“What kind of early childhood education do we want to leave behind?” — Toward politics that takes responsibility for the future

As I visit the front lines and engage in repeated dialogues with many people, a major realization is emerging within me.

What I felt strongly while listening to everyone is that what is being discussed is not simply a matter of “I want public kindergartens to remain” or “public kindergartens are unnecessary.”

What lay there was a heartfelt wish for the future: “What kind of early childhood education do we want to leave behind in Nagareyama City?”

Carefully watching over the growth of each individual child.

Supporting parents in their isolation.

Seamlessly connecting a child's growth to developmental support and elementary school.

Creating an environment where teachers can continue to learn and build upon better practices.

The scenery looks different depending on one's perspective. However, I strongly felt that the underlying wish to “make early childhood education in Nagareyama City better” is something we all share.

Thinking about political responsibility at disaster ruins

While engaging in these dialogues, the experience of visiting disaster ruins in Iwate and Miyagi Prefectures the year before last kept coming to mind.

Even now, years after the Great East Japan Earthquake, the “decisions made on that day” remain in those places as the current way of life and the shape of the region.

What do we leave behind, and what do we let go of?

Whose voices did we listen to, and through what kind of discussions did we reach our decisions?

Decisions that seemed best at the time sometimes appear as challenges later on. On the other hand, there were examples where discussions held over time became the foundation that supports the region.

Political decisions do not end on the spot. I realized once again that they are things that will continue to be quietly evaluated in the lives of people ten or twenty years from now.

That is precisely why I believe the role of politics is not to rush to immediate conclusions, but to accumulate decisions that can withstand the passage of time.

Connecting “functions” to the future, rather than “existence or abolition”

As I listened to the voices on the ground and reflected on my experience at the disaster ruins, my own questions changed significantly.

Initially, I was thinking mainly about the existence or abolition of the facilities, such as “Should we keep the affiliated kindergartens or close them?”

However, I now feel that that alone is not enough.

What I truly want to consider is how we will develop early childhood education in Nagareyama City from here on out.

What role has the affiliated kindergarten played until now?

Is that role still necessary moving forward?

If it is necessary, in what form can it be passed on to the future?

Isn't facing this question the very essence of the matter?

Rather than gathering evidence to support a predetermined conclusion—whether it be 'it must continue,' 'it must be closed,' or 'it must become a center for early childhood education and care'—it is important to first share the objective of 'what kind of early childhood education is truly necessary for the children of Nagareyama City.' Based on that, I believe it is essential to have a flat discussion that includes whether the public kindergarten model is the best approach or if there are other methods.

Politics that keeps thinking, rather than politics that rushes to provide answers

I have consistently asked these questions in my general inquiries to date.

・How do we listen to the opinions of children and young people and reflect them in policy?

・Is support connected as a system, rather than being dependent on specific individuals?

・Has the system become dependent on any specific person?

・Is the environment one where those on the front lines can continue to learn and think?

・And, in what form will today's decisions remain as time passes?

The work of administration is complex, and there are no simple correct answers.

That is precisely why I believe that taking the time to pause and continue thinking leads to better municipal governance.

Over the approximately three months leading up to the September session, I intend to deepen my learning not only from the parents of the affiliated kindergarten, but also from teachers at private kindergartens and nursery schools, those involved in developmental support, the Board of Education, the Children's Future Department, the Health and Welfare Department, experts researching early childhood education, and various examples from across the country.

The role of the assembly is not just to reach conclusions through majority votes.

Listening to voices from different perspectives, accumulating facts, and continuing to search for better answers through repeated dialogue is also an important role.

I intend to present my own judgment, reached after that process of accumulation, with responsibility at the September session.

Aiming for a decision that will make children ten or twenty years from now think, 'I'm glad they stopped and thought about it back then.'

Over these past three months, I have been listening sincerely to each and every voice, and I will continue to learn and think for myself.