 |
Urgent
Proposal on the Introduction of Manifestos
—With
an eye on the coming general election and the LDP presidential
election in autumn—
(July 7, 2003)
Congressional Forum for New Japan (21 Seiki Rincho) |
 |
| |
On
July 4, the Congressional Forum for New Japan (21 Seiki
Rincho) held a general assembly to commemorate its new
inception. With an expanded organizational system and an increased
participation of eminent persons in society, the Forum pledged
to actively engage in full-fledged political reform movements.
This proposal is the first message formulated under the new
system. It stresses the necessity of comprehensively introducing
a manifesto system to Japan to serve as a breakthrough for
reforming party politics and establishing a government-oriented
political system. |
| |
| <The
Current State of Government and the Significance of Manifestos> |
| |
| (1)
Given the present circumstances in Japan, it is necessary
to reform the political party system, beginning with elections.
|
| |
With
respect to the deepening crisis of the economy and people’s
living, the proposal firstly mentions the growing sense of
despair among the public regarding the opaqueness of Japan’s
politics, the political inability to solve problems, weak
leadership, and the lack of accountability.
Ideally, political parties should present to the public visions
for the country, and initiate reforms. The Cabinet should
be an organization of such political parties, and the political
system should enable the Cabinet to determine and implement
policies. However, the proposal claims that it is precisely
this mechanism that is obstructing the effective outcome of
structural reforms in Japan. In order to reexamine the cycle
and structure of party politics, from general elections to
governmental administration, as well as to establish a responsible,
government-oriented system, the proposal stresses the need
to go back to the election stage, or the root of the issue,
and carry out fundamental political reforms. |
| |
| (2)
In the next general election, political parties should present
“administration policy pledges,” or what are now
commonly called “manifestos.” The LDP must promptly
formulate an administration policy pledge based on its “presidential
manifesto.” |
| |
The
proposal advocates the introduction of manifestos, while it
strongly criticizes campaign promises made by political parties
to the public at each national election. Campaign promises
are simply abstract, unverifiable goals and intentions that
are made as a sweeping gesture to the public. In most cases,
no thought is given to their feasibility, and no framework
is created for their implementation. In other words, the policy
platforms of political parties have no bearing whatsoever
on the political outlook of the government.
General elections must serve as the starting point for bringing
about a government-oriented leadership. But if the commitments
made and accepted by political parties and the public during
a general election are ambiguous at best, the proposal states
that “no matter what kind of structural reforms are implemented,
it is virtually impossible for political parties to motivate
the bureaucracy to attain specific goals, to exercise strong
leadership among politicians, or to gain public consensus
on their reform plans.” Based on this understanding,
the proposal calls on all parties to break away from the practice
of campaign promises that fail to identify the locus of responsibility
and obscure the relationship between elections and the administration.
In place of such campaign promises, it proposes the introduction
of administration policy pledges, or manifestos, that require
administration policies and policy implementation frameworks
to be spelled out in specific terms. Only then can Japan realize
a government that holds specific targets, allows clear evaluations,
and guarantees the implementation of policies.
The proposal also implies that the LDP presidential election
scheduled for this September will serve as an important test
for turning the next general election into a contest of manifestos
advocated by each political party. In order to give substance
to the LDP manifesto and to establish a strong leadership
within the party, candidates for the presidential election
should propose concrete policies and implementation frameworks
as a “presidential manifesto.” The manifesto presented
by the candidate who is elected president should form the
basis of the LDP’s administration policy pledge for the
next general election. |
| |
| Summary
of the proposal |
| |
| 1.
The public should reject elections based on sugar-coated campaign
promises and demand meaningful manifestos. |
| |
|
|
| (1) |
As a means of
changing the government and selecting the prime minister,
general elections do not require individual candidates to
make “personal campaign promises,” nor do they call
for “party-oriented campaign pledges” that are in
fact a “wish list” of party principles and policies
that have no connection to their desires and strategies for
taking the reins of government. What are essential to general
elections are “administration-oriented campaign promises”
that would shape the administration after the election. In
other words, they refer to “administration policy pledges.” |
| |
|
| (2) |
Manifestos that
are being demanded of political parties are essentially what
these “administration policy pledges” are about.
Both the public and political parties must break away from
the concept of “campaign promises,” which simply
serve to obscure the locus of responsibility for public commitments
as well as the relationship between the administration and
elections. They must begin preparing for the next general
election by mutually acknowledging the term “manifesto.” |
| |
|
| 2.
