The People Power Party criticized the Democratic Party on the 13th for proposing a supplementary budget amounting to 35 trillion won, which includes "13 trillion won for local currency payments," calling it "a fiscal splurge supplementary budget" and "an electoral bribery supplementary budget."
Song Eon-seok, a Commissioner of the People Power Party and chairperson of the National Assembly’s Planning and Finance Committee, issued a statement that day, saying, "Representative Lee Jae-myung and the Democratic Party have argued for a 'fiscal splurge supplementary budget' and 'an electoral bribery supplementary budget' amounting to 35 trillion won. In the current fiscal situation, it is inevitable that all of the supplementary budget will require the issuance of deficit government bonds," and added, "Irresponsible supplementary budgets could be a poison that harms people’s livelihoods and the economy."
If government bonds are additionally issued for a large-scale supplementary budget, it would shock the capital markets, increase government debt, burden future generations, and could lead to a decline in the country's credit rating, causing a chain reaction that impacts the overall economy.
Representative Song noted that more than half, 52%, of the 35 trillion won supplementary budget proposed by the opposition party consisted of simple cash distribution projects, and stated, "The 'local love gift certificates' that Representative Lee and the Democratic Party are treating like a 'sacred jar' have already been proven to have a minimal effect. Nonetheless, continuing to advocate for offers of a fiscal splurge supplementary budget is merely an electoral bribery act to confuse the public, as their approval ratings are falling." He further emphasized his firm opposition to the request for a fiscal splurge supplementary budget and urged the Democratic Party to withdraw its supplementary budget proposal.
The People Power Party also criticized Representative Lee's contradictory statements regarding the supplementary budget. Spokesperson Ho Jun-seok commented on the Democratic Party's 35 trillion won supplementary budget proposal that day, saying, "The weight of Representative Lee Jae-myung's statement about wanting to become the leader of the nation is less than that of a feather." On the 31st of last month, Representative Lee had said, "If I cannot proceed with the supplementary budget due to livelihood support funds, I will give up on the livelihood support funds," but the supplementary budget proposal presented that day by the Democratic Party included '13 trillion won for a nationwide 250,000 won livelihood support fund,' prompting accusations of reversing his position. Spokesperson Ho criticized, "His shifting standards are solely based on what is advantageous or disadvantageous," referring to his move towards the right to target votes, followed by a shift to the left when there was no reaction.
It was also pointed out that the supplementary budget plan was announced unilaterally without negotiations with the ruling party. Policy Chief Kim Sang-hoon criticized the Democratic Party's supplementary budget proposal, stating, "The authority to organize a budget is uniquely reserved for the government as stipulated in the Constitution," adding that the proposal is "extremely arrogant."
The People Power Party had maintained a position of reviewing the supplementary budget discussions after observing the effects of the government's early execution of the first quarter budget. However, they recently shifted to a position of initiating supplementary budget discussions through the ruling and opposition parties' council.
Nonetheless, they outlined principles that the supplementary budget should include the full restoration of the 2025 budget plan, exclusion of local currency budgets, and focus on recovery of domestic demand, support for vulnerable groups, and enhancement of industrial and commercial competitiveness, including AI.
Given the contentious issues, they proposed that supplementary budget discussions should be directly handled in the national council for agreement. However, tensions over other issues, such as the Semiconductor Special Law's 'introduction of exceptions to the 52-hour work week for high-income research positions' and the formation of the National Assembly’s Special Committee on Pensions, have prevented the national council from convening.