Acting President Han Duck-soo's first political test
Published: 18 Dec. 2024, 19:46
Acting President Han Duck-soo faces a significant political challenge as he steps in to manage state affairs following the impeachment of the president. The main opposition party has threatened to impeach Han if he vetoes six contentious bills that the majority party recently pushed through the National Assembly. The ruling People Power Party (PPP) has officially called on the Cabinet to exercise its executive authority to veto these controversial measures — amendments to grain-related laws and other legislative activities — before the Saturday deadline.
Han must carefully navigate the demands of both rival parties to act as a nonpartisan leader during this critical time. However, the farming-related bills in particular should not pass.
The farming-related bills, sponsored by the Democratic Party (DP), run counter to free market principles and place an undue burden on public finances through excessive subsidies for farmers. A cornerstone of the revisions to the Grain Management Act mandates the government to purchase surplus rice if prices drop below the average of prior years, with the aim of stabilizing income for rice farmers. This unbalanced benefit risks incentivizing farmers to prioritize rice cultivation, worsening the current oversupply.
The government could spend approximately 1 trillion won ($695.4 million) annually to purchase surplus rice. These funds, which could be better allocated to promote smart farming and future-oriented food production, risk being squandered on a crop with a rapidly declining domestic consumption. Notably, this idea faced strong opposition when the DP attempted to implement it during its tenure as the ruling party.
Other proposed amendments are equally problematic. The revision to the Act on Distribution and Price Stabilization of Agricultural and Fishery Products requires the government to compensate farmers if prices for nonrice crops fall below a certain benchmark. This provision could encourage complacency in production practices and push farmers to favor easily cultivated, low-risk crops. Such incentives would harm overall productivity and strain public finances further. Additionally, these subsidies could spark international disputes and conflict with global agricultural policy trends, which focus on supporting household income rather than directly intervening in pricing.
Another amendment, the Act on Countermeasures Against Agriculture and Fishery Disasters, mandates full government compensation for crop losses due to natural disasters. Depending on the scale of such disasters, the financial burden on the government could be staggering. Furthermore, such provisions raise fairness concerns when compared to other industries. The bill’s clause prohibiting surcharges in disaster insurance payouts also defies basic insurance principles, such as setting premiums based on risk.
The amendment to the National Assembly Testimony Appraisal Act is another contentious proposal which allows lawmakers to summon government officials and others for hearings outside of regular audit sessions. These hearings could also compel the submission of private and confidential business information, which would likely exacerbate concerns among business leaders who already face frequent scrutiny and criticism in legislative settings. Such measures could further deter foreign investors. Instead of fostering a business-friendly environment to revive the economy, the opposition party risks undermining South Korea’s economic prospects.
The amendment to the National Assembly Act, which obstructs the automatic submission of budget and supplementary bills, risks causing frequent delays in the approval of budget plans. The DP would likely have approached these issues with greater caution if it were the ruling party. It must now demonstrate a higher level of responsibility and restraint in its legislative initiatives.
Han must carefully navigate the demands of both rival parties to act as a nonpartisan leader during this critical time. However, the farming-related bills in particular should not pass.
The farming-related bills, sponsored by the Democratic Party (DP), run counter to free market principles and place an undue burden on public finances through excessive subsidies for farmers. A cornerstone of the revisions to the Grain Management Act mandates the government to purchase surplus rice if prices drop below the average of prior years, with the aim of stabilizing income for rice farmers. This unbalanced benefit risks incentivizing farmers to prioritize rice cultivation, worsening the current oversupply.
The government could spend approximately 1 trillion won ($695.4 million) annually to purchase surplus rice. These funds, which could be better allocated to promote smart farming and future-oriented food production, risk being squandered on a crop with a rapidly declining domestic consumption. Notably, this idea faced strong opposition when the DP attempted to implement it during its tenure as the ruling party.
Other proposed amendments are equally problematic. The revision to the Act on Distribution and Price Stabilization of Agricultural and Fishery Products requires the government to compensate farmers if prices for nonrice crops fall below a certain benchmark. This provision could encourage complacency in production practices and push farmers to favor easily cultivated, low-risk crops. Such incentives would harm overall productivity and strain public finances further. Additionally, these subsidies could spark international disputes and conflict with global agricultural policy trends, which focus on supporting household income rather than directly intervening in pricing.
Another amendment, the Act on Countermeasures Against Agriculture and Fishery Disasters, mandates full government compensation for crop losses due to natural disasters. Depending on the scale of such disasters, the financial burden on the government could be staggering. Furthermore, such provisions raise fairness concerns when compared to other industries. The bill’s clause prohibiting surcharges in disaster insurance payouts also defies basic insurance principles, such as setting premiums based on risk.
The amendment to the National Assembly Testimony Appraisal Act is another contentious proposal which allows lawmakers to summon government officials and others for hearings outside of regular audit sessions. These hearings could also compel the submission of private and confidential business information, which would likely exacerbate concerns among business leaders who already face frequent scrutiny and criticism in legislative settings. Such measures could further deter foreign investors. Instead of fostering a business-friendly environment to revive the economy, the opposition party risks undermining South Korea’s economic prospects.
The amendment to the National Assembly Act, which obstructs the automatic submission of budget and supplementary bills, risks causing frequent delays in the approval of budget plans. The DP would likely have approached these issues with greater caution if it were the ruling party. It must now demonstrate a higher level of responsibility and restraint in its legislative initiatives.
with the Korea JoongAng Daily
To write comments, please log in to one of the accounts.
Standards Board Policy (0/250자)