My opinion this week(152):

An idling diet

  At this very critical stage of politics, a Diet is not functioning at all.
The three opposition parties decided to boycott the diet session to protest
the ruling coalition's one-sided tactics in pushing through the Lower House
a bill to reduce 20 number of proportional representation seats. It marked
the first time in modern history that a prime minister's policy speech has
been boycotted by the opposition.

  The question is that word of one-sided tactics. The ruling coalition
insisted that they decided the matter by vote for they took enough time
to discuss the bill including opposition group. The opposition insisted
that the ruling front forced to pass the bill at the beginning of diet
session to avoid the leave of the Liberal Party from the coalition unity.
The motive of that action was to try to keep the interest of three coalition
parties, the opposition insist.  The opposition would boycott all diet session 
because of this reason.

  Policy speech by a prime minister can be heard at any places with or 
without attendance of opposition parties. The question and answer session
on it is usually very conventional and not quite important. The critical
problem is the discussion on the fiscal 2000 national budget. The 
deliberation on the budget at a Diet is the most important for people of
the country. How could they avoid discussing such a critical issue at the
Diet? The Democratic Party has started the fight outside of the Diet looking
for early dissolution of the Lower House.

  A limitless argument may be possible once we start to arguer which is
right and which is wrong on this issue. Many mass-media are taking a 
kind of neutral stand on this issue. While they criticized some strong-
arm tactics of the ruling coalition, they also raised some doubt on their
move of the Democratic Party that is against the process of the bill
at the beginning of the diet session, while they expressed the agreement
on the reduction of diet seats itself. Only a few media criticize the 
coalition front for they went ahead to take a kind of strong approach
at this time.

  Personally, I believe that we should not stand on the neutral position
on this issue. We should say a definite yes or no on the boycott taken by
the opposition parties. If the Democratic Party accused the coalition
for they just worked for the sake of the interest of coalition, they should
be blamed for the same reason. 

 I think that the Democratic Party made a serious mistake by boycotting
the diet session corpora ting with the Japan Communist Party and the
Democratic Socialist Party that are opposing the reduction of seats at
the Lower House.

  In order to realize a democracy, the process to reflect the will of 
the people is very important, of course. However, it seems that the
Democratic Party is completely against the majority vote rule of 
democracy by boycotting the diet session working with two other parties
that have some entirely different policies on the issue in question.

  If the Democratic Party does not agree with the process to decide the
policy, they should appeal it to the people in general election which
may come soon. How can they justify their activities that they are not
following the majority rule of democracy while they are doing just
political campaign outside of the diet?

  I think their name; the Democratic Party is not worthwhile at all
as their name under the present circumstance.

2000/2/5
Tadashi HAYASE

My opinion of this week(153)

A closed society in network age

  A fix play of Sumo is a topic in worldwide news media these days. I don't
want to believe that there was such a fix game in the traditional Japanese
sport. Further more, it is very disgusting to read comments relating to those
news. Most of comments are on the closeness of Japanese society referring to
such a fix game of Sumo. Such fix games may exist not only in Sumo, but also
in any other sports in the world. And we Japanese are not quite pleasant to 
read such kind of articles on the closeness of Japanese society in relation 
to a fix game case of Sumo.

  Then we should ask ourselves: "Is the Japanese society or Japanese really
so closed? " The answer is yes in many respects unfortunately. 

  There were so many scandals disclosed last year in police authorities in
a few prefectures. That is a typical example of closeness of police
authority offices. It was unbelievable to see that the police authorities
that are to defend laws, protected their men and their face first rather 
than laws. There were also many of such scandals in business world in the
past few years.

  It is nothing wrong to cherish a group or an organization that people
belong to. However, any groups or organizations are just small entities. 
The validity of their existence should always be checked by national and
global standard viewpoints. If there were no such checks or supervision 
any more, they would become a closed society. 

  Under the development of Internet and portable phones worldwide, there
exist much wider communication opportunities today. But I just wonder 
with whom people are communicating.  The main mail pals are families, 
friends, or people in the same business. That's fine. But the problem is
that those mail pals are limited to categories. 

  The meaning and advantage of Internet mail is to communicate with people
in various fields of the world. The closeness is to be just intensified so
far as mail pals are just limited to that way. 

  In order to live in the current network society, it is necessary to break
such closeness in question. Many people start using e-mail these days, but
they are nothing but a kind of communication tool. How can we say that the
network age has come under such circumstance that e-mails are only used 
within closed societies?

  In this network society, it is very important to protect a privacy of
individual and secrecy of individual communication. But at the same time,
people should have more open mind for communication sharing common valuable
information in the world.

  How can we Japanese survive in this new network society? It entirely
depend upon how we can open up our closed mind and closed social systems.

  One other important aspect of this issue is that how that closeness
of Japanese and Japanese society will be opened by the use of open network
media such as Internet e-mail. Only little people may recognize the importance
of such aspect of the current boom of e-mail.

2000/2/12
Tadashi HAYASE

My opinion this week(154):

A new tax in Tokyo

  The so-called "Gaikei hyoujun kazei" , the concept of taxing corporation
based on their size, rather than on profit, was announced to be introduced
in Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture. In the case of a new taxation in
Tokyo, 3% of gross profit not on net operational profit is the one in 
question.

  This announcement created a lot of sensation throughout the nation. In
the past, local tax for business firms was based on net operation profit,
but this new tax is imposed on the basis of 3% of gross-profit that banks
earn in their operation. The Metropolitan Government intend to get about
11 billion yen tax revenue. The tax revenue decreased significantly since
the end of bubble economy. There is a special clause in the Local Tax Law
to support this action taken by the Tokyo Metropolitan Office.

