[Joo Young-jin's News Briefing]
When quoting this interview, please credit the program name SBS <Joo Young-jin's News Briefing>. SBS holds the copyright.
■ Broadcast: SBS <Joo Young-jin's News Briefing> Mon–Fri (14:00–15:20)
■ Host: Anchor Joo Young-jin
■ Guest: Jung Jeom-sik, Floor Leader of the People Power Party
--------------------------------------------
● <Jung Jeom-sik, Floor Leader of the People Power Party> Interview
"Constitutional revision pursued by Lee Jae-myung administration is for private gain"
"Constitutional revision can enter parliamentary discussion when 'public consensus' is formed"
"People Power Party's 'conservative politics' falls short of public expectations"
"Realizing conservative values is the biggest task to pursue during my term"
"Han Dong-hoon's passion in vetting Kim Seung-won is positively evaluated"
"Democratic Party intends a 'toothless hearing' for Kim Seung-won without adopting witnesses"
"Committee reassignment for Han Dong-hoon? Must approach from the National Assembly Act... Impossible"
"Kim Seung-won and Yong Hye-in do not meet public standards... judged unqualified"
"Thorough scrutiny of next year's budget... Burden on future generations, looting the future"
--------------------------------------------
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: People Power Party Floor Leader Jung Jeom-sik, whom you saw in the video clip, has joined us. Welcome.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Pleased to be here.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Was yesterday your first representative speech for a parliamentary negotiation group?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: That is correct.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: What was the reaction after yesterday's speech?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I received a lot of encouragement, with many people saying I did well and thanking me for saying things they wanted to hear.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: During your speech yesterday, did you hear the boos and shouting coming from Democratic Party lawmakers?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I heard them, but I believe they shouted because what I was saying—what our party was saying—struck such a painful nerve.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: In yesterday's speech, you were very assertive in ruling out constitutional revision, declaring there would be no constitutional revision under this administration. Originally, there were voices within the People Power Party saying that with a single pledge of 'no second term,' constitutional revision is necessary for the development of our country anyway. Why did you firmly state there will be no constitutional revision?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Fundamentally, isn't the constitutional revision currently being pursued by the Democratic Party or the Lee Jae-myung administration intended to pursue private interests? To erase President Lee Jae-myung's crimes through constitutional revision... excuse me.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Please take your time.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I made such a definitive statement because I believe they brought up the constitutional revision agenda for that very reason. Ultimately, constitutional revision is the most important agenda for the future of the Republic of Korea, regarding issues of our power structure and constitutional order.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: The basic framework, the foundation.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: That is right. But because almost all members of our party agree that this constitutional revision is being pursued for private interests—for the private interests of a specific individual in a specific party—I spoke so definitively yesterday.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Both the Senior Presidential Secretary for Political Affairs and media reports suggest that after returning from his current overseas tour, and amid upcoming schedules such as attending the UN General Assembly in New York, President Lee Jae-myung might hold a press conference at some point to state, "I will not seek a second term. There will be no dropping of indictments." Even if he does so, does that mean the People Power Party will not take part in constitutional revision discussions?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Yes. Fundamentally, what matters most in constitutional revision is the will of the people. A public consensus must be formed. In our history, constitutional revisions pursued by rulers ended up failing and were used as tools to oppress the people. To give two examples, the constitutional revision after the April 19 Revolution and the revision after the June 10 Democratic Struggle in 1987 were the most successful, and they were evaluated as successful because they were achieved by gathering the collective will of the public. However, isn't the constitutional revision currently being discussed led by those in power? That is why yesterday I said there would never be a constitutional revision regarding the second term issue. But pivoting from an anti-revision stance to being open to revision will not happen just with a single word from the president or a specific political party. Ultimately, only when this agenda can establish a public consensus can it enter the forum of National Assembly discussions.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Could that possibly happen within the term of this administration?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Ultimately, public consensus is the biggest issue on that matter. The prerequisites that must be met are declarations such as "There will be no second term. I will stand trial for my own charges," confirming that revision is not being sought for private interests, and forming a public consensus. That is our position.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Because constitutional revision is such a momentous task, and moving toward our future AI era—which the People Power Party also emphasizes—isn't it true that there are voices and demands of the times arguing that a constitution framed 40 years ago inevitably needs to be updated?