July 2009 to July 2010 - Religion and Politics in Contemporary Japan - page 180

s emphasis on social security (shakai hosh - ) in its manifesto was
similar to the main opposition party, Minshut - , although these were not new
objectives for Komeito. Young Komeito supporters by 2009 evaluated what
Komeito had achieved in terms of social security within the framework of the
LDP coalition, but were less enthusiastic about the more neo-liberal eco-
nomic policies. Yet, despite Komeito policies not reaching their ideal objective,
supporters were mostly convinced that it had been successful as a coalition
partner. In 2009, for all parties, the most important question should have
been about where the money would come from to cover increasing social
security costs. Komeito kept stressing, in its criticism of Minshut - , that policy
issues should be discussed in light of the extent to which people were willing
to pay higher taxes to pay for increased social security and not simply as
promises to attract votes. For Komeito it was not a question of whether
people needed higher social security bene

Komeito '

but how the gov-
ernment was going to pay for them. They argued that even without an
increase in social security, taxes would have to be raised just to maintain the
current system. Yet this fell mostly on deaf ears as discussions about raising
the consumption tax from its low of 5% had long been presented by the left as
an issue of stealing from the poor.
Komeito stressed the need for a fundamental overhaul of the tax system,
not only of increasing the consumption tax. However, it maintained that a
rise in consumption tax was necessary as part of tax reform pending on eco-
nomic recovery. This position was rather di

ts - they did -

erent from Minshut - , the SDP
and Kokumin Shint - , which had joined forces based on a common pledge to
refrain from raising the consumption tax for at least another four years.
Komeito argued that not seeing the rise in consumption tax as a necessary
part of the solution sidestepped the real issue of how increasing welfare ben-
e

ts were to be paid for. Supporters of Komeito used such arguments to try to
convince their friends that although Minshut - ' s policies looked attractive,

they were not grounded in fiscal reality. They argued that Komeito as a party

had consistently supported an increase in social welfare, if anything had
learned from its years in power that however much it might like to increase
social welfare spending, the question boiled down to how they were going to
pay for it. If voters wanted to receive higher social security, higher taxes
would have to be paid.
The 2009 election, however, was characterised by promises of increasing
monetary bene

ts without raising taxes. Another major point of discussion
for some years now had been the issue of declining childbirth (sh - shika
mondai). Minshut - ' s counter-proposal was to increase universal child-bene t

to 26,000 yen a month. Whether it was possible to solve the skewed work -

family balance, as discussed in the last chapter, through an increase in child
allowance was not part of the debates. Without addressing the value frame-
work that underpins work as the priority, it could be di

cult to address this
problem. This was the same for the importance of switching the economy to
sustainable development. Raising awareness would be an important exercise