the firs attempt of the ‘modernisation’ of LDP_1963

在60年代反对日美安保浪潮,以及自民党从55年建党以来面对来自反对党的冲击,自民党党内就派阀的废除,党内决策过程等等,进行了三次组织调查会,期间曾发布Miki report , 一直到1963年的池田总裁答申,提出了一系列的改革方案。

party organization research council (1961-1963)

这在LDP党史上被称作是“党近(现)代化的推进”,但是结果却是差强人意,针对派阀等informal groups未有任何实质的限制和规制作用。 以下是福井治弘(Fukui Haruhiro )。 Fukui是较早系统的研究LDP党内组织的专家之一。著有“party in power: the Japanese Liberal Democrats and Policy-making ” (1970) university of California press

日文版《自由民主党と政策決定》(1969)

以下节选自英文版page 105-106

Without denying the probability of some important changes being enacted in the not too distant future, it is nevertheless important to consider them in relation to the structural and behavioural characteristics attributed above to the various party organs, as they are currently constituted. The most important of these may be summarised as follows:

Firstly, the development of party organization, particularly the cluster of policy-making organs represented by the PARC, has shown that it is much easier to multiply and fragment the operational and functional units involved than to rationalize and strengthen the existing ones. In fact, the over-expansion of these organs has obviously imposed excessively heavy strains on the available manpower which has been limited, as far as the responsible positions are concerned, to members of the Diet. No change aimed at modernising the policy-making and leadership structure of the party would prove really meaningful or helpful unless it involved effective control or reduction of the number of organs and possibly appointment of non-parliamentary members to party positions so far monopolized by Diet members. In view of the steadily increasing volume of demands for public decisions which come to the party, the ultimate solution may call for a basic redefinition of the role of the party in the system of government, negating the view that the ministerial party must not only be informed of, but actually review and pass judgement on, every single demand for public decision.

Secondly, the influence of the factions and other informal intra-party groups is detrimental to the assertion of effective leadership by the formal party organs and to their smooth functioning, particularly the policy making chain represented by the PARC and the executive council, and the party presidency. The efforts so far made to combat the growth of these informal groups have met little success. If the basic aim of the modernization movement is to centralize the effective power of policy-making in the hands of the formal party organs, and if the factions, as is likely, should remain as resistant as in the past to a movement aimed at their liquidation, then they are bound to present the most formidable obstacle to that movement and may well ultimately defeat it.

Thirdly, the ineffectiveness and lack of authority of the formal party leadership in the intra-party decision-making process has been paralleled by its vulnerability and, at times, subservience to the influence of external groups, particularly the bureaucracy and interest groups. A similar pattern of relationship has obtained between formal party branches and prefectural federations on one hand and supporters’ associations built around individual politicians on the other. The difficulty lies in balancing the need to secure material and spiritual support from a wide range of external groups (particularly for the purposes of elections), and the demand for the party’s freedom of action and independence from pressures inevitably applied by such groups. This dilemma, which is certainly not peculiar to the LDP or the Japanese parties, is likely to remain unresolved and even aggravated for a long time to come and may prove, like factionalism, fatal to modernisation efforts.

而致力于废除派阀的努力,一直到实施SMD选举制度改革20年后,才初见效果。但是也很难说,faction 作为Informal group 就失去了分派职务,党内沟通,资金调动,以及政策学习的功能,只能说比起60-80年代的强势时期,如今的派阀在分派职务和资金调动方面日渐式微。

但是如果放到OECD国家中去比较,同样60年代开始政党现代化,LDP虽然开始的早,但是步伐小,效果不佳?还是说anti-elite 的formal rules 也好,informal rules 也好,在日本都需要较长的时间发挥作用?还是与LDP 长期的执政有关?2012年LDP卷土重来,再次质疑制度派的期待,是不是有别的factor 被忽略了呢?

OECD的比较请参考“politics at the centre一书。

Advertisements

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: