Tomoyo MatsudaOn October 31, we will vote for the first general election in Japan in four years. Before that, on October 17, Fridays For Future Japan (FFFJ) held a public debate on climate action with members representing each political party. One of the two ruling parties and five opposition parties participated as the main political parties, while one from the Social Democratic Party (SDP) was absent. A first-year university student and a second-year high school student acted as moderators, and a third-year high school student and a third-year junior high school student participated as questioners. Half of the student members do not have the right to vote. It was quite epoch-making for such a young generation to hold a public debate with members representing each political party.
Why did FFFJ hold a climate change debate? That’s because climate action hasn’t risen at all as an election issue. In fact, the two ruling parties did not include the wording on climate action in the political views published in the election bulletin. Although some opposition parties included it, such as the Constitutional Democratic Party’s (CDP) “Carbon Neutral” and Japanese Communist Party‘s (JCP) “2030 Strategy for Breaking the Climate Crisis,” few parties have set out climate action as their main policy. Why is climate action neglected so far in the election that predicts the future of the country? Perhaps it is because the political parties have judged that “the people are not interested in climate change.”
FFFJ proceeded with a public debate along with four questions prepared in advance. Let’s see what each answer was.
Are your climate action policies consistent with the Paris Agreement and responsible for future generations and socially vulnerable people?
Regarding the first question, only Hamaguchi of the Democratic Party for the People (DPP) said “between yes and no,” and the other said “yes.”
Makihara of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) said, “Former Prime Minister Suga declared that Japan will be carbon neutral by 2050 last year, and announced that Japan aims to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 46-50% in 2030 from 2013 levels at Leaders Summit on Climate in April this year. We are moving toward a goal that is even higher than the target set in 2015. It is a challenging goal, but we are moving toward that goal.”
Yamazaki of the CDP said, “It is too late to achieve 50-60% in 2030. The challenge is how to move forward and speed up.”
Hamaguchi of DPP said, “We are considering a vision to realize carbon neutrality without sacrificing the stability and growth of people’s lives and the economy. We do not yet know the evaluation from the outside, and that’s why I answered, ‘between yes and no.’”
Are you aiming to abolish coal-fired power earlier than 2030?
The answers to the second question were divided. The ruling LDP and Komeito answered “no,” the opposition CDP, Japan Innovation Party (JCP), and Reiwa Shinsengumi said “yes,” and the DPP said “between yes and no.”
Niizuma of the ruling Komeito party said, “A stable supply of electricity is essential. We should gradually stop inefficient coal-fired power, keep highly efficient ones and take out carbon to bury it in the ground or use it as cement. That is more realistic.”
Tamura of JCP said, “We should stop coal-fired power. As the development of renewable energy and storage technology is steadily progressing worldwide, Japan is behind not only Europe but also China by relying on nuclear power and coal-fired power. If we do not clearly state that we can no longer rely on coal-fired power and have a renewable energy dissemination target, CO2 reduction will be postponed. It is also strange that the government relies on new technologies for CO2 absorption that haven’t been developed yet to achieve the target in 2030.”
Hamaguchi of DPP said, “In consideration of the impact on people’s lives and the economy, we should gradually reduce coal-fired power generation while making the timing flexible.”
Do you have a plan to abolish nuclear power？ If yes, when will it be?
Answers to the third question were divided within the ruling party and the opposition party. Only JIP answered “no,” LDP and DPP answered “between yes and no,” and Komeito, CDP, JCP, and the Reiwa Shinsengumi answered “yes.”
Makihara of LDP said, “We have the policy to replace conventional energy with renewable energy as the main power source in the future, but we cannot clear when it will be. If we stop nuclear power generation now, it will be replaced by coal-fired power. At the global meeting, it was pointed out that thermal power generation has a much greater destructive effect on the earth than nuclear power. We will consider the next power generation while reducing the number of nuclear power plants.”
On the other hand, Niizuma of another ruling party, Komeito, said, “By promoting energy saving, the maximum introduction of renewable energy, and the introduction of new technologies such as decarbonization of thermal power generation and hydrogen power generation, we aim to reduce our dependence on nuclear power as soon as possible. Our goal is zero nuclear power.”
Yamazaki of CDP said, “Our big goal is to get rid of the dependence on nuclear power plants quickly. As a result of our simulation, it turns out that we can supply electricity only with LNG power and renewable energy if we leave some coal-fired power as a reserve. It will take some time to reach a social agreement, but we will promptly shut down all nuclear power plants and make a decision to decommission them.”
“We must remember that the goal of carbon neutrality is to create a sustainable society,” pointed out Kushibuchi of Reiwa Shinsengumi. “It is predicted that an earthquake directly beneath the Tokyo metropolitan area and a Nankai Trough earthquake may come in the near future. We should be aware of the risks of nuclear power plants in the event of an earthquake, as well as our awareness of climate change.”
“Until an alternative energy source to nuclear power is established, we have to consider existing nuclear power plants as one of the important options from the viewpoint of energy security,” said Hamaguchi of DPP.
On the other hand, Adachi of JIP said, “Nuclear power plants are necessary when considering climate change and decarbonization. The small modular reactor called SMR, which France, the United Kingdom, and the United States are moving toward practical use, is safer than a large reactor. Japan should also consider introducing it.”