All political parties should present a manifesto at the next
general election. |
| |
|
| (1) |
A manifesto is
a contract binding the bearer of the next administration to
the public. It must contain specific policies for governmental
administration which the political party or coalition of parties
intend to pursue during their term in the administration.n
after the election. In other words, they refer to “administration
policy pledges.” |
| |
|
| (2) |
The manifesto
should be instrumental for improving the quality of political
parties and the government, and for realizing a government
that has definite targets, allows clear evaluations, and guarantees
the implementation of policies. It provides a way to ensure
that political parties participate in elections as the bearers
of such a government. |
| |
|
| (3) |
In the next general
election, political parties should present a specific policy
package they intend to pursue as the next administration,
along with (i) specific targets that can be verified by the
public as well as self-evaluated (numerical targets, timetables,
financial means, etc.), (ii) an implementation framework,
and (iii) a working schedule for policy implementation. They
should strive to realize a general election based on manifestos
for the first time in the history of Japan’s constitutional
government. |
| |
|
| 3.
The LDP must select a manifesto at its presidential election
in autumn. |
| |
|
| (1) |
As the LDP presidential
election is scheduled to be held immediately before the general
election, it is expected to serve as an important test for
turning the next general election into a contest of manifestos. |
| |
|
| (2) |
In order to provide
substance to the manifesto and to establish a strong leadership
within the party, all candidates of the LDP presidential election
should present concrete policies and implementation frameworks
they intend to pursue if elected president, in the form of
a “presidential manifesto.” The manifesto presented
by the candidate who is elected president should form the
basis of the LDP manifesto for the next general election,
and the LDP should reveal to the public the process by which
the manifesto was formulated. |
| |
|
| 4.
The Public Office Election Law should be revised to enable
election campaigns to be based on manifestos. |
| |
|
| (1) |
The present Public
Office Election Law prohibits candidates from campaigning
before the official announcement for an election is given.
Even after the official announcement has been given, however,
it strictly prohibits the distribution of documents other
than postcards and flyers stipulated by the law. Therefore,
even if a political party prepares a booklet of its manifesto,
it is not allowed to distribute it. In order to enable the
next general election to be a contest of manifestos, it is
urgently necessary to revise the law to at least allow the
free distribution of manifestos at any time, whether before
of after the official announcement of an election. Furthermore,
the ban should be lifted on the use of the Internet, which
is currently classified among restricted literatures and images. |
| |
|
| (2) |
Furthermore, the
present Public Office Election Law prioritizes the ideas of
those who manage election campaigns, and does not presuppose
an election in which political parties engage in full-blown
policy debates with each other. Instead, it mainly provides
for matters concerning the election campaigns of individual
candidates. This is what consequently produced the distinctly-Japanese
electoral practices of broadcasting the backgrounds of candidates
and repetitively advertising their names only. In addition
to making the minimum required revisions to the law with an
eye to the next general election, a group of nonpartisan lawmakers
should drastically review the Public Office Election Law itself,
including reexamining campaign broadcasts and lifting the
ban on door-to-door canvassing for voters. |
| |
|
| 5.
The mass media should provide in-depth coverage of manifestos. |
| |
|
| (1) |
The mass media
is expected to play an important role in turning the next
general election into a contest of manifestos. To this end,
it will also be required to devise new reporting schemes.
For example, in governmental elections under the single-seat
constituency system, the public is urged to compare the “performance
of the incumbent administration” with the “future
visions of the opposition parties,” and is prompted to
vote in retrospect. The mass media will therefore be required
to provide in-depth coverage on the new manifesto of the ruling
party based on an evaluation of the performance of the incumbent
administration, and it will need to focus on the manifestos
of opposition parties from the perspective of assessing their
ability to take over the reins of government. |
| |
|
| (2) |
Also, in the event
that political parties agree to unite their efforts in a governmental
election so that a ruling coalition contends with an opposition
coalition, the mass media should not only report on individual
electoral districts and political parties, but it must focus
on the manifestos of the coalitions. |
| |
|
| (3) |
Traditional election
coverage simply introduced the public commitments of political
parties across the board. This type of coverage would seem
to guarantee a fair and just election, but it had actually
presented an impediment to the public’s right to select
its government. A rising awareness of the necessity of media
coverage centered on manifestos creates the opportunity to
overhaul the strange media practice of downplaying political
reports during campaign periods, and enables the mass media
to seek a more significant identity. |
|
|
|
|
