Campaigning by leaders of political parties are heating up as the Upper House election nears, but their debate over agricultural policies has not deepened. Who should we choose to entrust the future of agriculture, rural communities and safety and security of food? Political parties and candidates should discuss concrete policies from the viewpoint of farmers so that they will be easier to understand.
Needless to say, the biggest point of issue is the policies concerning the Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade negotiations. The People’s Life Party, the Social Democratic Party and the Green Wind party clearly expressed opposition to the TPP scheme in their campaign pledges, and the Japanese Communist Party pledged to urge the government to withdraw from the talks. Meanwhile, Your Party held up a pledge to promote the TPP framework and the Japan Restoration Party is also campaigning on a clear, pro-TPP platform, stressing the need for “aggressive negotiations.” The Liberal Democratic Party, New Komeito party and the Democratic Party of Japan are competing over how to secure national interests in the TPP negotiations.
While each party’s standpoint regarding the TPP talks is becoming clear, major parties such as the LDP and the DPJ address the issue on the premise that Japan will participate in the talks, and fail to provide concrete campaign pledges when it comes to specific strategies. The LDP stated in its campaign pledges that it will utilize its negotiating power to protect what should be protected and go on the offensive when necessary. In its list of policy proposals known as the J-File, the LDP said it will strive to exclude five key agricultural products from tariff elimination in the TPP negotiations, but the party does not identify the issue in its campaign platform. The DPJ went as far as stating that it is ready to withdraw from the talks if the key agricultural products are not exempted from tariff cuts, but attitudes are said to be still divided within the party.
For farmers, what will happen to tariffs on agricultural products such as rice is a matter of life or death. Since it largely influences their lives, it must not be left ambiguous. How could politicians just say it “depends on future negotiations” when a young, entrepreneurial farmer is working hard to make his dream come true? They have the responsibility to show a clear determination to deserve a vote.
While there is a heated discussion over the TPP talks, arguments on the future vision of agriculture remain superficial. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has come up with a 10-year plan to double income in the agricultural sector, but exactly how will he realize the goal? How will the LDP deal with the unresolved issue of revising the individual household income support system? How is it going to put into practice a direct payment system which it says will be extended to owners of grasslands, orchards and other fields? All of the above issues are significant in deciding the future of Japan’s agriculture, and clear blueprints including how to obtain fiscal resources should be offered. The another controversial issue of deregulation in the agricultural sector, such as allowing private enterprises to own farmlands, is also put on the table.
In his famous poem Unbeaten by Rain, Kenji Miyazawa wrote:
…
If there is a sick child in the east
Go and take care of him
If there is an exhausted mother in the west
Go and carry a bunch of rice stalks for her
…
Shedding tears on a scorching day
Walking with worry on a cool summer day
…
In the poem, Miyazawa expressed his deep feelings toward the hardships of building a new rural community. Politicians should walk into the rural villages and discuss face-to-face with farmers, which will definitely offer them insights to come up with measures taking account of the actual circumstances.
The Upper House election will be a turning point in setting a future course for the nation’s agriculture. Leaders of political parties and candidates should visit rural communities and listen to the compelling voices of farmers.
(July 9, 2013)