みなさま(重複失礼、拡散歓迎!)

重ねての呼びかけです。なんとか選挙への関心を高め、野党への票を伸ばしましょう。
インターネット中では、同じ意見の人の間での情報交換になってしまいがち。
街頭で、多くの人が耳を傾けるような平易な言葉で発信することが重要かと思います。
ひとりひとりができることは小さなことですが、「ハチドリのひとしずく」のお話にならいましょう。 

ためしに、昨日と今日、ミニ街宣やりました。昨日は4人、今日は2人で交代でスピーチをして、チラシを配布。

通行人はそれなりに耳を傾け、中にはたちどまってじっとボードをみていく人もいました。
「自民党が大勝したら、安倍さんはやりたい放題。文字通り、一党独裁政治になってしまいます」
 
「与野党が国会で、バランスの取れた議論が必要ではないでしょうか?」

「いままでだって、強行採決につぐ強行採決。武器輸出3原則の撤廃などは国会にすらかけられていないんです」
 
「国会できちんとした議論がなされていません。3権分立が機能していません」
 
「自民の改憲草案、読んだことがありますか? 9条だけではありません。基本的人権に関する部分もざっくり削除。管理型の国家になってしまいます」
 
「アベノミクス、本当に成功していると思いますか? 実質GDPも実質賃金も下がってます。中小企業は苦しんでいます。」

市民街宣(勉隊長)@飯田橋西口


投票日まであと4日。何人かで集まって、全国津々浦々で市民街宣やってみませんか?

なるべくやさしい言葉で、語り掛けましょう。

題して、「未来のために選挙に行こう~あっちこっちで勝手に市民街宣~」。

メッセージもやり方も思い思いでいいと思います。一人でもできます。
ねらい目は、人がたまる場所に声が届き、通行のじゃまにならないような場所。
あまり強いメッセージをガンガンスピーチすると引かれてしまい、逆効果なので、ソフトに、問いかけるように、たとえば
「このままだと安倍政権は暴走してしまいます。このままでいいんでしょうか? 選挙に行きましょう! 野党に投票しましょう!」
などと呼びかけてみましょう。

<実施例>
数人がグループでやるのがよいと思います。
 
人がたまる場所に声がとどき、なおかつ通行のじゃまにならない場所。
候補者の街宣とバッティングしないようなところ。

たとえば駅のホームやバス停、交差点などに声がとどくようなちょっとしたスペースをみつけて、マイ
クスピーチとチラシとボードなどでアピールするとよいでしょう。

ボードを使う場合は、大きめのダンボールに、シンプルなメッセージや、図などを、なるべく大きく、パッと目に飛び込んできるように貼り、倒れないように誰かが持つか、なんとか固定する。

拡声器がない場合は、レンタルもあるようです。 

スピーチは、なるべく短く平易な言葉で訴えかけるといいと思います。

また、「私たちは候補者ではなく、普通の市民です。とくにどこの党にも所属していませんが、安倍政権のやり方には危機感をもっています。いてもたってもいられず、こうしてアピールしています」

などと、自分たちの位置づけをはっきりさせるといいと思います。
 
糾弾・弾劾口調は逆効果。通行人の無関心を責めてはいけません。(人間の心理として、責められると、きくよりも耳にふたをしてしまいます)

<アピールの例文>
・与党が強すぎて国会が機能していない。
・秘密保護法は数の力で強行採決された。国会で議論ができていない。
・このまま自民が圧勝すれば、安倍さんの暴走にストップかけることができなくなる。
・自民党も変質し、いまは暴走を止めるストッパーがいない。
・自民党が圧勝すれば、憲法も改正されるかもしれない。基本的人権も制限されるかもしれない。
・与野党が伯仲することが重要(これは、世論調査でこういう意見が多かったので)
・野党を伸ばそう
・ふだん自民に入れている人は野党にいれてみよう。
・ふだん棄権している人は選挙に行こう。

からんできた人がいても、口論しないように注意しましょう。

また、公職選挙法違反、とかなんとか言ってくる人がいたら、「いいえ、このような普通の市民の街頭でのスピーチは憲法で保障された表現の自由であり、公職選挙法にも違反していません。弁護士もそういっていますよ」と穏やかに反論しましょう。

<配布用>
アベノミクスについてやさしく解説したチラシの例)

★街宣やる方、よろしければ、ぜひ、①日時、②場所、③やり方、④主催者、⑤連絡先--などの情報を共有していただければ幸いです。
XLA07655@nifty.com
また、よろしければ、街宣やった手ごたえや写真なんかを送っていただければ、「秘密保護法を考える市民の会」のページにブログアップして宣伝させていただきます。

★街宣の報告を、短くツイッターで流してください! できれば写真つきで。明るい雰囲気でポジティブにやるのがいいでしょう。
@kannamitsuta にメンションいただければ、拡散します。
ハッシュタグは、#勝手に市民街宣 で! 

★街宣がハードルが高ければ、電車の中で、気のあった仲間と、選挙の話をする、とか、「とりあえず自民以外で」のシールをスマホに貼って、電車の中でわざとらしくいじる、などのちょっとしたアクションもいいでしょう。こちらのツイッターで、いろいろ画像や使用例を配信しています。
素材集
★シール投票も、参加者と対話できるので有効な手段ですので、ぜひ!

sugamo5

December 6, 2014


50 non-governmental organizations in Japan released a declaration to protest the
“Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage” (CSC) which protects nuclear power technology vendors from responsibility for reparations and does not protect the victims of nuclear power accidents
 

Declaration
 

To protest The Japanese Diet’s over-hasty approval of the “Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage” (CSC), which heavily protects the nuclear power industry and encourages nuclear exports

 

November 19, the “Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage” (CSC) was ratified by the House of Councilors.  We strongly object to today’s vote to approve this treaty, without any discussion of its numerous problems, which was rushed through to accommodate the Abe administration’s schedule for dissolving the Lower House of the Diet. 


The treaty promotes the export of nuclear power technology while ignoring the lessons of the Fukushima accident.
 

Specifically, we raise the following issues:

1) The exemption of nuclear power technology vendors from liability/responsibility for reparations.  This will result in increased exports of nuclear power technology.
2) The use of international funds for nuclear accident damage compensation above a fixed amount.  This will serve to benefit any nuclear technology vendor who causes an accident.
3) As a result of items 1 and 2, parties involved in the nuclear energy business only profit, without taking any risk – leading to moral hazard and the acceleration of nuclear exports.
4) By placing fixed restrictions on items eligible for nuclear accident compensation, it becomes likely that divergent claims for reparations will go unpaid.
5)  By failing to adopt the principle of “unlimited liability” in Japan’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act  governing nuclear power damages compensation (i.e. nuclear power technology vendors are required to pay an unrestricted amount of compensation), it opens the way for the establishment of a cap (maximum limit) for payment of damages.
6) Despite nuclear accident damages extending far beyond national borders, legal jurisdiction is focused in the nation where the accident originated, meaning a case can only be brought to court in that particular country.
7) As a result of items 4 – 6, the victims of nuclear power accidents are left unprotected.

According to the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act based on the principle of concentrating primary liability for damages, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) is the principal party responsible for compensating damages resulting from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident. However, in actuality, due to the
system set up under the Nuclear Damage Compensation Facilitation Corporation Act, the burden is having to be borne by the consumer and taxpayer.

This treaty extends this type of irresponsible system internationally.

Nuclear power is in and of itself a dangerous and non-efficient system for supplying electricity. It cannot exist without lavish public protection.

Rushing through this treaty’s approval during this Diet session can only be seen as accommodating the “nuclear village”.

The Fukushima Daiichi accident is ongoing with no end in sight. So many people have lost their homeland.

