Gov't to consider Japanese language ability as requirement for long-stay foreigners

[Glenski]

It depends on how you see this; either you see this new policy as a protection for foreigners themselves or - a well-known feature of the Japanese gouvernment - another policy to keep away immigrants out of Japan.

With the lack of information from the horse's orifice at the moment, I'd say the answer cannot be decided yet. One thing is for sure, though. If you believe the Japanese government is out to protect foreigners, you are dreaming.

Everyone knows that Japan is in need of immigrant workers.

Yup, but Japan refuses to open its doors.

Having an outstanding degree may sometimes cover up your lack of Japanese, especially in branches where Japanese are less skilled.

Homerduff, do you realize that a degree in any major will get you a job teaching English? Any degree, from anthropology to zoology. You don't need anything "outstanding" for that.

If the Japanese gouvernment has other meanings (keeping out foreigners) with this new policy, then they are just a bunch of idiots.

As I mentioned above, the jury is out on this, but you are right about the idiot part, IMO.

Let's look at this another way, folks.
From the little we can gather from the few articles printed so far, it seems that imposing a language requirement is mostly for...
1) renewing a visa
2) people who want to stay here a long time
Little more can really be gleaned from this, IMO. So, with these tiny tidbits, what can we deduce?

The requirement may not be imposed upon a person getting his first visa here. I infer this from the word "renew" in the article, and from the fact that most people looking for their first work visa will not be able to tell you that they intend to stay here long-term. However, from the generalunion.com web page, there is an interesting Ministry of Justice graph. Go to http://www.generalunion.org/law/welfare and scroll down to the first thing you see above the heading on HEALTH. There it is. Granted, it shows 2001 data, let's just use this as a rough guideline (hey, at least it's data, compared to what the articles have provided so far). If we consider people can get a 3-year visa, and that general banter says most people go home after that many years, look who's left...less than 10% of foreigners who come to Japan for work. So, who is the MOJ trying to target with this proposed policy? Potential terrorists? Not likely in just that small number of people (and considering that no terrorist acts have been committed by foreigners).

So, we have thoughts that the MOJ wants to target people who intend to stay here a long time, yet we also see evidence that doesn't support the rationality behind this. Well, that's what I get for applying logic to the MOJ.

Oh, and if anyone wants to see a much more extended discussion on this whole topic, go here (and brace yourselves). GaijinPot

 

[Elizabeth]

I'm not arguing with the first part. I am arguing the second. What's your stand on the latter, other than to say there will likely be no rigorous test?

I think a test of basic to intermediate language ability is a good idea for anyone applying for OR renewing a work visa although other immigration restrictions would probably have to be waived to ensure no fall off in overall numbers. Particularly single people in unstable, tenuous English-only jobs with lower average incomes have little prospect of moving up in society as illiterates. When larger populations of transient, low skilled, no language workers are allowed to persist is when serious social problems start to develop. Other immigration mandates, such as four years of college before applying to a language school or for an English teaching job are much more arbitrary and meaningless in my opnion.

So, basically, anyone that isn't prepared to fully adjust to a foreign country has no business living there in my opinion. If Japanese becomes too hard, stop whining and try for a European culture. ☝

 

[orochi]

>Anyone that isn't prepared to fully adjust to a foreign country has no business living there in my opinion.

What about people that are transferred here or otherwise forced to move out here due to work?

What about those who marry here and have families?

There are loads of circumstances that bring a person anywhere.

>If Japanese becomes too hard, try for a European culture and language.

I don't think this is the problem.

 

[nanook]

If this goes anywhere, which I doubt, when looking at the Japanese demographic development, it would most probably end up as just another arbitrary "case by case" handle for immigration officers to turn down visa applicants they don't like for any kind of esoteric reason.

I think, it is a non-story

 

[Glenski]

I think a test of basic to intermediate language ability is a good idea for anyone applying for OR renewing a work visa although other immigration restrictions would probably have to be waived to ensure no fall off in overall numbers.

Other restrictions like what? The need for a degree or years of experience? What do you mean here?

