Press Conference by Taro Aso, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Finance, and Minister of State for Financial Services

(Excerpt)

(Friday, June 21, 2019,  6:17 pm to 6:33 pm)

A.

You like the term working group, but it’s still a sagyou bukai.

Q.

Yes.

A.

What’s been formally decided by a sagyo bukai is passed up to the Council for deliberation, and only then is it adopted. It only becomes government policy after deliberations at a general meeting. So this is before that stage. This topic that you’re taking about is. You understand? You’re making out that we have refused to accept something that’s been officially signed and sealed, that’s been formally decided on, but that isn’t the case.

Q.

But you didn’t really need to say that you wouldn’t accept it before the decision had been made.

A.

That’s a totally different issue to what we are talking about. What we are saying is that this topic involves various matters, and this topic will move up to the Council and that things will take time. Besides that, there are other topics like this, and it’s going to take a long time. This means that the topic will sweep more and more people along with it, so it’ll keep spreading. And if this is going to whip up concerns unnecessarily, and before that this topic turns into wrong information and then spreads, it at least needs to be put to bed. The report also contains a lot of good things. But out of everything in it, people have been writing things that suggest that there will be a 50,000 yen per month shortage, or that unless you have 20 million yen in savings you won’t be able to survive. That’s a bit inaccurate, so our decision has been to act swiftly to respond properly. What Mr. Ibuki says is just his opinion.

Q.

What if the response like this time becomes the normal way of doing things?

A.

What do you mean by the “normal way of doing things?”

Q.

For example, if the response this time becomes established as a precedent, I think that this precedent could allow reports to be rejected if the views of the people asked to produce it are at odds with that of the government.

A.

That’s what you and the rest of the mass media are always saying, but we think that in this case the report rapidly whipped up a great deal of concern, and it led to statements being made that bore no relation to the fundamentals of the pension system. That’s wrong. So because those sorts of opinions are fundamentally wrong, we’ve pointed out the inaccuracies, and we’re not saying that everything else in the report is bad. But you people write as though we’re cherry picking, saying that the original report still stands, and you go on and on. But if you write like that, those stories keep spreading, but they’re wrong, and it’s certainly not the case that they will start affecting other areas more and more.

Site Map

top of page