What Japan should be exporting instead, based on this experience, is the wisdom,
practical design, and philosophy for realizing a renewable energy system.

We will, with many others, oppose the export of nuclear technology, based on the lessons learned from the Fukushima accident.

Initiated by:

Friends of the Earth Japan

Green Action

No Nukes Asia Forum Japan

Endorsed by:

North east Asia Information Center

Green Forest Kansai

Tokyo Occupational Safety and Health Center

People to make our Constitution in realty

Fukushima Beacon for Global Citizens Network

Kaku-no-Gomi campaign, chubu

JFOR( Japan Fellowship of Reconciliation )

RenewableHydrogenNetwork

Kinohanasha

Niji to MIdori no kai

MIdori  Fukushima

Documentation Centre 'The Seeds Beneath the Snow'

No Nukes! Noniyuku-kai

Noto Nuclear Emergency Preparedness & Response Research

Hiroshima Setouchi himbun

Citizens Against Nuclear Power Plants, Takarazuka Japan

Alternatives

Ponte fra Italia e Giappone - TomoAmici

NNAA

Class Action Against the Nuclear Reactor Builders

No Nukes, Join in Western Japan/Madams Meeting

Yotsuba Home Delivery Keiji Co,LTD

Shinagawa's women who consider a nuclear power plant

Japan Bear&Forest association Shiga Prefecture Branch

genpatsu maker sosho no kai

beqerefree Hokkaido

Greenpeace Japan

Atomkraftfreie Welt-SAYONARA GENPATSU Duesseldorf e.V.

Takahashijun

Tokai No Nukes Network For Future Generations

femin women's democratic club

kanagawa kakumondai shouiinkai

Fukushima women against Nukes

Campaign for Nuclear-free Japan

The Peace and Nuclear Issues Committee of the National Christian Council in Japan

Kizuna Japon

People Thinking of Local Autonomy for No-Nukes Hokkaido

Against nukes Akune

Kyoto YWCA

Wind of Citizens toward Uniting for Peace

Association of Izumi Citizens Who Question the Restart of the Sendai  Nuclear Power Plant

Osaka Citizens against the Mihama, Oi and Takahama Nuclear Power Plants  (Mihama-no-Kai)

no nukes kobe

No Nukes Action

No Nukes Akashi Octopi Group

The Takagi Fund for Citizen Science

Christian Network for Nuke-Free Earth

 

 

Contact:

Friends of the Earth Japan

1-21-9 Komone Itabashi-ku Tokyo 173-0037
TEL: (+81)3-6909-5983
FAX: (+81)3-6909-5986

E-mail: info@foejapan.org

Friends of the Earth - Urgent Appeal:
We deeply regret that Kagoshima Prefecture “approved” the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant despite 31 dissenting petitions from local residents  

November 7, 2014, Kagoshima Prefectural Council approved a petition for the restart of two reactors at the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant, while rejecting 31 petitions opposing it in some ways (e.g. outright opposition, calling for caution, demanding more research and the inclusion of more local residents as stakeholders). Given the council’s approval, Kagoshima Governor Yuichiro Ito is expected to express his support for the restart of the nuclear reactors sometime soon.

At the Special Committee on Nuclear Safety Preparedness on November 6, some council members offered detailed explanations, with a sense of great urgency, for why the nuclear reactors at Sendai should not be restarted: (1) informed consent from local residents was not obtained yet; (2) the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) was still in the process of reviewing safety procedures and plans for reinforcement installation, (3) who would take responsibility in case of a nuclear accident remained unclear; (4) the Fukushima nuclear accident was not over yet, and many people were still suffering from it; (5) the Volcanological Society of Japan acknowledged the difficulty of predicting a large-scale eruption and recommended that NRA revise its guidelines for assessing the risk of volcanic hazards to nuclear power plants; (6) “national wealth” would mean people in Kagoshima enjoying their beautiful natural environment; and (7) Kagoshima Prefecture could immediately start an effort to revitalize the local economy and community without relying on the nuclear industry. Nonetheless, the majority in the council – the Liberal Democratic Party and Komeito – proceeded to approve the restart of the nuclear reactors.

