環太平洋パートナーシップ（ＴＰＰ）協定交渉参加に関する件
本年三月十五日、安倍内閣総理大臣はＴＰＰ協定交渉への参加を表明し、四月十二日、ＴＰＰ協定交渉参加に向けた日米協議に合意した。
そもそも、ＴＰＰは原則として関税を全て撤廃することとされており、我が国の農林水産業や農山漁村に深刻な打撃を与え、食料自給率の低下や地域経済・社会の崩壊を招くとともに、景観を保ち、国土を保全する多面的機能も維持できなくなるおそれがある。また、ＴＰＰにより食の安全・安心が脅かされるなど国民生活にも大きな影響を与えることが懸念される。
これまで本委員会では、平成十八年十二月に「日豪ＥＰＡの交渉開始に関する件」を、平成二十三年十二月に「環太平洋パートナーシップ（ＴＰＰ）協定交渉参加に向けた関係国との協議に関する件」をそれぞれ決議し、二国間、複数国間の経済連携協定が、我が国の農林水産業や国民生活に悪影響を与えることがないよう、政府に十分な対応を求めてきたところである。
こうした中、本年二月に行われた日米首脳会談における共同声明では、「日本には一定の農産品、米国には一定の工業製品というように、両国ともに二国間貿易上のセンシティビティが存在することを認識」したとしており、政府は、この日米首脳会談において「聖域なき関税撤廃が前提ではない」旨確認したとして、ＴＰＰ協定交渉への参加を決断した。
しかしながら、我が国には一定の農産品以外にも、守り抜くべき国益が存在し、この確認がどのように確保されていくのかについても、その具体的内容はいまだ明らかにされていない。そのため、各界各層の懸念はいまだに払拭されておらず、特に、交渉参加について農林水産業関係者をはじめ、幅広い国民の合意が形成されている状況ではない。
よって政府は、これらを踏まえ、ＴＰＰ協定交渉参加に当たり、左記の事項の実現を図るよう重ねて強く求めるものである。
記
一 米、麦、牛肉・豚肉、乳製品、甘味資源作物などの農林水産物の重要品目について、引き続き再生産可能となるよう除外又は再協議の対象とすること。十年を超える期間をかけた段階的な関税撤廃も含め認めないこと。
二 残留農薬・食品添加物の基準、遺伝子組換え食品の表示義務、遺伝子組換え種子の規制、輸入原材料の原産地表示、ＢＳＥに係る牛肉の輸入措置等において、食の安全・安心及び食料の安定生産を損なわないこと。
三 国内の温暖化対策や木材自給率向上のための森林整備に不可欠な合板、製材の関税に最大限配慮すること。
四 漁業補助金等における国の政策決定権を維持すること。仮に漁業補助金につき規律が設けられるとしても、過剰漁獲を招くものに限定し、漁港整備や所得支援など、持続的漁業の発展や多面的機能の発揮、更には震災復興に必要なものが確保されるようにすること。
五 濫訴防止策等を含まない、国の主権を損なうようなＩＳＤ条項には合意しないこと。
六 交渉に当たっては、二国間交渉等にも留意しつつ、自然的・地理的条件に制約される農林水産分野の重要五品目などの聖域の確保を最優先し、それが確保できないと判断した場合は、脱退も辞さないものとすること。
七 交渉により収集した情報については、国会に速やかに報告するとともに、国民への十分な情報提供を行い、幅広い国民的議論を行うよう措置すること。
八 交渉を進める中においても、国内農林水産業の構造改革の努力を加速するとともに、交渉の帰趨いかんでは、国内農林水産業、関連産業及び地域経済に及ぼす影響が甚大であることを十分に踏まえて、政府を挙げて対応すること。
右決議する。
------------------------------------------
(Unofficial translation)
On the start of Japan’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement negotiations
The House Standing Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries resolves as follows:
On 15 March 2013 Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced Japan’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement negotiations, and on 12 April 2013 reached an agreement on Japan-U.S. consultations toward participating in the TPP negotiations.
The Agreement, whose basic principles are originally designed to remove all customs duties, poses a risk of causing a serious blow to Japan’s agriculture, forestry and fisheries industries and its farming, mountain and fishing communities, while reducing food self-sufficiency rate and bringing about the collapse of regional economies and communities as well as forfeiting their diverse functions to sustain the current landscape and maintain the state lands. The agreement, in addition, is feared to affect the life of the people greatly in such areas as food safety and security that come under threat.
The Committee has, by passing two resolutions: one “On the beginning of the Japan-Australia Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiations” in December 2006, and another “On consultations with the countries concerned toward participating in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement negotiations” in December 2011, pursued its request that the Government of Japan exert all adequate efforts in dealing with bilateral, multilateral economic partnership agreements with other countries to keep Japanese agriculture, forestry and fisheries industries and the people’s life from being adversely affected.
Against this background, the Joint Statement issued by Japan and the United States after the bilateral summit talk in February 2013 stated that the two Governments “recognized both countries have bilateral trade sensitivities, such as certain agricultural products for Japan and certain manufactured products for the United States,” and the Japanese Government, having ensured that Japan was not “presumed to eliminate all tariffs without any sanctuary” at the summit talk, decided to participate in the TPP negotiations.
Japan has, however, other national interests to protect besides certain agricultural products, and is yet to make clear how they can be securely ensured and with what specific contents. For this reason the worries that all walks of people harbor are not completely dispelled; Japan’s consensus on the participation in the TPP negotiations, in particular, has not been reached among a broad range of the people including those in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries industries.
Accordingly, the Committee reiterates its strong demands that with the above in mind the Government of Japan should, when participating in TPP negotiations, put into practice the following:
1. Rice, wheat, beef, pork, milk products, sweetening resource products and other sensitive agricultural, forestry and fisheries products should be exempt or taken for re-negotiation so that they can continue to be reproduced. No approval should be given even to gradual elimination of tariffs beyond ten years.
2. Care should be taken both to ensure food safety and security and to do no harm to stable production of food, in such areas as standards for residual pesticide chemicals and food additives, mandatory disclosure of genetically modified foods, regulatory measures on genetically modified seeds, place-of-origin labeling for imported ingredients, beef import and other measures regarding bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).
3. Maximum consideration should be paid to the tariffs on plyboard and lumber which are essential to the forest management in Japan’s domestic measures of global warming and its improvement of wood self-sufficiency rate.
4. Japan’s right to determine its own policy of fisheries subsidies and other matters should be maintained. Even if restrictions on fisheries subsidies were to be framed, they should be limited to the area relating to overfishing, whereas the subsidies necessary to ensure the sustainable development of the fishing industry and its multi-functioned enhancement, including fish-port improvement and income support, should be maintained, in addition to those to ensure recovery from earthquake and other disasters.
5. No stipulation of investor-state dispute settlement with prejudice to national sovereignty should be made unless a measure to check rampant litigation is provided.
6. The Government should conduct the negotiations, keeping bilateral and other negotiations in mind and with the top priority given to the holding out of the immunity of five sensitive products in the agriculture, forestry and fisheries industries that come under restrictions of natural and geographical conditions, and should not hesitate to abandon them in case such a consideration could not be upheld.
7. The Government should deal with information acquired through the negotiations in a manner to promptly report to the Diet, and to adequately provide it to the people so that a wide range of popular debates can take place.
8. Even while proceeding with the negotiations, the Government should exert all efforts in accelerating structural reform in domestic agriculture, forestry and fisheries industries, and combine all resources in its handling in full consideration of the massive effects stemming from the outcome of the negotiations upon the above and other related industries as well as regional economies.