Prime Minister Naoto Kan's announcement that Japan needs to phase out nuclear power drew a smattering of applause that was largely drowned out by criticism and outrage directed at the lame-duck leader.
Prime Minister Naoto Kan's announcement that Japan needs to phase out nuclear power drew a smattering of applause that was largely drowned out by criticism and outrage directed at the lame-duck leader.
Many critics in the political and business circles said they do not necessarily disagree with the idea to shift the country away from nuclear power generation. But they did not appreciate Kan's unilateral action nor his lack of specifics for such a drastic plan.
Harsher critics said Kan made the announcement simply to continue his reign as prime minister.
Kan told a televised news conference on July 13 that Japan should build a society free from nuclear power plants by phasing out its reliance on this energy source. He said the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant changed his perception of nuclear power, convincing him that the risks inherent in nuclear power generation are too enormous.
But he failed to present a timetable for the strategy and other details of his vision.
Kan decided to shift Japan's energy policy without discussing the matter with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, which has promoted nuclear power.
"A prime minister usually has a number of discussion sessions before he gives a news conference over such an idea," said a senior official at METI's Agency for Natural Resources and Energy. "But we had no discussions."
The prime minister also apparently did not bother to discuss the issue within the ruling Democratic Party of Japan.
"It sounds like utter nonsense," a senior party official said of the plan.
Other DPJ members were also cool to Kan's vision.
Yukio Hatoyama, Kan's predecessor, said, "(A departure from nuclear power generation) is a right direction, but the timetable for realizing it is ambiguous."
Even Kaoru Yosano, a former member of the Sunrise Party of Japan whom Kan had handpicked as economic policy minister, opposed Kan's policy from an economic viewpoint.
"If (electric companies) use fossil fuels in place of nuclear power plants, the additional costs will be equal to an increase of 30 percent in corporate tax," Yosano said at a speaking engagement on July 13.
A junior member of the DPJ in the Upper House said Kan's direction was correct, "but it lacks specifics and does not sound compelling coming from a prime minister who is stepping down."
Shigeru Ishiba, policy chief of the main opposition Liberal Democratic Party, said Kan should have offered more specifics in his plan to reverse the country's energy policy.
"The Diet will have to have many discussions on such a weighty issue," Ishiba said. "Unless he presents a roadmap to a Japan free from nuclear plants, his act will amount to being called populism."
Kan in June said he would resign after a certain amount of progress is made in rebuilding from the March 11 Great East Japan Earthquake. But he did not give a date, and his critics are now accusing him of resorting to drastic measures to prolong his stay in power.
The Asahi Shimbun's latest opinion poll conducted earlier this month found 77 percent of voters endorsed a phasing out of the nation's nuclear facilities. But the support rate for the Kan Cabinet slumped to 15 percent.
Social Democratic Party leader Mizuho Fukushima was one of the few politicians to openly praise the prime minister's policy.
"It is a bold decision," she said. "An administration led by the LDP would have never made such a pledge. I would like him to stay in office until a path toward it is laid out."
The business world was divided over the issue.
"People's appetite for consumption is ebbing due to their fear of radioactive materials," said an official at a department store operator. "Nuclear power plants should be looked at from a viewpoint of phasing them out."
An official at a leading food producer said faith in the safety of food products has been shaken since the crisis started at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
"There is a need to make a change in society with a big step, like decommissioning nuclear plants," the official said.
But others said the absence of nuclear power plants could have devastating effects on the economy.
"It is understandable to call for cutting our dependence on nuclear power, but that would lead to the exit of manufacturers from Japan," a senior official with a leading electronics company said. "In that scenario, we won't be able to protect jobs (for Japanese)."
A top official in the auto industry said the Kan administration should present a way to secure a stable power supply if Japan aims to go without nuclear energy.
Hiromasa Yonekura, chairman of Keidanren (Japan Business Federation), the country's most influential business lobby and a proponent of nuclear power, also demanded that Kan explain further about his vision.
"We have no clues on what (Kan) thinks of Japan's future," Yonekura said. "After talking about that, he should discuss (a departure from nuclear power generation)."
Unsurprisingly, the Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan opposed Kan's plans to end nuclear power generation in the country.
"A drastic overhaul of the nation's energy policy involves an extremely important issue with the foundation of the future of the country at stake," said Makoto Yagi, chairman of the federation. "If we move in the wrong direction, it will create a serious problem for the future."
Local government leaders echoed mixed views of Kan's proposal, with many of them criticizing the messenger, not the message.
Katsuya Endo, mayor of Tomioka, Fukushima Prefecture, home to Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima No. 2 nuclear power plant, endorsed a shift from nuclear power.
"We became convinced of the dangers of a nuclear power plant after the accident," Endo said. "Since we were inflicted as extensively as this, a move to cutting reliance on nuclear power is a matter of course."
But Issei Nishikawa, governor of Fukui Prefecture, which hosts 13 commercial reactors, the most in the nation, questions how serious Kan is about his plan.
"It is not clear if his vision is shared in the government," Nishikawa said. "It may be just his dream, but it won't be a good political message unless he clearly shows a process on realizing it."
Hirohiko Izumida, governor of Niigata Prefecture, home to TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant, said Kan's actions lack consistency.
Izumida said he was puzzled when Kan mentioned the possible nationalization of nuclear power plants while his government was trying to sell nuclear power facilities to Vietnam.
"I cannot help but feel a sense of discomfort when the prime minister, who announced his intention to resign, continues to make statements about the country's crucial policy measures," Izumida said.
Kanagawa Governor Yuji Kuroiwa said Kan's true intention appears to be staying in power.
"What he says is absolutely right, but his action can be interpreted as politically motivated because he began talking about scrapping nuclear power after promising to resign," Kuroiwa said. "Even though he says something good, his action looks like a political maneuver to prolong his term."