"Veto Power Tinkering" vs "Determined on the 23rd"... Ruling and Opposition Parties' Meeting Ends with Parallel Lines on Grain Management Act

Resolution Including Expansion of Assembly Seats Likely to Be Revised by Political Affairs Committee
Ruling Party on Grain Management Act "Will Look After It, But..." Opposition "Will Process on the 23rd"

Although the Speaker of the National Assembly and the floor leaders of the ruling and opposition parties held a meeting on the 20th, they failed to narrow their positions on the plenary vote for the Grain Management Act. There were mentions of possible revisions and supplements to the political reform special committee's 'resolution,' which includes the expansion of the number of National Assembly members.

Kim Jin-pyo, Speaker of the National Assembly, Joo Ho-young, floor leader of the People Power Party, and Park Hong-geun, floor leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, held a meeting at the National Assembly on the same day regarding issues related to the plenary session scheduled for the 23rd but could not find a solution for handling the Grain Management Act.

After the meeting, Floor Leader Joo explained to reporters, "The Speaker requested that the two parties narrow their opinions further to reach a consensus on the Grain Management Act. The Democratic Party expressed its position that it should be handled at the next plenary session according to the existing promise. We said we would check again if there was room for agreement, but our position remains unchanged that it is difficult to accept as long as there is a mandatory purchase provision."

Floor Leader Park also said, "The Speaker has publicly declared before the people that it will definitely be handled at the (next) plenary session, so the timing of the handling is unchanged." He added, "Even though the original bill reflected the government's average mandatory purchase, the Speaker gave opinions to strengthen the excess production requirement from 3% to 5%, expand the rice price decline range from 5% to 8%, and even included provisions that exclude mandatory purchase if the rice cultivation area increases. We were going to submit a revised bill, but since the Speaker did not process it, we did not submit it. How can negotiations proceed when only the opposition keeps conceding and the ruling party relies solely on the veto?"

Floor Leader Park criticized, "It only appears that the government and the ruling party are eagerly waiting to exercise the veto power and are not considering any mediation or compromise plans at all."

Speaker of the National Assembly Kim Jin-pyo, People Power Party Floor Leader Joo Ho-young, and Democratic Party Floor Leader Park Hong-geun are meeting on the 20th at the Speaker's Office in Yeouido, Seoul. Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@

Regarding the resolution that includes the expansion of the number of National Assembly members, there seems to be growing support for convening a full committee meeting of the National Assembly even if the political reform special committee's resolution is revised. Previously, the subcommittee of the political reform special committee adopted the election law amendment proposed by the Speaker's advisory committee, which includes an increase in the number of members, as a resolution and decided to submit it to the full committee of the political reform special committee. However, concerns were raised that convening the full committee might become difficult as the People Power Party leadership expressed opposition to increasing the number of National Assembly members.

In this regard, Floor Leader Joo said, "We discussed the political reform special committee," adding, "It would be good if the floor leaders of both parties in the political reform special committee could consult on the part concerning the number of National Assembly members." This leaves open the possibility of revisions through discussions between the floor leaders. Floor Leader Joo said, "The resolution containing the increase in the number of members will not proceed as is," and added, "The full committee should be convened, and just because the number should be increased does not mean it will be, so is there any reason not to convene the full committee?" He also said, "The leadership of both parties has not decided their positions, and no one can confidently talk about the number of members," and "Everyone knows that public opinion strongly opposes it." While maintaining a sense of concern about the number of members, he seemed to support convening the full committee.

Floor Leader Park said, "The Democratic Party does not think it is time to officially decide the party's position on the election law," explaining, "At the party meeting, we only received explanations about the Speaker's advisory committee's proposal and had a free discussion." He continued, "It is appropriate to decide the party's position when there is a possibility of some consensus during discussions at the full committee using the advisory committee's proposal," and added, "Is it easy to unilaterally increase the number of members without public consent? We should not politically exploit that." He expressed his personal opinion, saying, "I think the Speaker's advisory committee excessively increased the number of members," and drew attention by asking, "Would the majority of National Assembly members agree to an increase of 50 members?"