Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Round 1 to the DPJ: MAFF and Minister Akamatsu

Reading Time: 4 mins

In Brief

The appointment of new Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) Minister Hirotaka Akamatsu – one of the most high-profile members of the DPJ, but a politician with almost no expertise on agricultural policy – is being interpreted as a symbol of the DPJ administration’s reform aiming to cut long-standing ties between Kasumigaseki (where Japan’s main ministries are located in Tokyo) and Nagatacho (where LDP headquarters is).

The Japanese press reports that MAFF bureaucrats, who, together with the LDP have controlled the country’s agricultural policy since 1955, have been gearing up for a war with the DPJ on the issue of transferring policymaking power from bureaucrats to politicians.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

MAFF’s Administrative Vice-Minister Michio Idei reportedly looked very nervous when he saw off former LDP MAFF Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who left the MAFF ministry building in Kasumigaseki to thunderous applause from ministry officials on 16th September.

Idei freely admitted knowing little of Minister Akamatsu: ‘To be honest, we don’t know anything about him…We have no connection with him at all’ (Nihon Nogyo Shinbun, 17 September 2009, p. 3). Idei reflected the general confusion amongst MAFF officials about Akamatsu’s appointment.

Meanwhile a DPJ executive pointed out that MAFF reform had become a symbol of the party’s flagship proposal to transfer policymaking power from bureaucrats to politicians.

The DPJ’s election manifesto, which contained key policy plans to make direct income compensation payments to farmers, to abolish tied grants from the central to prefectural and municipal governments and to abolish the local offices of the central ministries, would inevitably restructure and reduce the size of MAFF.

This was why MAFF was concerned about what would happen under the new minister, who in their view, had no experience of agricultural policy.

It is possible that the DPJ might have won this war without even a shot being fired.

The Mainichi on 18th September 2009 reported that Administrative Vice-Minister Idei had offered his unconditional surrender to the DPJ by withdrawing his earlier criticism of the party’s direct income compensation scheme as being ‘unrealistic’ (and for which he had been criticised by the DPJ as ‘contravening the political neutrality of bureaucrats’).

Idei apparently said that he ‘fully supported the DPJ government’s agricultural policy’. This was interpreted as an unexpectedly early surrender by the bureaucrats, whom Akamatsu had threatened with a most aggressive line: ‘work with us, or leave your position’. Akamatsu reportedly asked Idei to explain himself at their first meeting on the 17th September, whereupon Idei proffered: ‘Our task as bureaucrats is to support the government whoever the ruling party is. We are now prepared to fully support the new government’.

Welcome to the Westminster system.

Akamatsu accepted the apology, saying: ‘We are not interested in what you said in the past. We have more important things to do. We can now work together’.

At his first press conference on 17th September, Akamatsu revealed something of his hand on the issue of agricultural trade liberalisation: ‘It is hardly acceptable, even with direct compensation to farmers’ (Nikkei Shinbun, 18 September 2009, p. 5).

As noted in an earlier post, the DPJ is divided on the issue: some in the party are arguing that the compensation program will cancel out the effects of drastic tariff reductions on farmers, while others are fundamentally opposed to tariff reductions on agricultural products generally.

According to the new agriculture minister, the intraparty debate is currently dominated by the latter group. While acknowledging DPJ Secretary-General Ozawa Ichiro’s role in the coupling of agricultural trade liberalisation with the proposal for a direct compensation scheme, the new agricultural minister nevertheless said, ‘we all have different perspectives, which should be fully respected’ (Nikkei Shinbun, 18 September 2009, p. 5).

On the other hand, ex-MAFF official Kazuhito Yamashita reports in Diamond Online that Akamatsu is known for his pro-liberalisation stance, which he demonstrated during the 1993 debate on the Uruguay Round trade agreement when he advocated rice tariffication despite his own party’s (i.e. the SDP’s) rigid stance in favour of maintaining agricultural protectionism.

Against this backdrop, there are reports that the LDP’s agricultural and forestry ‘tribe’ (norin zoku) is still trying to exert influence on agricultural policy by emphasising the fact that the new minister is relatively unconnected to the farming industry and farmers’ groups. ‘Our concern is that farmers’ voices are not going to be reflected in the new government’s agricultural policy (Nihon Nogyo Shinbun, 17 September 2009, p. 3).

Comments are closed.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.