President Roh Sends Letter to National Assembly on the Political Reform Bill

[punuri]

President Roh Sends Letter to National Assembly on the Political Reform Bill

The Honorable Speaker Park Kwan-yong

Members of the National Assembly

Subject: Political Reform Bill

I send my deep respect to you for your endeavors to fulfill your parliamentary duties.

Politics is now facing a rigorous public test. In particular, there is a strong demand for reform of the political funding system. This is not a simple matter but calls for resolve and real action.

There is no place any more to retreat, and neither is there any way to avoid the issue. Even by enduring unbearable pain, we should seize on this opportunity to usher in an epochal turning point to realize transparency in political funding and to bring fund raising to a realistic level.

Debate is underway in the National Assembly regarding a possible amendment to the related law to help reduce political funding and ensure transparency. I trust that a draft reform bill will be forthcoming that will meet public expectations.

In the meantime, there is something that requires more attention and stronger endeavors. That is how to overcome regionalism.

How to overcome regionalism together with transparent politics and public participation in politics are the three major tasks of political reform, but overcoming the first is the most important task. It is the foremost task politicians should resolve. If we keep the existing order intact, we will not be able to say that politics has been reformed, and public distrust in politics will be irreversible.

Politics based on regionalism has been charged with emotion rather than based on a competition among policies. Not only in election campaigns but also on the floor of the National Assembly, support is sought only with visceral verbal attacks.

It has been impossible to help a political culture based on dialogue and compromise take root. We have heard about  non-partisan cooperation  or  politics for mutual survival.  In reality, however, there has been endless tactics to obstruct opponents. That, in turn, has incited friction and confrontation in all areas. Everyone hoped to throw off the yoke, but it is hard for any lawmaker to turn away from such temptations.

If the 17th general elections are held next year under the present system, the ardent public desire for political reform will be dashed. Once again, the people will be forced to witness confrontational politics and wasteful political feuding for the next four years. It will be difficult to recover trust in politics, promote unity among the people or achieve a per capita income of US$20,000.

If regionalism is removed through the general elections next year, and the 17th National Assembly becomes a forum of rational policy debate with dialogue and compromise, I will not care even if a political party critical of me wins a majority of seats. I am firmly convinced that we can administer state affairs in a constructive manner through compromise, persuasion and concession if the outdated system promoting regional confrontation is dismantled.

Distinguished legislators,

I think the best way to eliminate electoral parochialism is for the nation to adopt a medium to large-size electoral district system picking two to five lawmakers from a district.

Regionalism has had a strong influence on Korean politics for decades. If under such circumstances we stick to the small electoral districts with one lawmaker, it would be impossible to avoid such an abnormal outcome as one political party sweeping most of the seats in a region, especially in the Yongnam and Honam areas.

Voters, too, do not want politics to be based on regionalism. But they are not free of the regionalism that has been entrenched for so long, and there will be no room for choice if they are allowed to choose only one political party.

Some people claim that the adoption of the medium to large-size electoral district system will make election campaigns much more costly. But there is no evidence to support the idea that a specific electoral district costs a lot more than another electoral district. The problem of high campaign cost can be settled sufficiently by transparent political funding, the public management of electioneering, strict controls and punishment.

I think it is worthwhile for us to consider different urban and rural electoral districts. In such a system, the small district would be maintained in rural areas and small cities where regional representation is required while medium to large-sized districts would be created in large cities where regional representation loses its significance. This can be a rational way to maintain regional representation in the rural areas and small cities and eliminate regionalism.

If small districts are to be kept for various reasons, at least the proportional representation system by regional bloc should be adopted. The existing proportional system based on national representation has not contributed anything to eliminating regionalism. Under the national proportional representation system, only those who are based in the central part of the nation, particularly in Seoul, have dominated the stage.

When each regional bloc selects proportional representatives, several lawmakers will represent one district, and in that way, we can redress the abnormal system, under which one political party would win a sweeping victory. That would also be consistent with the trend toward decentralization.

For a regional proportional representation system to help dismantle regionalism, the number of seats under the proportional representation system should be raised to about 50 percent of elected seats. Under the present circumstance, the number of proportional representation seats is less than 20 percent. The adoption of a regional proportional representation system with such a small number of seats would not likely be able to defuse the impact of regionalism.

To increase the number of seats under the regional proportional representation system, I think the right approach would be to increase the total number of seats rather than decrease the number of elected members. If under the present circumstances the number of elected seats is to be reduced, two to four administrative districts in the rural areas would have to be integrated into one electoral district, thus marring the function of regional representation. Such a consequence is not desirable for representation in the National Assembly, regardless of the advantage or disadvantage to specific individual lawmakers. It is not the right choice if regional representation in the rural areas, which have long felt alienated, is further weakened.

Of course, there is quite a bit of public criticism and distrust about the idea of increasing the number of National Assembly seats. But the present number is not particularly large when the size of the population is considered. What is important is not the number of lawmakers, but the quality of the National Assembly. I believe that, even if the number of seats were raised by about 100, it would be worthwhile to absorb the cost if the National Assembly becomes more productive and is not hamstrung by wasteful political bickering among 200-odd solons. I believed that the cost should be paid willingly. Things could be smoothed out if we plead with the people and seek their understanding.

Meanwhile, I would like to mention the issue of the district chapters of political parties.

I understand that in the course of consultation among political parties and debate in the National Assembly ad hoc committee on political reform, a consensus has been built regarding the abolishment of the district chapters. The underlying reason, as I understand it, is that the district chapters constitute a major cause of the high cost of politics.

But the district chapters are an important channel through which the public can participate in political parties. They constitute the cornerstone of party politics. That is even more important, because the expansion of participatory democracy is a major trend of the time. They are also consistent with the spirit of the time calling for decentralization and autonomy.

In this light, I believe that renovating the operation of the district chapters rather than eliminating them is the right direction for reform. The problem of the expense of maintaining the district chapters can be resolved if the operation is improved and the underlying way of thinking is altered.

For instance, if we change the way of thinking, the district chapters can be even operated without offices. Members of the district chapters may be able to have routine gathering at certain places by assuming their own share of the cost. Taking advantage of our merit as an information and telecommunication powerhouse, it would be possible to utilize the Internet for gatherings.

If party members themselves bring about a change in district chapters by assuming their own costs and stopping the old method of having the chapters play leading roles in arranging meetings and events for them, that would, indeed, represent a political reform in the style of genuine participatory politics.

Honorable speaker, and members of the National assembly,

I again plead with you in earnest.

It is not an easy job to change a system since the interests of individual legislators and all the political parties are at stake. As for the task of dismantling regionalism, I call on the lawmakers to take action after careful consideration for the sake of the people and the nation by discarding partisan considerations or personal interests.

Lets liberate ourselves from the kind of politics that creates a public furor, brings humiliation to our posterity and shames the politicians.

If only regional politics is eliminated through the general elections next year, I will do all I can as the President, including giving greater responsibilities to the prime minister as I already pledged.

I truly expect that the 16th National Assembly will go down in history as a legislature that provided a decisive turning point away from regionalism, the long-standing urgent task in the modern history of Korean politics.

Thank you.