|
On May 7, DPJ member of the House of Representatives Chinami Nishimura debated Japan’s falling birthrate and the state of childrearing support with various Cabinet members in the Committee on Budget of the House of Representatives.
Nishimura posed questions regarding the expected economic benefits of “The Special Allowance for Childrearing” included in the supplementary budget, as well as the basis on which the proposed beneficiaries and amount of allowance to be paid had been determined. Minister of Finance Kaoru Yosano replied regarding the economic benefits: “It is not by any means a large amount, but we calculated that it would be a policy that would give some kind of support,” but did not give any precise estimate of the economic effect of the policy. Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare Yoichi Masuzoe explained the rationale for the proposed amount of the benefit, saying, “The basic amount of daycare charges paid by households who are not subject to pay residents’ tax is 6,000 yen per month, so we will provide half that amount, that is 3,000 yen per month. 3,000 yen times 12 months comes to a total of 36,000 yen per annum.”
In response to this, Nishimura expressed the opinion that “This is not at all a rational explanation,” adding that the administration needed to provide a clearer explanation of the grounds for limiting the payment of the allowance to households with children between “the ages of 3 and 5”. She went on to state that “according to financial law, the supplementary budget should be composed of emergency measures…including the Special Allowance for Childrearing in the supplementary budget is also extremely problematic from the perspective of fiscal discipline.” Minister of State for Social Affairs and Gender Equality Yoko Obuchi acknowledged that limiting support to a one-off payment “certainly was extremely inadequate in some respects,” and said that it was a first step toward considering fundamental measures for dealing with the falling birthrate.
Nishimura commented on petitions from the victims of domestic violence calling for the prevention of fixed sum economic stimulus payments being paid to the head of the household, and said that the same concern existed in the case of the Special Allowance for Childrearing. She called on Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications Kunio Hatoyama to rethink the system of distributing payments to the head of each household, saying, “It is still not too late. I would like you to rethink the procedures.”
Nishimura went on to say that placing a time-limit on the policy was nonsensical, saying “Childrearing doesn’t end in a year just to suit the whims of the government and the ruling parties. It is only with the establishment of a permanent framework that people will be able to raise their children free from care.” She went on to stress that the DPJ’s proposed child allowance was a permanent policy that was laid out in clearly in the party manifesto, and that upon taking power, the party would secure the necessary budget and realise the policy.
Finally, Nishimura raised the issue of support given to one-parent households, saying, “If you were able to dole out 14 trillion yen in vote-pleasing measures, why were you not able to restore the 20 billion yen of supplementary benefits paid to one-parent households?” Masuzoe answered that this policy (of reducing supplementary benefits) had been born out of the desire to give incentives to work and encourage the independence of those who were capable of working but made no effort to do so.
Nishimura retorted that 85% of mothers who headed single-parent households in Japan were working, but they were constricted by part-time and temporary working conditions. She stressed that in contrast to the government initiative, which is based on the US-style workfare ideology wherein you must be actively searching for work to receive benefits, the DPJ would implement a comprehensive support package including the elimination of the gender gap in earnings and the consolidation of daycare service provision.
|
.jpg)
.jpg)