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Yes, that is correct. We also agree on that point. I understand some within the Democratic Party claim we oppose it because we are against including the May 18 spirit in the preamble. However, since the previous administration—our administration—we have already stated that the May 18 spirit should be included in the constitutional preamble, so we should not approach the constitutional revision issue based on that. Almost all of our lawmakers agree on that point.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: I see. I think many viewers today will nod in agreement with what Floor Leader Jung Jeom-sik just said. If such consensus is formed, and if the president clearly indicates that this is not a constitutional revision for private interests, right?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Yes, that is correct.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Understood. The part at the end of yesterday's speech discussing what conservative politics and conservatism mean seemed quite memorable. A politics that knows how to be grateful to past generations and take responsibility for future generations. Is that your usual philosophy? How do you view it?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I believe that is ultimately the kind of politics all of us politicians should dream of. Today's Republic of Korea was built through the efforts of our ancestors. I believe our generation's duty is to develop this Republic of Korea even better and pass it on to future generations—that should be the most fundamental value of conservative politics.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Do you think such conservative politics is being realized right now? Do you feel the People Power Party is falling considerably short?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I think it falls short of public expectations. We always feel pained about that. The biggest problem, after all, is internal fighting within the party. What we hear most from citizens, especially from residents in our constituencies, is: "Why are you always fighting among yourselves within the party?" We face rebukes asking why we are fighting each other when we only have 109 or 110 members and need all our strength just to stand up against the government and ruling party. So we are working to make up for these shortcomings through party unity, and I consider it the biggest task to pursue during my one-year term.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: In what area specifically?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: I am speaking of whether our party is realizing genuine conservative values and whether we are practicing politics that aligns with the public will.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: This could also be interpreted as an intention to reshape the People Power Party's conservative identity and leadership?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Connecting that to the leadership system would be an overinterpretation. Please understand it as my commitment to strive to make the People Power Party a party that delivers the politics the public desires.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: In other words, "Stop fighting among yourselves and properly take on the ruling party and the Democratic Party." But lately, regarding Justice Minister nominee Kim Seung-won, some commentators have even remarked that Representative Han Dong-hoon alone is doing better than the entire People Power Party. Lawmakers belonging to the People Power Party might feel a bit uncomfortable about that. What is your assessment of Representative Han Dong-hoon's recent parliamentary activities and his vetting of nominee Kim Seung-won?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Fundamentally, although Representative Han Dong-hoon is not a member of our party, I view his passion in vetting nominee Kim Seung-won very positively.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Positively evaluated. Today, Representative Jang Dong-hyeok criticized Han for clouding the essence by repeatedly emphasizing the 'oppa' issue, to which Representative Han Dong-hoon countered that 'oppa' is indeed the essence.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Rather than saying either of them is wrong or right, it is a question of where to place emphasis. If one focuses on the 'oppa' aspect, it ties the public's attention to a male-female relationship, which seems to be why Representative Jang made that point. On the other hand, Representative Han Dong-hoon seems to frame it as, "Would this improper solicitation issue have occurred if not for this 'oppa' relationship?" I think this difference appears because each has a different focal point.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: I am not sure if you caught the situation in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee this morning, but didn't the Democratic Party agree to hold nominee Kim Seung-won's confirmation hearing on the 15th? Do you also understand that they intend to proceed without a single witness?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Yes, that is correct. We requested about 40 individuals as witnesses and testifiers, including key witnesses, involved parties, and prosecution officials who suspended the indictment. Normally, before the full committee convenes, the ranking members of both ruling and opposition parties reach some level of agreement before proceeding.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Ranking member Kim Eui-kyeom and ranking member Park Hyoung-soo.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: That is right. But without reaching any agreement, they held the full committee meeting today, voted only on the date and requests for data submission, and recessed the committee meeting saying negotiations would continue. Ultimately, I believe the Democratic Party demonstrated its intention today to make it a completely toothless hearing without adopting a single witness. Of course, pro forma, they say to negotiate until midnight tonight. But earlier, during the confirmation hearing for Prime Minister nominee Han Seong-sook, we requested around 10 or 11 witnesses and testifiers, but the Democratic Party opposed their adoption, so the hearing proceeded without any witnesses or testifiers. I believe they are doing this to make nominee Kim Seung-won's hearing another toothless hearing, just like back then.