize reserve money from the Employees' Pension Insurance system, with opponents labeling it "a misuse of funds." Some LDP figures also expressed concern that implementing the measure would temporarily reduce pension benefit levels and negatively impact the party's hopes in the summer House of Councillors election. If left unchanged, the current pension system will see basic pension payments decrease by approximately 30% in about 30 years, raising concerns that the number of people expected to face insufficient pension benefits will increase, particularly among the so-called "employment ice age generation," who struggled to find stable employment throughout the post-bubble economy malaise. Given such projected outcomes, the CDP demanded that basic pension-boosting measures be reinstated, a request the LDP eventually agreed to. We can appreciate that the political parties succeeded in reaching consensus as the end of the current Diet session approaches. Still, implementation of these measures comes with certain conditions. The pension-boosting policies would be introduced only if the outlook for pension finances, set to be released in 2029, projects a decrease in basic benefits. Postponing pension reforms and relying too heavily on hopes of economic growth improving pension finances risks future repercussions. Political parties must work rigorously to ensure these pension-enhancement steps are definitively realized. The establishment of solid resources has also been deferred. Currently, half of basic pension benefits are funded through taxes. Over 2 trillion yen (about $13.86 billion) in additional public expenses will be required in the future, yet detailed discussions were avoided ahead of the July upper house election. Unless Japan experiences a substantial expansion in tax revenue at current rates, tax increases inevitably await. Securing public acceptance will take considerable time. Failing to begin serious deliberations promptly cannot be considered a responsible attitude. This revision of the pension system includes additional measures, such as improving coverage for part-time workers and reviewing rules that currently reduce Employees' Pension Insurance benefits for elderly people who remain employed. Despite this revision impacting the daily lives of the public significantly, considerable delays in submitting the bill resulted in insufficient time for Diet discussions. Responsibility clearly rests with the governing parties. Although the three-party talks involving the LDP, Komeito and CDP succeeded in shaping amendments, the Diet ought to formally create platforms enabling participation from all parties. Both ruling and opposition parties must avoid exploiting pension issues for political purposes, but focus instead on ensuring the pension system's viability and sustainability.
Yomiuri Shimbun
2 days ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Diet Panel Starts Deliberations on Dual Surname Bills
Yomiuri Shimbun file photo The Diet Building in Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo Tokyo (Jiji Press) — A committee of the House of Representatives on Friday began deliberations on three bills submitted by opposition parties related to a selective dual surname system for married couples. At the day's meeting of the lower house's Judicial Affairs Committee, the leading opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, the Japan Innovation Party and the Democratic Party for the People respectively gave summaries of their bills. This was the first deliberation in 28 years at the committee on legislation for a selective dual surname system for married couples. The bills submitted respectively by the CDP and the DPP are designed to revise the Civil Code to allow married couples in the country to choose the same or different surnames. As ways to decide children's surnames, the CDP bill calls on married couples to decide these at the time of their marriage. The DPP bill proposes that children have the same surnames as the first registrants on the family register, which parents would select at the time of their marriage. JIP's bill is aimed at revising the family register law to introduce a system in which maiden names are recorded in the family register as commonly used names. None of the three bills are expected to be passed during the current Diet session, as they are unlikely to gain majority support at parliamentary votes. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party skipped submission of its own bill in the current Diet session, as the party contains supporters and opponents of a selective dual surname system and did not reach a conclusion on whether to introduce it.