In addition, many local residents expressed their opposition to the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant at five public seminars held in Kagoshima Prefecture. Thus, the prefectural council’s “approval” did not really reflect its constituency’s voice.

As members of the opposition pointed out at the council meeting, there are many reasons that the nuclear reactors at Sendai should not be restarted, whereas there is no reason for expediting their restart. At present, evacuation plans for local residents have so many problems; for example, temporary evacuation sites and emergency shelters are located in “dangerous areas” according to the Japanese government’s tsunami, landslide, and other hazard maps. This is a potential violation of the Basic Act on Disaster Preparedness, and even local municipalities (i.e. Satsuma-Sendai, Izumi, Akune, Ichikikushinoki) acknowledge this problem. 

It is therefore nonsensical that Kagoshima Prefectural Council and Governor rushed to approve the restart of the nuclear reactors by ignoring these problems. We deeply regret that Kagoshima Prefecture disregarded the dissenting petitions from local residents, and that “approval in absence of the public” became a precedent for the restart of other nuclear reactors in Japan. 

Friends of the Earth (FoE) Japan
1-21-9 Komone, Itabashi, Tokyo 173-0037 Japan
Tel:03-6909-5983 Fax:03-6909-5986  

Appendix: Five reasons we should not restart the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant

1. Public opinion was disregarded
 
(i) According to the survey published by Nikkei Business Daily on August 24, 2014, 56 % of the Japanese are against the restart of nuclear power plants, whereas only 32 % in favor. The opinion survey by Minami Nihon Shimbun in May 2014 also showed that about 60 % of residents of Kagoshima Prefecture are against the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant. Thus, Japanese citizens are against the restart of nuclear reactors both nationally and locally.  

(ii) At a public seminar held in Satsuma-Sendai City on October 9, 2014, nine out of ten speakers stated strong skepticism and criticism against the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant. Similarly, at a public seminar in Hioki City the following day, all the nine speakers expressed their opposition to the restart. While many more participants were raising their hands, the hearing was adjourned. The national and local governments used these seminars merely to explain the safety review report on the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant to local residents, not to receive feedback from them. This lack of mechanisms to incorporate opinions of local residents in a decision on the restart is problematic because a nuclear accident would affect the surrounding areas for a long period of time and possibly force local residents out of their homes forever. To address this problem, FoE Japan and other NGOs both inside and outside Kagoshima submitted signatures calling for public hearings and discussions (not merely public seminars).   

(iii) Prior to the restart of a nuclear reactor, “approval by the local community” is required. While Kagoshima Prefecture argues that this approval pertains only to Satsuma-Sendai City and itself, this is totally inadequate, given the range of municipalities that would be affected in case of a nuclear accident. In fact, in response to demands from residents, city councils of Ichikikushikino and Hioki, both adjacent to Satsuma-Sendai, adopted resolutions calling for the expansion of the definition of “the local concerned community.” We believe that this definitional expansion, as well as the creation of mechanisms for public participation, is absolutely necessary. 

2. Evacuation plans take radiation exposure as inevitable

Evacuation plans have serious problems. On September 12, the Cabinet Office’s Nuclear Disaster Prevention Conference approved evacuation plans for the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant as “concrete and rational.” However, it is questionable whether the plans are operationally effective because they are limited to a 30km radius from the plant, as well as they fail to consider the possibility of a compound disaster, the necessity of evacuation for home patients and other vulnerable groups outside a 10km radius, and the locations for screening and decontamination. 

