Don't overly restrict nuclear panel membership
Will the government be able to rebuild its nuclear safety regime? It depends on whether it can properly select members of a new nuclear regulatory commission.
We urge the government to make every effort to select the best people for the job. The ruling and opposition parties should also review whether the current system under which the Diet approves the government's personnel proposals for certain institutions is being used properly.
Ahead of appointing members of the nuclear regulatory commission, the government has compiled guidelines for selecting its members.
The guidelines bar people who have served at nuclear-related companies or related organizations in the past three years, regardless of whether they were ordinary employees or executives. People who have received a certain amount of remuneration for lectures and other services from a single nuclear-related company in the past three years will also be barred from the commission.
===
Avoid excluding N-experts
The aim of avoiding people who have cozy ties with nuclear-related companies to ensure the neutrality and fairness of the nuclear safety administration is understandable.
However, it will be difficult to secure the most suitable people for the new commission if the government excessively excludes people who have been involved in the nuclear power industry. One important requirement for commission members should be a profound practical knowledge of nuclear power plants and related fields.
The role of the regulatory commission's chairman and members is not limited to crisis management after the outbreak of nuclear accidents. They also need skills to lead a nuclear regulatory agency, which will act as the secretariat of the commission, and to negotiate with the central and local governments.
It is desirable for the government to appoint people who have both such expertise and extensive practical experience.
The commission is not a place to discuss the nation's energy policies. Appointment by the government of people who vehemently favor abolishing nuclear power plants could lead to confrontations over the use of nuclear power within the commission. This could hinder the body from carrying out its main tasks, such as monitoring the safety of nuclear power reactors.
===
Scrap unjust rule on appointments
The government's appointment of the commission's chairman and four members requires Diet approval.
There is one problem--a rule that stipulates that the appointment of the chairman and members will be scrapped, in principle, if the media reports personnel proposals before they are submitted to the Diet.
The rule was made under a proposal by the Democratic Party of Japan in 2007, which was then in opposition, and was stipulated in a written agreement between the chairmen of Rules and Administration committees of both houses of the Diet.
The government's nomination of regulatory commission members has drawn wide public attention, so it is possible the media will report the government's personnel proposals before they are submitted to the Diet. In March, the government scrapped the nomination of a Bank of Japan policy board member after it was reported by the media before it was submitted to the Diet. This rule must be abolished as soon as possible.
It is possible to abuse this regulation by leaking nominations to the media to intentionally torpedo them. Scrapping nominations that the government has concluded are the best for the nation just because they are reported in the media would cause confusion in the appointment of members, and stall the government's administration of nuclear safety.
It is unacceptable to use the Diet's approval of the government's personnel proposals as a political weapon, as the DPJ did when it was in opposition.
For nominations of the Bank of Japan governor, which also require Diet approval, both houses invite candidates to their meetings of the Rules and Administration committees, request the candidates to give speeches and ask them questions.
Considering the importance of the nuclear regulatory commission, the Diet should make similar efforts to evaluate the competence of candidates.
(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 4, 2012)
(Jul. 5, 2012)
Can punishing tax hike rebels breathe life into DPJ?
Will the Democratic Party of Japan's disciplinary action against rebel lawmakers be the first step toward its reconstruction as a party in power?
The DPJ decided Tuesday to punish lawmakers who did not toe the party line in voting on the bills on integrated reform of the social security and tax systems in the House of Representatives last week.
The heaviest punishment of expulsion from the party will be imposed on former DPJ President Ichiro Ozawa and 36 other lawmakers who voted against the bills and submitted a letter of resignation from the party.
As for 19 lawmakers who voted against all or some of the bills but did not submit a letter of resignation, former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama will be suspended from party membership for six months and 18 others suspended for two months.
The punishments will be formalized after being discussed by the party's ethics panel.
Fifteen lawmakers who were absent or abstained from voting will be given a severe warning and cautioned under the names of the party's standing executive committee and the secretary general.
The DPJ decided to accept the resignations of 12 House of Councillors members who defected from the party along with Ozawa and his group members. They avoided being expelled because their actions were deemed not to be rebellious.
===
Punishments reasonable
Some observers believed it would take more time for the DPJ leadership to decide on disciplinary measures against the rebels. In this sense, it is commendable that punishments were decided quickly.
Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and DPJ Secretary General Azuma Koshiishi might have judged that quickly imposing the penalties would be necessary to solidify party unity and overcome the difficulties that have plagued the management of government.
We think the punishments are generally reasonable, when held up against past disciplinary measures.
It is natural that Ozawa and 36 other rebels who are pushing ahead with the creation of a new party were booted from the DPJ. Of the 19 lawmakers facing suspension from the party, Hatoyama, who previously served as DPJ president, will receive the heaviest penalty. This is quite understandable.
During a meeting of his group, Hatoyama indicated he might join hands with Ozawa, saying, "I share an understanding of many policies pursued by the former party president [Ozawa]." Hatoyama does not understand the situation he is in.
Rebuilding the DPJ will be a precarious task if its lawmakers continue to threaten to defect. Noda must ask Hatoyama about his real intention.
===
Triparty cooperation vital
The DPJ takes too long to make policies and decisions, and party members do not follow the party line even if decisions are made.
To correct the DPJ's immature political culture that was behind the latest rebellion, it is indispensable to reexamine and revise the authority and policymaking process of the party's Policy Research Committee.
It will also need to accelerate the formulation of a party platform, an issue left pending for a long time.
Now that the DPJ has punished the rebels, moves to normalize Diet business have finally started.
New parliamentary groups and the composition of committee members will be decided this week in the upper house, a move necessitated by the departure of Ozawa and his followers from the DPJ. A special committee is scheduled to be established to deliberate on the integrated reform of social security and tax systems.
The Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito had demanded that the DPJ come down hard on Ozawa and his fellow rebels. Now that the ruling party has obliged, the LDP and Komeito must actively cooperate in deliberations on the reform bills and other important bills.
We hope the three parties will get politics moving without the involvement of Ozawa.
(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 4, 2012)
(Jul. 5, 2012)
0 comments:
Post a Comment