[ad_1]
Furthermore, the storm is intensifying after the Democratic Party handled the ‘Law of the 3 Economy’ (the Fair Trade Law, the Commercial Law and the Financial Groups Supervision Law) in a plenary session of the National Assembly on day 9. The business community is embarrassed and says, “We gather opinions and discuss in depth, and then we deal with them alone.” Within the Democratic Party, there is criticism of the “rollback of the reform” for the fact that President Moon Jae-in’s presidential election promise, the abolition of exclusive impeachment rights, has fallen at the last minute, and even they express voices to review the law. Re-elect one of the criticized legislators, “(if this were the case), why did we have to deal with it alone while carrying the burden?” Why did the Democratic Party make this decision?
Kim Sang-jo, director of the policy office, is deep in thought after attending the cabinet video meeting held in the Blue House Women’s Room on Day 1. Newsis
He said “consensus management” and suddenly enforced the Third Economic Law, why?
Initially, the Democratic Party was in the position that the “ three economic law ” should be discussed with the opposition party. This is because it cannot be promoted unilaterally since it directly or indirectly affects 6.64 million companies. On the 24th of last month, at a closed strategy meeting of the standing committee of the Democratic Party standing committee, Kim Tae-nyeon said: ‘The legislative speed is slow in the political committee (which deals with the Fair Trade Law and the Financial Groups Supervision Law) ‘. They are reportedly confronted, saying: “We need to collect stakeholder views and address the deal.” It is known that the Policy Committee, which oversees the party’s policy, also considered that “an agreement with the Fair Trade Law and the Financial Group Supervision Law is possible, except for the Commercial Law with the opposition of the opposition party. “.
As of this month, the airflow of the Democratic Party has begun to shift to “forced treatment.” The background is complex.
First, Kim Jong-in’s remarks from the President of People’s Strength Hypertrophy are said to have become a major catalyst. President Kim is reported to have ordered the active legislation of the three economic laws in a closed non-confrontational meeting on 23 last month. It was a comment that came out “abruptly” at a time when there were few discussions between the opposition parties about the 3rd economic law in the corresponding standing committee. The key Democratic Party official said on the 10th: “It is not that he urged the opposition to the Third Law on the Power of the People to change their attitudes, but rather that he interpreted that President Kim gave a signal to our party saying: ‘ It’s hard to deal with a deal, so go ahead. ‘ “There was,” he said, “when the vote for the Third Economic Law was voted in the plenary session on the 9th, many of the Kim Jong-in-gye legislators abstained and did not even obstruct.”
At the level of the Democratic Party, it is known that Lee Nak-yeon’s will to overcome the crisis through legislative reforms was strong. In a poll of real gauges from last month 30 to this month, the Democratic Party’s approval rating was 28.9%, the lowest since the Moon Jae-in administration was launched. Honam, women and people in their 30s and 40s were notable. In response, the Democratic Party established a policy to protect the ‘domestic rabbit’ by completing the reform legislation as soon as possible. In fact, on the 3rd of this month, when Lee returned from self-quarantine from a new coronavirus infection (Corona 19), he held a “ Conference of Secretaries of the Standing Committee on Future Legislative Tasks ” and ordered a swift battle for the Third Economic Law. A passport official said: “ At the crossroads of addressing the deal or addressing it alone, Representative Lee cleared the traffic. ” “ Whereas this is the last chance to tackle the reform of the legislation before the elections for mayors of Seoul and Busan next year and the presidential elections next year. I did.”
Annul the promise of the presidential election and ‘keep the exclusive impeachment’ … 靑 Kim Sangjodo’Agree ‘
The Democratic Party handled the Three Economic Laws, excluding the provisions of President Moon’s presidential election compromise, the abolition of exclusive grievances. In the process, there was a story that ‘the Blue House objected to’. However, on the 10th it was confirmed that the party, the government and the government did not have much disagreement with the ‘maintenance of the current exclusive billing rights’.
Recently, the Democratic Party’s Third Economic Law (TF) Task Force and domestic representative Kim Tae-nyeon gathered opinions and asked the Blue House for its position. Kim Sang-jo, Director of the Blue House Policy Office, said: “ If other provisions of the Fair Trade Law, such as the regulation of the conduct of work and the restriction of voting rights for circular investments , they are approved as is, it is okay to abolish exclusive prosecution.
However, the aftermath of the withdrawal of the abolition of exclusive indictments continued. Democratic Party lawmaker Lee Sang-min said on the 10th: “We will re-promote the total abolition of exclusive prosecution rights and ensure that it is enforced.” Hong Ik-pyo, director of the Institute for Democratic Research, also said: “It seems that the abolition of exclusive indictments should be discussed with the reform of the prosecution.” Key Democratic Party officials noted: “At the general meeting of parliamentarians held before the plenary session on the 9th, criticism from legislators for withdrawing the abolition of the exclusive indictments was poured out, and the party leadership was also concerned about the possibility to “reject” the bill “.
Junseok Park reporter [email protected]
Jo So-jin reporter [email protected]
You can also watch the Naver Et news edited by Hankook Ilbo.
Issues that may interest you
[ad_2]
