|
On November 5, DPJ President Banri Kaieda held a press conference at party headquarters. He referred to various matters, including the focal points of the second half of the Diet session and the proposed revision of the civil code to eliminate discrimination against children born out of wedlock.
Regarding the remaining half of the Diet session, Kaieda said, “The Diet session started late, but now we are in the fourth week, and there are many important legislative proposals queuing up to be dealt with in the second half of the session. The proposal for a Japanese National Security Council looks likely to pass the House of Representatives this week. Legislation regarding the social security program and strengthening industry competition have undergone interpellation in the plenary session of the House of Representatives and are now to be discussed in the relevant committees. We would like to explain carefully and clearly to the Japanese people where the problems lie with each of these important pieces of legislation.”
Kaieda also touched on the fact that the DPJ, Your Party, the Social Democratic Party and independent Keiko Itokazu had submitted a joint member’s bill that morning. This bill proposed eliminating discrimination against children born out of wedlock from the civil code. Kaieda stated, “The DPJ has submitted this proposal as a members bill to both houses of the Diet a total of 17 times between 1998 and April of this year, but regrettably it has been buried on each occasion. The Supreme Court has made a ruling on this matter, and so we have decided to submit this proposal to the Diet once again. We would like to make every effort to ensure that this legislation sees the light of day as soon as possible.”
Kaieda was asked his opinion with regard to the issues of members of the House of Councillors Taro Yamamoto, who had passed a letter to the Emperor, and Antonio Inoki, who had visited North Korea without obtaining leave from the Diet. He responded that this was “my personal opinion”, and went on to criticise Yamamoto’s behaviour as “in a word an act lacking in common sense, and inappropriate behaviour for a Diet member”. With regard to Antonio’s visit to North Korea, Kaieda said that “In addition to the fact that he did not obtain permission from the Diet, there is the matter of the fact that we are called on to voluntarily refrain from visits to North Korea. This is a self-centred act.”
|