In response, Tamura of JCP argued, “If you are going to spend a new budget, it is better to spend a budget on renewable energy, which is sustainable, earth-friendly, and you can immediately go for CO2 reduction.”
Yamazaki of CDP also said, “The trend of the world is rather renewable energy, and there is no doubt that investment has occurred and it has become a growth field.”
Makihara of LDP pointed out, “We will study SMR, but we don’t have any plan to introduce it at this point.”
Do you think the opinions of the general public, including young people, are incorporated into policy in the current policy-making process?
To the last question, only JIP answered “yes,” DPP answered “between yes and no,” and LDP, Komeito, CDP, JCP, and Reiwa Shinsengumi answered “no.”
Adachi of JIP said, “Today, the policymakers of so many political parties gathered and discussed at the event hosted by young people. Even if you look only at this point, you can say your voice reaches us, the member of the Diet. I answered ‘yes’ in honor of your efforts.”
Hamaguchi of DPP said, “The government’s efforts are inadequate. I will work hard to establish a new subject, environment, in school education so that children who will make the future can think about climate change and environmental problem from a young age.”
Tamura of JCP said, “Even though there is a public comment system, it ends with just listening to the opinions. The problem is that there is no process of how to respond to the opinions given. Regarding the basic energy plan, we need a mechanism to exchange opinions with experts and have them check the plan.”
Niizuma of Komeito said, “The problem is that there are no young people in any council. It may be necessary to set up a youth quota in the council, set up a post like the minister in charge of youth to make the policy convincing for young people, and lower the age of eligibility for election.”
Ohtsubaki of SDP, who was absent, commented in the text message, “We should allow representatives of young people and citizens to participate from the stage of considering policies. It is desirable not only to solicit comments on the draft as in public comments but to make policies and make decisions together with young citizens.”
Kushibuchi of Reiwa Shinsengumi said, “Energy policy has been promoted in a centralized manner. The future renewable energy society will become a decentralized network society. The decision-making system should be changed as well. It is not enough to receive organized opinions. We need to visit concerned people to hear their voice.”
The voice of Japan’s citizens, not just the youth
At the end of the debate, two young members gave speeches. Tamaki Kadoya, a third-year junior high school student, said, “What I would like to ask you today is to carry out politics that fulfill your responsibilities. I was an ordinary junior high school student with hope for my future, but I was desperate for my future when I learned that climate change was about to destroy my future. However, the activities of many people have made me realize that there is still hope, and I have become keenly interested in politics. If we can change politics, we can change our future. So we have to change politics in elections. We must ensure that the Diet, the place that decides what is extremely important to us and has a direct impact on our future, seriously considers the future of us young people.
“I don’t have the right to vote, so there’s little I can do. That is why I would like to ask if you are really responsible. I learned at school that parliamentarians are representatives of the people. I think that the people are not only those who have the right to vote but also those who cannot vote. I understand that the number of votes in an election is very important, but the members of parliament are responsible for our life. Your decision can kill us young people and all those affected by climate change. Remember those who do not have the right to vote, those who cannot directly reflect their voice in politics, and those who are forced to change their lives because of Japan.
“We don’t want to die from climate change. But we cannot reflect our thought in politics, and we will see that climate change will kill someone or ourselves in the future. You should be responsible for preventing that from happening.”
She also told the audience of the public debate, ”Please go to vote. Remember that your decision can affect the lives of young people who do not have the right to vote. Please do your responsibilities for the sake of the youth and for your children.”
Following her speech, Daiki Yamamoto, a third-year high school student, said, “I will vote for the first time in my life. However, too little attention has been given to climate change, and no matter how much we speak out, candidates don’t fight their opinions and discuss what policy is best for climate change. I think it was meaningful in the sense that we created such a place today. But what matters is execution. I think it’s a situation where I don’t really know if I’ll be alive 30 years from now unless you make a policy about what you’ve talked about and actually protect the future. In order to save as many lives as possible, we must really take climate action, and if we only consider the switching cost of changing existing ones, we will regret it someday. From now on, I sincerely hope that you will work together to take climate action while sharing awareness in the political world.
“Finally, I would like you to reflect on the voices of citizens, not just young people. I sincerely hope that you will discuss in earnest the vision you talked about today in a way that is open to the public.”
Writer’s thought
At this debate, we heard the opinions of each political party in climate action. In the election campaign, you can’t see the differences in climate action between political parties because it has not become a major theme. As some politicians said “Climate action is the thing we have to do” at this debate, each political party looks as if they have almost the same vision against climate change on the surface. However, the vision of how to approach climate change is quite different by each party. At this debate, the differences in each party’s thoughts about climate change became clear.
There are many issues in the general election, and you can’t decide to whom you vote solely on climate action. However, as climate crisis becomes more serious, each voter is required to seriously consider which party or candidate’s plan for climate action you want to support.
FFFJ, which organized this debate, will also participate in COP26 started soon. On November 6, both locally and in Japan, they will take action with young people from all over the world to ask world leaders to reflect the voices of young people in the discussions. Through these activities, they will urge Japanese politics to stop coal-fired power generation, which has a major impact on the climate.
