On June 20, the DPJ Next Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Nobutaka Tsutsui, issued the following statement.

On June 18, the Administrative Vice Minister at the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries criticised the bill for revitalising rural communities, submitted to the Diet by the DPJ, in the name of pointing out problematic issues.

Firstly, a person who is in effect the administrative head of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries criticises the policies of a publicly-run political party, and moreover, goes so far as to make a comment that “there is a possibility that policy will take a totally different course to the agricultural policy that the Ministry has implemented up until now,” while the legislation is still under debate in the Diet, which is the highest organ of national power. This comment acknowledges that the LDP/Komeito government is a bureaucratic cabinet, where “bureaucrats determine policy”, and furthermore lays bare the reality that the Aso Cabinet is definitely “controlled by the bureaucrats.” In addition, the bureaucracy should be a professional body dedicated to supporting the cabinet, and so not only does criticising the policies of a publicly-run political party run counter to that mission, but it poses a risk of violating political neutrality, and so we certainly cannot overlook it. Furthermore, the comments of the Administrative Vice Minister regarding the legislation certainly do not seem to have been made based on an accurate understanding of its contents obtained for example from listening to an explanation made by the DPJ. Making prejudiced criticisms shows a lack of the impartiality required of a public servant, and we cannot help but judge him as lacking in professional temperament and ability.

Here are our comments regarding the points cited as problematic.

1. Regarding the “sense of urgency” of the policies

The measures called for in the bill for revitalising rural communities should of course be tackled with a sense of urgency, starting with those measures that are possible to implement. However, there are also measures, such as the income support system for the fishing industry and the traceability system, which require information gathering and a transformation to a preparatory period, and consequently, such measures are to be implemented gradually, within a target period of 4 years from the implementation of the law. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, which has wasted time and money in vain, and brought our nation’s agriculture to the brink of disaster, has no right to be talking about lacking a sense of urgency. Rather, the administrative top should himself be responding with a “sense of urgency” to his real work, such as enforcing official discipline against the Ministry officials who have been found to have falsified the records of stocks of rice and other produce.

2. Regarding the establishment of production targets

Production targets should ultimately be established on the authority of the government in order to achieve food self-sufficiency ratio targets, and we intend to engage in this with a firm determination. Criticising the DPJ’s proposed policy measures by citing voices of protest from those directly engaged in regulating rice production, is based on the “illusion” that the policies carried out by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries up until now are definitely correct, and is totally nonsensical. Rather, [the Administrative Vice Minister] has failed to realise that in referring to the regulation of rice production he is himself negating the current system of regulating production, and this is evidence of an unredeemable stupidity.

Furthermore, with regard to the establishment of production targets for barley, soybeans and stock farm products; this will raise the self-sufficiency ratios for foodstuffs, which are imported in large quantities, and in addition to there being no problem in aiming for an increase in production, it will naturally be possible to meet the needs of consumers and actual users in terms of quality and cost.

3. Regarding the method used to realise food sufficiency ratio targets

In order to realise food sufficiency ratio targets, we will establish a minimum safety net of income compensation by introducing income support systems aimed at producers who are meeting production targets; guarantee competitiveness with relation to imported goods by introducing traceability systems such as HACCP and GAP in order to differentiate domestically-produced agricultural, forestry and fishing industry products, and by expanding the product labelling of country of origin for ingredients in processed foods; and by realising the creation of sixth sector industries in rural communities that are engaging in value-added processing and distribution sectors under the deflationary economy. This intention is made clear not only in our bill for revitalising rural communities, but is also set forth in the DPJ’s “Vision for Transforming Rural Communities into Participants in Sixth Sector Industry”, which is the basis for this bill and which even a child can understand at a glance.

Now, to add one last word, the DPJ, if entrusted with the reins of power by the majority of the electorate, will overthrow the current “bureaucratic cabinet system”, as well as enacting reforms so as to shift to a true “parliamentary cabinet system” where the ruling party takes responsibility for formulating and implementing policies, and the bureaucracy acts as a professional support body for the cabinet.