Particularly single people in unstable, tenuous English-only jobs with lower average incomes

Stop it, Elizabeth! Do you have some fetish against English teachers or something? Geez. We don't even know what this policy is going to cover, yet you continue to belittle English teachers. Yes, some have low salaries (below what used to be the standard 250,000 yen/month). Yes, the jobs are tenuous in that they are mostly contract positions, but that hasn't stopped huge numbers from renewing visas.

... have little prospect of moving up in society as illiterates.

Where is it written that anyone, Japanese or foreigner, has to "move up in society"? Plenty of Japanese don't. Should we find a way to kick them out?

When larger populations of transient, low skilled, no language workers are allowed to persist is when serious social problems start to develop.

Yes, and the government is causing many of them by letting them in under trainee visas, offering even lower wages than English teachers, fewer benefits (if any), and not acknowledging their existence until they discover that they have not prepared such people to assimilate (such as putting their kids in schools). It's not the fault of the worker.

Other immigration mandates, such as four years of college before applying to a language school or for an English teaching job are much more arbitrary and meaningless in my opnion.

I don't argue that having a degree with any major is acceptable for people who truly teach, but the situation is not as simple as that. What sort of standards would you impose on teachers, and how would you enforce them?

Other people, non-teachers, have to show credentials, too, including relevant degrees and/or work experience. There are lots of loopholes in the system, but that's because the "rules" are just guidelines, meant to cover a lot of situations, not just one.

So, basically, anyone that isn't prepared to fully adjust to a foreign country has no business living there in my opinion. If Japanese becomes too hard, stop whining and try for a European culture.

"Becomes too hard". Well, we just have to wait and see to whom this applies. Brazilians? Teachers? Refugees? Permanent residents?

And, we just have to see what sort of test the MOJ is proposing. Written plus spoken? How many kanji? What level of spoken Japanese?

And, just how much time will the MOJ allow for people to learn this before they decide to kick them out? Lots of unanswered and relevant questions here.

For now, I think it is too soon to do more than speculate. Looking down your nose on people who have spent years here surviving (key word!) without much Japanese, and without offering solutions other than "learn the damned language", is a poor way to debate.

 

[Mikawa Ossan]

Although in principle, I think the idea of making long term residents learn the local language is beneficial for all parties, I think that codifying it into law is a bad idea for Japanese manufacturing interests, unless they decide to move many more factories overseas.

The English teachers in Japan are a small percentage of the foreigners living here. Many more are factory workers. Many of them do not know much Japanese, and that limits their options in this country, but if they had to leave Japan due to their lack of language skills, who will fill the jobs that they vacate?

Those jobs are very significant for Japan's economy. Living here in Mikawa, home of Toyota and its affiliates, I can see how important these people are to the manufactoring sector, if only through the sheer numbers of these foreigners.

I think that English teachers in Japan is something of a red herring on this issue.

And, we just have to see what sort of test the MOJ is proposing. Written plus spoken? How many kanji? What level of spoken Japanese?

Plus the fact that generally speaking, tests in Japan are not so much to gauge one's actual ability as they are to see how well one can do on the test itself. If the MOJ made their own test, I would be very wary of having to take it no matter my level of Japanese ability.

 

[Dogen Z]

This is contrary to most opinions posted in the thread but I think it deserves some space here.

Many countries have or will shortly have language requirements for their immigrant population--France, Switzerland, Austria, and even Australia. Of course, the immigrant population in those countries object but having such a policy helps society at large when dealing with these people rather placing an extra burden on society to try find a way to communicate them. It also encourages integration because the better they can communicate, the easier it is for them to function normally in that country.

IMO, keeping pockets of functionally illiterate people who can only speak a foreign-language is like having people colonizing the country which can lead to balkanization of the culture. I don't think the Japanese would stand for that. When Japanese emigrated to the U.S. and Brazil, they quickly learned the culture/language of their host country. Japan might want to see a similar regard for its culture by those who are coming to the country now.

