A few days ago, five opposition parties, including the main opposition Democratic Party (DP), and four civic and social groups, including Hope and Alternatives, announced a joint policy plan for the June 2 regional elections. The ‘5 plus 4 Council’ represents another step forward in the level of solidarity, following an agreement on principles for presenting unified opposition party candidates.

Looking back on our political history, we can find another example of solidarity among political forces during the 1997 presidential election: the DJP alliance. At that time, however, despite the difference in political ideology among the different factions, there was no policy solidarity, only a promise to divide positions such as prime minister and ministerial positions. The alliance was thus vulnerable to criticism that it was too indiscriminate or focused on dividing the spoils of election victory, and the alliance did indeed crumble midway through the presidency.

In contrast, this 5 plus 4 Council has opened up a path for generating joint pledges for the regional elections by finding a common policy denominator through discussion. Those factions holding progressive and reformist ideologies have demonstrated the flexibility to create a consensus rather than insisting on their differences. And whereas the DJP alliance was created solely through the decision by party leaders, the participation of civil society this time around is commendable in terms of the development of democracy.

This council has put together policy plans in twelve areas, among them job creation, education, social welfare, the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, the revisions to the Sejong City Development Plan and national finances. In particular, the majority of policy areas where ruling and opposition parties, or progressives and conservatives, are facing off are contained in the agreement, including the implementation of free, environmentally friendly school lunches. As such, this agreement could serve the proper function of generating a more active policy confrontation in the local elections. It is also significant as an experiment with the possibilities of policy coordination among opposition parties on the way to the 2012 general and presidential elections.

The agreement is currently at the policy level of a general outline of policy plans. As such, there needs to be a careful follow-up process in which factors such as policy demand and budget procurement plans are examined, fleshed out into actual policies, and distilled into election pledges. In order to do this, it is best if there is large-scale cooperation not only among political parties and civic and social groups, but also progressive and reformist think tanks.

A system also needs to be created where joint policies are carried out in the event of an election win, and joint responsibility is taken for the results. For instance, there is a need to form administrative advisory committees for each local government. The committees, consisting of members of parties that did not produce local government heads, can then make recommendations based on the majority decision of committee members. Currently, only the concept of a joint local government has been brought up, and no specific plan has been put together. In order to secure support and trust from a population still unfamiliar with coalition politics, a system of joint policy implementation is of the utmost importance.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]