For example, home patients who reside within a 5km radius and require assistance are expected to evacuate to nearby facilities. One of the evacuation facilities, an old building of Sōrō Elementary School, is located only 1.6km away from the nuclear power plant. Besides, this evacuation facility stores only the amount of fuel that can last for four days. In case of a nuclear accident, evacuees at this facility will likely be abandoned, and they are expected to receive maximum 190mSv of radiation doses in two days, according to the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s simulation.               

3. The safety review has serious problems

While the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) was reviewing the safety of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant, it received about 18,000 public comments. Nonetheless, NRA ignored comments that were critical of its safety review. The limited scope of NRA’s safety review practically guarantees the restart of the nuclear power plant; for example, nuclear emergency responses are excluded from the review. Particularly problematic is NRA’s handling of risks related to volcanic eruptions, as elaborated in the following. 

(i) Southern Kyūshu has multiple calderas, including Aira Caldera encompassing Sakurajima, and about 7,000 years ago, massive volcanic eruptions occurred off the coast of Kagoshima. Many volcanologists thus warned devastating effects of a volcanic eruption on the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant. Since traces of past pyroclastic flows were found only several kilometers away from the plant, even Kyūshu Electric Power Company (KEPCO) acknowledged the possibility of a pyroclastic flow reaching the plant, and NRA proceeded with its safety review accordingly.     

NRA’s Guidelines for Volcanic Risk Assessment consider (a) whether the risk of a pyroclastic flow reaching an operating nuclear power plant is sufficiently low and (b) whether an operator has adequate plans for stopping a plant and taking out fuel rods when symptoms of a volcanic eruption are detected. However, KEPCO has not demonstrated that the risk is sufficiently low with regard to (a), and it has merely stated its “policy to take out fuel rods” without specifying details with regard to (b), not to mention the feasibility of detecting symptoms of a volcanic eruption in a timely manner. In fact, experts warn that after stopping a plant, “it will take at least five years” to cool fuel rods, take them out, and transport them to a safe place. It is thus problematic that NRA did not enlist volcanological experts in its safety review of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant, even though the risk of volcanic hazards was the key issue. We therefore believe that NRA should redo its safety review on the volcanic risk.            

(ii) KEPCO has so far stated its “overall policies” on preparedness for potential volcanic hazards without detailed operational planning. The company is expected to prepare a “construction plan” to demonstrate that the facilities of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant will be sufficiently anti-seismic to meet NRA’s new standards, and to include in its “safety rules” the procedures for cooling fuel rods, the methods of taking them out, and the location of their storage if symptoms of a volcanic eruption were detected. But KEPCO’s safety rules contain no detailed discussion of operational responses to such an emergency situation.  

4. There is no shortage of electricity

According to the Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan, there was 10 % surplus electricity even during the peaks of electricity demand between July and August 2014: Japan had enough electricity without any operating nuclear reactor. At this juncture, KEPCO suspended access to its grids for any more new producers of renewable energy, beginning on September 25. KEPCO argued that its grids could be overloaded with the expected amount of electricity generated by solar and wind power, more than 16 million kWh, that could meet the summer peak demand − with the expansion of grid capacities and the introduction of mechanisms to balance supply and demand, renewable energies will be able to replace nuclear energy. In reality, however, KEPCO has allowed only 4.1 million kWh of electricity by solar and wind power to be introduced in its grid. Here, KEPCO’s decision to suspend access to its grids seems to be related to its plan to restart the Sendai and Genkai Nuclear Power Plants.               
 
5. The Fukushima Nuclear Accident is not over yet

At this moment, contaminated waters continue to leak, and no viable countermeasure has been found. More than 100,000 evacuees are also still living away from their homes. In fact, we still do not know the real cause of the Fukushima nuclear accident. And yet, the government and KEPCO are trying to rush the restart of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant by ceremonially conducting “safety review,” offering “public seminars,” and obtaining “approval by the local community.” We argue that  forcing the restart of the nuclear power plant this way is completely unjustifiable.  

↑このページのトップヘ