********
"To learn and and, at times, to practice what you have learned, is that not a joy?" Confucius

 

[Glenski]

IMO, keeping pockets of functionally illiterate people who can only speak a foreign-language is like having people colonizing the country which can lead to balkanization of the culture. I don't think the Japanese would stand for that. When Japanese emigrated to the U.S. and Brazil, they quickly learned the culture/language of their host country. Japan might want to see a similar regard for its culture by those who are coming to the country now.

One would have to wonder why the sudden shift, if this is truly their reason? Decades have gone by with absolutely no inkling of this. Japan is happy telling people it is difficult/impossible to learn its language, and many live happy existences based on the notion that Japan is a "homogeneous" nation.

Of course, I think you can tell I am being sarcastic above, but I thought I should just point that out.

Besides, the article clearly states that this potential policy change is based on protection from terrorism, not any real sort of integration or alleviation of the negative birthrate. Let's hope that along with the language policy (if it ever surfaces) comes language lessons available for those who desire them (especially the Brazilians) and a tearing down of the "no foreigners" signs, many of which are aimed at Brazilians themselves.

 

[Elizabeth]

One would have to wonder why the sudden shift, if this is truly their reason? Decades have gone by with absolutely no inkling of this. Japan is happy telling people it is difficult/impossible to learn its language, and many live happy existences based on the notion that Japan is a "homogeneous" nation.
Of course, I think you can tell I am being sarcastic above, but I thought I should just point that out.
Besides, the article clearly states that this potential policy change is based on protection from terrorism, not any real sort of integration or alleviation of the negative birthrate. Let's hope that along with the language policy (if it ever surfaces) comes language lessons available for those who desire them (especially the Brazilians) and a tearing down of the "no foreigners" signs, many of which are aimed at Brazilians themselves.

Are you talking about the article posted in the original post ? There's nothing in there I could see remotely connected to terrorism.

My assumption was that the reason this is being brought up now is planning ahead for the not so distant day where an unprecedented number of foreigners will be brought in for manufacturing or other low-skill, manual labor positions necessitating a more thorough policy of integration than in the past.

I'm quite sure a language policy that leads to a net deficit of employees in these jobs is not going anywhere.


Although it's interesting, in the US at least, there is a "get tough on illegal immigrants" fervor sweeping the country which is not at all good thing in itself (particularly for migrant or factory employers). But many legal and permanent residents are also feeling the heat of discrimination and potential deportation which has prompted a huge spike in the numbers applying for citizenship. Although the test requires high fluency, becoming a citizen is seen as the ultimate security status. So it's possible that a similar pattern may also start to develop in Japan. Simply the awareness that a test could someday be instituted stimulates an appreciation of the importance of learning or consequences of not that may stir at least a few folks to take more serious action on it on their own initiative...

 

[pipokun]

Decide would be ﾅ塚??凖ｨﾂ 窶ｰﾃで塚 or similar.
Decided to consider would just be ﾅ椎ｸ窶慊｢窶堙ｰﾅｽn窶堙溪?堙ｩ or similar.

Many thanks.
I am sure that it will take another century before the J government orders wives of expats to study Japanese like the French does.

 

[Glenski]

Are you talking about the article posted in the original post ? There's nothing in there I could see remotely connected to terrorism.

The first article to come out, plus one other that followed, did mention terrorism. A few subsequent articles did not. Who can say why? Here is a link to the first one (which will expire, so I will also copy/past the quote):
http://www.japantoday.com/jp/news/425041
"Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura ... cited reasons such as the need for foreigners to be able to speak Japanese to fit into the Japanese society. While he gave no further explanation, the envisioned measure is believed to be aimed at eradicating illegal residency and likely part of antiterrorism policies."

My assumption was that the reason this is being brought up now is planning ahead for the not so distant day where an unprecedented number of foreigners will be brought in for manufacturing or other low-skill, manual labor positions necessitating a more thorough policy of integration than in the past.

While the need is there to combat the declining birthrate, these articles on language requirements don't really seem to discuss much if anything about integration, which should really include educating these people. IMO, the government is embarrassed at the results of opening its doors so far, especially because of some of the illegalities involved in their own shenanigans.

Although it's interesting, in the US at least, there is a "get tough on illegal immigrants" fervor sweeping the country which is not at all good thing in itself (particularly for migrant or factory employers).

As I wrote above, itis the government itself that operates some of these migrant workers illegally, so they are probably just trying to keep a low profile and divert attention.

But many legal and permanent residents are also feeling the heat of discrimination and potential deportation which has prompted a huge spike in the numbers applying for citizenship. Although the test requires high fluency, becoming a citizen is seen as the ultimate security status. So it's possible that a similar pattern may also start to develop in Japan.

Possible, perhaps. But you don't see citizenship mentioned above, only long-term residency.

Simply the awareness that a test could someday be instituted stimulates an appreciation of the importance of learning or consequences of not that may stir at least a few folks to take more serious action on it on their own initiative...

True, but as I've pointed out, the article(s) don't provide enough clarity for the affected group to know whether it is included in this proposal.

 

[JimmySeal]

I think language requirements wouldn't be such a bad thing. I don't think Japanese proficiency should be a prerequisite for becoming a resident, but IMHO maybe residents should be required to learn Japanese.

There are plenty of situations where a lack of Japanese ability can really jam up the works. Almost anyone living here has times when they need to interact with shop clerks or police officers, and if the resident isn't making the slightest effort to know Japanese, it places a large burden on these servicepeople to deal with members of society who aren't trying to become a part of the society.

I think it's a bit bizzare that it's possible to obtain a Japanese driver's license without being able to read even hiragana or katakana. Road signs convey important information that is relevant to everyone on the road, not just the nihonjin.

I think living in Japan without trying to learn Japanese is tremendously disrespectful and Japan shouldn't have to accept people who show that kind of disregard for the comfort of the people of Japan. In a way, this proposal could be seen as a step towards the integration of foreigners, by requiring them to possess the rudiments to participate in Japanese society.

There is the case of people who get transfered to Japan for work without a particular desire to go to Japan. For such people, it would be the company's responsibility to make sure that their employees are up to speed with the requirements. The JET Programme already provides a wide range of Japanese language courses, free of charge, to its participants.

 

[epigene]

My apologies in advance for not having read through the thread, but what is the definition for "long-term stay"?

I don't think the proficiency requirement will be imposed on those with study or work visas and assume it will be for people who seek permanent residence and eventually Japanese citizenship?

 

[orochi]

My apologies in advance for not having read through the thread, but what is the definition for "long-term stay"?
I don't think the proficiency requirement will be imposed on those with study or work visas and assume it will be for people who seek permanent residence and eventually Japanese citizenship?

I don't think the government knows yet, either. In the Japanese articles, they refer to 窶卍ｷﾅ?ﾃｺ窶佚伉催? so 窶兒ﾅ?ﾃｺ窶佚伉催?tourist visas, etc) and 窶ｰiﾂ住(permanent residence) are likely not going to be affected.

 

[Taiko666]

\
I know Belgium isn't unique for that mather. I'm mostly talking about European countries. Anyway as for my 'self-satisfied' opinion, I have you got the point that learning a language shouldn't be a burden. I'm aware that English native speakers may worry more about this because foreign languages are usually less taught at a young age. That is not the fault of English native speakers. It's the fault of the education system for one part, and also the fact that English is the number 1 international language so why bother learning other languages..
I'm sure that the test level won't be amazingly high. Knowing that you have to get JLPT 2 to enter most Japanese colleges. If he/she isn't willing to learn Japanese, then yes he/she should face the consequences. If you have 'contributed' to the Japanese society for an amount of years, you should have some respect towards Japanese society itself also. And what is the best way to show respect to society ? Yes, learn the language.

I agree learning languages shouldn't be a burden, it should be a highly enjoyable and rewarding experience (as was/is my learning Japanese, and even my 'Franglais' French!) But making it a legal requirement (learn it or lose your livelihood) turns it into an incredibly heavy burden.

