Joo Ho-young: "Kim Jong-in said he never demanded 'indefinite'... Likely to agree on full authority period"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Ji-eun] Former Future United Party Chairman Kim Jong-in has effectively demanded an indefinite term during a radio interview, while Future United Party lawmaker Joo Ho-young stated, "At one point, he also said that I never requested an indefinite term."

On the 24th, on KBS Radio's 'Kim Kyung-rae's Strongest Current Affairs,' Rep. Joo said, "I also heard that he was requesting it that way, but at another time, he said that I never requested an indefinite term."

He added, "Emergency committees usually have full authority, and the term can be set in stages, for example, until the end of August as regulated for the party convention, until the end of December when the regular National Assembly session ends, or until a presidential candidate is selected. I think an agreement can be reached among the parties involved."

The Future United Party is divided internally over whether to proceed with the 'Kim Jong-in emergency committee.' Skeptical views have emerged about an indefinite, fully authorized emergency committee after former Chairman Kim stated in a radio interview that he would manage the party until the presidential election.

Regarding this, Rep. Joo said, "(The emergency committee) term has not been confirmed whether it is until the presidential election or until the environment to select a presidential candidate is established," adding, "Many elected members and related parties seem to feel that having an emergency committee until the presidential candidate is selected is excessive and difficult to accept."

Regarding his name being mentioned as a candidate for the new floor leader to be elected next month, he said, "We suffered a complete defeat this time, and the opening of the National Assembly is more important than ever. Isn't someone with experience in negotiating the opening needed? Also, isn't someone with floor leader experience needed? Because of such discussions, my name is being mentioned. It is only possible if the elected members' intentions are united."

In response to criticism that the Future United Party is 'changing its stance' by opposing 100% disaster relief payments, he said, "Our position has consistently been that it is not acceptable to give everything by borrowing," adding, "During the election, when we said 'let's give 100%,' if we had clearly repeated the premise 'if it does not involve borrowing,' we would not have faced criticism for changing our stance. Because that part was omitted, we have received unfair criticism."

He said, "If this is a one-time measure ending with this second supplementary budget, I agree with borrowing, but no one knows how long the COVID-19 situation will last, and there may be a second wave this winter," adding, "If it lasts three years, five years, or even one year, we need to have resources to respond afterward. If we judge only based on this time, there will be problems about what to do later."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.