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Was Representative Han Dong-hoon also included in the People Power Party's witness request list? Was what Representative Yoon Sang-hyun mentioned on the spot today just his personal thought?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: It was just his personal thought.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: His personal thought.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Because there is no precedent for having an incumbent lawmaker stand as a witness at a confirmation hearing.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: No precedent.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Yes, that is right.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: As an idea, one People Power Party lawmaker suggested that if you proposed to National Assembly Speaker Cho Jeong-sik to reassign Representative Han Dong-hoon to the Legislation and Judiciary Committee to participate in the hearing, it would become quite a topic of discussion and put pressure on Speaker Cho. Have you heard of such talk?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Someone did mention that to me privately, but fundamentally, it must be approached from the perspective of the National Assembly Act.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: The National Assembly Act.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Currently, a special committee on confirmation hearings has not been formed; the hearing is being conducted in the Legislation and Judiciary Committee. Under the National Assembly Act, each standing committee has fixed quotas for each negotiation group as well as for independent, non-negotiation group members. Therefore, removing a specific member of a negotiation group to insert an independent lawmaker is legally impossible under the National Assembly Act. Ultimately, Speaker Cho Jeong-sik would have to swap members among independents, but both parties involved must agree. Since committee members have already been appointed, you can consider it impossible.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: So even if you were to propose it, it would merely be a political proposal that cannot be realized, which is why you have not considered making such a proposal at all.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: That is correct.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Understood. So the People Power Party's view is that both nominee Kim Seung-won and nominee Yong Hye-in are unacceptable?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: That is correct. Fundamentally, candidates for State Council positions must possess and be scrutinized for very high levels of morality and competence. But have both of them demonstrated the high ethical standards and qualifications demanded by the public? The public assesses them very negatively. From a poll I saw today, I recall opposition to both candidates well exceeded 50%. Ultimately, politics must be conducted to meet the public's standards, prioritizing those expectations over a politician's personal views. From that perspective, our party judges both of them to be unqualified.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: The People Power Party has experienced being both the ruling party and the opposition. Being the ruling party is quite difficult, though being the opposition is difficult as well.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: We had our time as the ruling party, but even then, we were a minority ruling party. So the majority opposition party wielded the legislative power of the National Assembly at will, and even then, there was no dialogue or compromise. Now that we have become the opposition, there is still no dialogue and compromise, so it remains difficult for us.
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: In this year's regular parliamentary session, next month brings the parliamentary audit of state affairs, and the budget bill exceeding 800 trillion won—the largest ever—must be passed in December. What are the People Power Party's basic principles and strategies?
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Fundamentally, as I said in my representative speech for the negotiation group yesterday, their intention is to spend money freely through expansionary fiscal policy, but who will bear that burden? The government currently says excess tax revenue, additional tax revenue of around 200 trillion won, is expected...
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Is expected.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: ...and yet they say they will issue 106 trillion won in new government bonds. If there is excess tax revenue, using it to pay off the national debt is the basic principle of the National Finance Act. However, creating a so-called 'Future Response Fund,' pouring 162 trillion won into it for the executive branch to spend at will, while also issuing another 106 trillion won in new bonds might be fine for our generation. But our future generations—the youth who will bear the burden of the future—will have to pay back the debt incurred for the pleasures of our generation. That is why I used the term 'looting the future' rather than 'responding to the future.'
▷ Joo Young-jin / Anchor: Understood. I will take this to mean that you will thoroughly scrutinize next year's budget proposal under those principles. Next time we invite you, I will focus on asking about the rebuilding of the People Power Party. Today, I did not ask because I thought you might give principled answers. Once the regular session of the National Assembly wraps up to some degree, we will invite you again to hear more. Thank you very much.
▶ Jung Jeom-sik / Floor Leader of the People Power Party: Thank you.
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.