Recently, voices of opposition are growing in the political arena regarding the National Pension reform plan that passed the National Assembly through bipartisan agreement.
Former People Power Party leader Han Dong-hoon criticized on the 23rd, "The 86 generation, who will receive more pension immediately, is enjoying the benefits, while the youth generation, who must pay for several decades to receive the pension, bears the burden."
On the same day, former leader Han stated via Facebook, "The plan that was passed this time raised not only 'the amount contributed' but also 'the amount received.' In fact, 'the amount contributed' has been gradually raised over eight years, while 'the amount received' was increased immediately."
Former leader Han remarked, "If we think about the original purpose of reforming due to a lack of funds, doesn't it seem strange to increase the benefits?" He continued, "Even in this situation, where we need to share the pain, the 86 generation (those born in the 1960s and who entered university in the 1980s) will receive benefits instead of suffering, leading to more suffering for the youth generation. Isn't the 86 generation already enjoying enough benefits compared to the youth generation? Must this continue even in pensions? Isn't there any remorse for the youth generation?"
Targeting Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung, he criticized, "How can you pat yourself on the back by saying 'for the first time, the National Assembly and the political sphere have achieved something worthy of praise from the public' after imposing such a burden on the youth generation? Isn't that embarrassing?"
Regarding Daegu Mayor Hong Joon-pyo, he said, "It is unfortunate that Mayor Hong, who is swayed by such absurd self-praise, says, 'It is regrettable that young people oppose and follow suit, not knowing what they are talking about.' Mayor Hong is indeed the one that is unfortunate." He added, "While he tries to teach the youth generation as if there is some profound meaning that the youth cannot comprehend, let me assure you, there is no such deep meaning."
Former leader Han noted, "Discussions on structural reform are realistically less likely in the current chaotic political situation. In the recently passed amendment in the National Assembly, the Democratic Party took everything they needed for the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions and the 86 generation and left the rest to the pension special committee," adding, "There is no way the Democratic Party, having taken everything they needed, will properly engage in additional structural reform discussions."
He emphasized, "After 18 years of difficult agreement, does the youth generation have to bear the burden? Can't we do it properly after 18 years and 3 months?" He argued, "The National Pension Law amendment that imposes the burden on the youth generation should not be finalized as it is. We must discuss it again after exercising the veto power (right to demand reconsideration). The veto should be used in times like this."
Meanwhile, members of the so-called 'Under 73' group, classified as acquaintances of the People Power Party's Han Dong-hoon and born in 1973 or later, also held a press conference at the National Assembly that day, calling for 'the veto to be exercised and the discussion to begin anew.'
Lawmakers in their 30s and 40s from the People Power Party, including Kim Yong-tae, Kim Jae-seob, and Woo Jae-jun, as well as Lee So-young, Jang Cheol-min, and Jeon Yong-ki from the Democratic Party, and Lee Joo-young and Cheon Ha-ram from the Reform Party, also expressed their opposition to the National Pension reform plan at the National Assembly that morning.
They gathered under the name 'Members of Parliament Demanding Better Pension Reform' and stated, "In summary, this adjustment plan aims to increase immediate insurance benefits while raising the premium rates for future generations," criticizing, "The enhanced benefits are being enjoyed by the older generation, while the burden falls again on the future generation."
He pointed out, "We must honestly discuss who receives more and who pays more. We should first convince those who contribute more rather than those who receive more," adding, "This time, there was a lack of minimal effort to persuade the youth generation."
They also urged, "More than half of the members of the pension reform special committee must be from the 30s and 40s. The committee's size should be expanded from 13 members to over 20," and emphasized the need for procedures to gather the voices of youth.