politics

Osaka aims to hold referendum on metropolis plan on Nov 1

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

Japan needs a backup city for Tokyo, the capital vulnerable to natural disasters, namely a large scale earthquake. Osaka can be a qualified candidate.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This is not the right time to hold a referendum, especially when the whole country, including the hard-hit Osaka, is still recovering from the dire effects of the pandemic. The people of Osaka voted against the Osaka metropolis in 2015 and the issue was settled once and for all.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

This is not the right time to hold a referendum, especially when the whole country, including the hard-hit Osaka, is still recovering from the dire effects of the pandemic. The people of Osaka voted against the Osaka metropolis in 2015 and the issue was settled once and for all.

That’s probably why they’re trying again while everyone is distracted.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Japan needs a backup city for Tokyo, the capital vulnerable to natural disasters, namely a large scale earthquake. Osaka can be a qualified candidate.

True, but in my opinion, the national government would be better served by being in a location that is within neither.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The people of Osaka voted against the Osaka metropolis in 2015 and the issue was settled once and for all.

If I recall correctly the referendum then was non-binding, so the issue wasnt "settled once and for all"

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I hope Osaka goes through with it because it'll save so much money and make things more efficient

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I live near Osaka and many people I know said they didn't really understand what the referendum was about. The personalities involved were also tussling with Abe and it looked like a power grab.

Now the consensus (amongst the people I know and what I see in the media), is that it is a good idea. Local councils waste enormous amounts of money on both inefficiency (hanko, fax, multiple docs for everything etc) as well as lack of real skills in understanding where (our) money should be invested. A centralised, professional - and audited office could hopefully do it a lot better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've always found Osaka to be more progressive, in many ways, than Tokyo. They figured out alternating one-way streets to smooth traffic flow, and introduced automated turnstiles on the subway system long before Tokyo did. TV monitors were installed on Keihan Line expresses back in the 1970s. I suppose new reforms would put other positive changes in motion. Some of those Osaka trends (like capsule hotels) also eventually catch on in other cities. Go for it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I don't think this is a very "efficient" time to be spending more money on referendums and having people all go to the same places to touch the same things to go vote for a more "efficient" government structure.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

For my two pence...

japan should be the first country in the world to have 2 official capitals.

tokyo and Osaka.

it is 4hrs by train, and the new one will be less than 2hrs.

in the event of a major disaster, japan could continue as normal.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

While I haven't looked into it too deeply yet, in principle a well considered plan to reduce the waste of government at any level is a good start.

So many civil servants in my local city hall do very little for the ridiculous city taxes I have to pay. Especially when we had to battle with them about screwing up my shiminzei last year. Got a councillor involved and a half-a$$ed apology from the bucho in charge.

Especially in times like these when public servants are comfortably insulated from the economic damage that the virus scare and government incompetence while people who work in the private sector are copping it sweet, they need to get a taste of what accountability for your actions is like.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GoodlucktoyouToday  10:51 am JST

For my two pence...

japan should be the first country in the world to have 2 official capitals.

tokyo and Osaka.

it is 4hrs by train, and the new one will be less than 2hrs.

in the event of a major disaster, japan could continue as normal.

In a perfect world this might not be a bad idea on the face of it.

However, in the real world it wold mainly give the government the excuse to double-up the bureaucracy, creating an extra layer of redundancy on an already bloated and corrupt system, coz, just in case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There shouldn't be any fear about getting out to vote by November. Even if this overblown crisis is still lurking around by then, anyone interested and motivated enough to vote can just take whatever precautions they consider necessary to avoid whatever threat they perceive to be present. Don a hazmat suit if it makes them feel better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

noriahojanenToday 06:54 am JST

Japan needs a backup city for Tokyo, the capital vulnerable to natural disasters, namely a large scale earthquake. Osaka can be a qualified candidate.

sure, because Osaka can't be hit by earthquakes like that one in Kobe in 1995 ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Voters rejected the idea in a May 2015 referendum,, with both ruling and opposition parties arguing costs could be cut without such a reorganization.

democracy in XXI century

people already stated but let's keep voting again and again until the result is the one the government wants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just in terms of population, but during the war, half of Osaka fu's population lived in Osaka shi.

Osaka fu developed during the 50s to 70s as suburbia (private train lines?) and now two thirds of Osaka fu's population does not live in Osaka shi itself. So Osaka shi is actually weaker than it was in the past.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You can see a graph here.

https://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/toshikeikaku/page/0000129467.html

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Doesn't Japan have the absentee ballot and ability to vote via the Internet machine???

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The actual people who resist this plan are the local government elected officials who will lose a seat on the diet. Many redundant paper work and red lines as well as bureaucratic turf war can be removed those this plan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm fine with more business base for Osaka. Osaka is a great city with friendly people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've always found Osaka to be more progressive, in many ways, than Tokyo. They figured out alternating one-way streets to smooth traffic flow, and introduced automated turnstiles on the subway system long before Tokyo did.

Could they learn horticulture and plant some trees while they are at it? Osaka still looks like someone kicked an enormous trash can over.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is not the right time to hold a referendum, especially when the whole country, including the hard-hit Osaka, is still recovering from the dire effects of the pandemic. The people of Osaka voted against the Osaka metropolis in 2015 and the issue was settled once and for all.

It's never the right time for some people. Besides, this isn't just about money. Tokyo has been hoarding far too much attention and power for too long.

This wouldn't be so problematic if Japan did what countries like Australia and Canada have done, which is to try and even things out by not having the biggest city as the capital.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

in a bid to save hundreds of billions of yen in taxpayers' money by reducing functional overlaps between the prefectural and city governments

I'm a bit cynical, but attempts to make government more efficient tend to increase the inefficiencies - bigger and further-away offices, more complex forms to fill out, and more assistants for the honchos. I learned it as the "diseconomies of scale" when I was a student.

Osaka still looks like someone kicked an enormous trash can over.

That's just another of its charms. For those rare times Osaka people pine for pretty trees and elegant manners, just hop on a train to Kyoto or Nara. But nothing beats a nighttime drive down the coast through the chemical plants. Like a scene straight from Bladerunner.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When I hear this garbage coming up again, I always find the JOC claims that "It's next year or never!" mirror it, and hence why I said it's utter BS. Hashimoto said he would stop down, the party disband, and the issue be dropped if the people voted it down the SECOND time, after saying similar things the first time, too. What happened? I think the party changed it's name from "Isshin no to" to Isshin no Kai" or vice-versa, Hashimoto DID step down, but then started pulling the strings from the outside and feeding his idea again, the mayor and governors of Osaka only quit when they knew they could simply switch roles, and here they are, after losing this referendum twice, pushing it once again on a public that has already voiced their opinion on the issue. So it's clear that, "If we don't win, the issue is dropped," only applies IF they win. I have met people who will lose their jobs if Osaka becomes a megalopolis and they don't even know that -- their reason for wanting it? And inferiority complex when looking up on the map to Tokyo. That's all. That is the ONLY reason why your average Tanaka wants it. Politicians in the city want it, of course, as do their vested interests, because the city will then control the resources on the outskirts of the prefectures, while having no idea of the mechanics of how the localities work.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

U got to be joking.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bad news for accountability

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tokyo and Osaka.

it is 4hrs by train, and the new one will be less than 2hrs.

It’s obviously been a while since you caught the train.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites