In connection with the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism withdrawing the request to suspend new reservations on all international flights arriving in Japan, Chief Cabinet Secretary Matsuno received a post facto report that Prime Minister Kishida and himself made the request. He said, "In border measures, prompt response is more important than responsibility."

As a border measure against the new mutant virus of the new corona, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism requested airlines to suspend new reservations on all international flights arriving in Japan, but requested that it caused some confusion. Was withdrawn, and we reminded us to give due consideration to the return demand of Japanese people.



In connection with this, Chief Cabinet Secretary Matsuno said at a press conference on the afternoon of the 2nd, "The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism will work closely with airlines to closely respond to reservation status and demand trends. We will flexibly make necessary decisions based on the infection situation. "



Then, on the night of December 1st, Prime Minister Kishida was informed after the fact that he had requested a new reservation suspension through the Prime Minister's Secretary, and he himself made it on the 1st with the executives of the relevant ministries and agencies. When I opened the "Task Force", I revealed that I received a post facto report.



On that basis, "Requests to airlines have been made at the discretion of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, but in the future, matters that may have a significant impact on the people will be thoroughly consulted in advance with the" Task Force "etc. I think there is. "



On the other hand, when the reporters asked, "Where do you think the responsibility that caused the confusion lies?" I think it's important to respond. "



In addition, when asked about the legal basis for making the request, he said, "It does not uniformly restrict the return of Japanese people, but considers existing reservations, so it is constitutionally free to move. I've heard that it's not against. "



Furthermore, in response to the question, "Does the return of Japanese people take precedence over the re-entry of resident foreigners?" I have. "