  Needless to say, those banks operating in Tokyo were severely against 
the new tax. They said that this new plan is not fair because it target 
only to banks. That will provide adverse effects on the management efforts
to recover from bad debt burden. 

  Many economic and business organization and association also expressed
the objection on the new tax. They are afraid that such new taxation system
will also be imposed on other industries following to banking business.
The Government and the central finance authorities are against the new
plan, of course. They expressed concern on some bad effects on the mana-
gement of leading banks and the elimination of distrust against monetary
system that is a part of reason for a long economic slump in this country.
Most of all, the Government does not like the way Tokyo Metropolitan Office
announced such important decision without making any consultation with the
central authorities beforehand.

  Most parties in the metropolitan assembly supported this plan for they
consider it necessary to improve financial difficulties of Tokyo. The 
reaction from other prefectures are various. Some showed a great interest
in the new taxation system for they had same kind of financial problems
to tackle. Some governors said that such new taxation system should have
been introduced simultaneously at all over the country, while they consider
it necessary to be introduced in their own prefectures.

  There must be many advantages and disadvantages on this new taxation 
and I cannot discuss all of those issues and points from professional
point of views. Nevertheless, I would like to set a high valuation on this
political decision at this time. So far, none of prefectures could have
made such an important policy decision by themselves. All of other 
prefectures has just followed to the guidance by the central Government
on any issues. 

 No legal problem is involved on this decision itself. Without any of such 
autonomy and independency, I believe that such stagnant situation of politics
both at local level and central level in this country will never be improved. 

  Certainly, there will be more voice which request the Metropolitan Office
to make further restructuring of their financial position. Governor Ishihara
has taken several steps to improve their financial debt including reduction
of number of employees of their offices. However, he must know now that
a lot more efforts to improve the operational efficiency inside of their
offices will be necessary. 

  At the same time, it is obvious that more drastic restructuring and
improvement of the operational efficiency are requested for any Japanese
business firms, especially for big banks. Under the zero interest circumstance,
Japanese big banks make a big earning by lending their money with 3% or so
much interest rate. I believe that 3% tax on gross profit earned that way
are quite reasonable in any sense of the world.

  It is a common feeling pf people that they may ask the following questions.
Why are those Japanese banks failed on their business operation due to their
easy going loan in bubble days are helped by special fund paid from taxes 
from general publics?  It is common feeling of people that those banks should
pay such tax for sure.

  In this free markets, those banks that cannot agree to continue to pay
such tax, will go out from Tokyo and move to other cities where there are no
such tax after a while. Any local government should make any of such policy
decision based on their own judgment taking all of such factors into
consideration. This is, I understand, the start of new era for the autonomy
for any local governments and the start of new democracy in this nation.

2000/2/19
Tadashi HAYASE

My opinion this week(155):

Too late, too little

  The title of "My opinion this week" is expressed in English exceptionally.
This word is used by a certain foreign reporter or critics to describe slow
decision making process and their little outcome of Japanese politics and
management in general. Unfortunately, such description is true, as to slow
decision making process and actions of Japanese politics and business to a
certain extent. This is generally true with the way of thinking of Japanese
people.

  Last week, an Upper House Constitution study pannel started at the Diet.
This study pannel is organized to make a full-scale parliamentary discussion
on whether to rewrite parts of nation's hitherto untouchable Constitution. The
Liberal Party that is most aggressive to try to revise Constitution, schedule
to create a new Constitution sometime in 2005 after necessary study and
discussion. Why does it take so much time? 

  Japanese Communist Party and Social Democratic Party declared they will
oppose any revision, while the Democratic Party of Japan and New Komeito
maintained they will only "discuss" the supreme code at this stage. The
Liberal Democratic Party, that is in power now, consist of parliamentary
members who have all sort of different opinion on the revision of Constitution.
So it will take a long time before the study panel gets a certain conclusion
on this issue. What a wasteful process it is!

  Needless to say, revision of constitution is very important for sure. But
why does it take so much time? This is a typical example of "too-late, too-
little". What and how do they discuss this taking so much time?  

   One important argument is on the revision of Article ) of constitution.
There were always a lot of dispute in Japan whether or not Japan could 
dispatch PKF abroad under the existence of Article 9 of Constitution when
the dispatch is requested by UN. Some insist to revise the article so that
Japan could contribute to peacekeeping operation for global society 
including the dispatch of armed force in one way or the other. Some strongly
were against any of such possibility. I would not argue which is right or
wrong at this time. I just wonder why is it necessary to take so much time
to make such an important decision? 

  All sort of careful and abundant discussion is possible in a year or so,
I believe. The leaders and the Diet must make a decision in much shorter
period of time. Japan is not well trusted by other countries because she
is too slow in taking any concrete actions.

  I talked about the introduction of a new tax system in Tokyo by Governor
Ishihara. I appreciated his great political decision and leadership. Is this
too fast and too easy-going decision as criticized by some critics? I don't
think so. Possibility of introducing such new tax system has been studied
over ten years by the Government Tax Research Team. Nothing happened so far
after spending so much time and money. The Diet and politicians exist not 
for arguing something but for making some actions which are good for 
people and the nation.

  We understand the importance of discussing about the constitution. But
the contemporary global society wait for Japan's definite attitude and 
actions on peacekeeping operation, for example. What sort of conclusion
can we get by discussing such issue over five years?

  The issue is not so simple and easy to solve. We know that, of course.
Any decisions include two phases, advantages and disadvantages, plus and
minus effects on the outcome. Politics and management exist to make a
certain concrete decision to select the better alternatives after making
some proper study and discussion. But Japanese politics just spend a
lot of time to do anything.

  "too-late, too-little" is a typical psychological stance of Japanese
people as well politicians and business executives in general. We should
Realize the weakness resulted from such structure of psychology now.

2000/2/26
Tadashi HAYASE