January 27, 2011
Former members of the welfare ministry panel said in response to an Akahata inquiry that additional benefits for the elderly in the livelihood protection program should be reinstated, indicating that the abolition of additional benefits was unjust.
The ministry panel was established in August 2003 and finished its work in December 2004. It carefully researched into what the ideal livelihood protection program should be. The panel consisted of 12 members headed by Professor Iwata Masami of Japan Women’s University. Five of them responded to the Akahata inquiry.
In December 2003, the government decided that additional payments of benefits for the elderly receiving welfare assistance would be ended in 2006 on the grounds that the panel’s interim report recommended the abolition.
However, one of former members of the panel, Professor Nemoto Yoshiaki of Momoyama Gakuin (St. Andrew’s) University said, “The government only used parts of the report that they could use as an excuse to stop the additional payments.”
In the interim report, what members actually proposed was that if the government discontinues additional benefits for the elderly, it should establish a new system of public support which protects livelihood protection recipients from any deterioration in their living conditions. However, the government only stopped the additional payments without replacing it with any new system of protection.
Another member said, “Because the government refuses to provide public support after ending additional payments of benefits, elderly people in the livelihood protection program can’t maintain even the minimum standards of living. Such a situation should not be allowed to be ignored.”
Elderly people filed lawsuits in nine district courts across Japan seeking restoration of additional benefits. In Tokyo, district and high courts recognized that the government decision to stop additional payments is reasonable because the panel unanimously approved the abolition.
However, Akahata found that majority of members of the panel opposed or disagreed with the government decision at that time.
Professor Okabe Taku of Tokyo Metropolitan University, also a former member of the panel, stated, “I opposed the government decision. Additional assistance is essential for elderly and single-mother households receiving welfare benefits to maintain the minimum standards of living. Last year, the government reinstated additional welfare benefits for mother-children households. The payments for the elderly should also be restored.”
The ministry panel was established in August 2003 and finished its work in December 2004. It carefully researched into what the ideal livelihood protection program should be. The panel consisted of 12 members headed by Professor Iwata Masami of Japan Women’s University. Five of them responded to the Akahata inquiry.
In December 2003, the government decided that additional payments of benefits for the elderly receiving welfare assistance would be ended in 2006 on the grounds that the panel’s interim report recommended the abolition.
However, one of former members of the panel, Professor Nemoto Yoshiaki of Momoyama Gakuin (St. Andrew’s) University said, “The government only used parts of the report that they could use as an excuse to stop the additional payments.”
In the interim report, what members actually proposed was that if the government discontinues additional benefits for the elderly, it should establish a new system of public support which protects livelihood protection recipients from any deterioration in their living conditions. However, the government only stopped the additional payments without replacing it with any new system of protection.
Another member said, “Because the government refuses to provide public support after ending additional payments of benefits, elderly people in the livelihood protection program can’t maintain even the minimum standards of living. Such a situation should not be allowed to be ignored.”
Elderly people filed lawsuits in nine district courts across Japan seeking restoration of additional benefits. In Tokyo, district and high courts recognized that the government decision to stop additional payments is reasonable because the panel unanimously approved the abolition.
However, Akahata found that majority of members of the panel opposed or disagreed with the government decision at that time.
Professor Okabe Taku of Tokyo Metropolitan University, also a former member of the panel, stated, “I opposed the government decision. Additional assistance is essential for elderly and single-mother households receiving welfare benefits to maintain the minimum standards of living. Last year, the government reinstated additional welfare benefits for mother-children households. The payments for the elderly should also be restored.”