I hope the test will be fairy straightforward. But common sense is a rare commodity among J-politicians. And even if it's only JLPT4, bear in mind that nihongo looks incredibly scary to new-starters. Even having to learn kana and 50 kanji in order to get a visa would be enough to disuade many workers from even considering coming to Japan.

 

[Elizabeth]

My apologies in advance for not having read through the thread, but what is the definition for "long-term stay"?
I don't think the proficiency requirement will be imposed on those with study or work visas and assume it will be for people who seek permanent residence and eventually Japanese citizenship?

Yes, for long term residents but not only at the time they apply for residency. As it's being considered by the MOJ, language ability would apparently be part of a "landing examination" at the time of entrance into a country for those people. That score would serve as a baseline measure which would be reassessed for improvement upon visa renewal or other change in residency status. Those "improvements" would then be taken into consideration by immigration for approval or not. Here is one Japanese article from Mainichi :

政府は日本に長期滞在する外国人の入国や在留許可審査の際、日本語能力を要件として重視する具体策を外務、法務両省が検討することを決めた。就労目的などで増加傾向にある外国人が地域社会に溶け込みやすい環境整備につなげるとともに、来日する外国人にも日本語学習意欲を高めてもらうのが狙い。

高村正彦外相が１５日の閣議後会見で明らかにした。外相は「日本語能力は、外国人自身の生活の質を高めるためにも、日本社会のためにも大切」と強調したうえで「『日本へ行くために日本語を勉強しよう』という機運が高まれば大変よいことだ」と述べた。

具体的には、入国時の上陸審査基準に日本語能力を新たに盛り込むかどうかや、在留期間の更新、資格変更時に日本語能力の向上について確認するなど、何らかの形で考慮することが検討対象となる見通し。外務省によると、カナダでは就労目的の永住者が査証申請時に提出する略歴で、語学力を含む６項目をポイント化し、総ポイント数に応じて許可。英国、ドイツ、フランスで語学能力を重視する移民政策を取っているという。

ただ、政府内には、要件を厳しくすることで「査証（ビザ）の発給・更新などに影響が生じ、貴重な人材が入国できなくなる可能性もある」との課題を指摘する声もある。【上野央絵】

 

[epigene]

In the article Elizabeth posted, I can read that the government came up with the idea "but with hesistance and absence of consensus within."

It isn't reasonable to make language proficiency a requirement at "landing," and I think they are considering proficiency (probably rudimentary) as requirement in visa extension. The reference to Canada's requirement by MOFA says "for permanent residents planning to work." Probably that's what the Japanese government has in mind.

The closing remark suggests hesistance to implement it for fear of losing talented people who hope to come to Japan and work here. (The concluding sentence is usually the gist of the article.)

 

[Glenski]

I agree with epigene. How can someone who has just entered the country know whether he/she is going to be a long-term resident (ie, someone with PR)? Unfair and stupid to impose a test on someone like that. If "long-term resident" means a refugee, as is one of the definitions for a Long-term Resident visa holder [http://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/visit/visa/04.html Refugees as stipulated by the convention relating to the Status of Refugees, Indochinese refugee settlers, second- and third-generation Japanese settlers, etc.], then Japan has automatically put a lock on the doors to refugees, since they cannot be expected to know enough Japanese from day zero to survive daily living conditions. But perhaps that is precisely what the Japanese want.

As for people with work visas being exempt (per epigene's 10:17 comment), why would you say that? Some people hold work visas for many years. It takes 10 years for a single person to become eligible for PR, so how else would a single person stay in the system? To spin off from your remark above, though, just how long on a work visa would the MOJ consider a person to be a "long-term resident"? 3 years? 5? 7.3426? Less than 10% of foreigners who come here (excluding those who stay only 6 months or less, essentially tourists) remain longer than 3 years. So, why even bother testing that small number?

 

[Elizabeth]

As for people with work visas being exempt (per epigene's 10:17 comment), why would you say that? Some people hold work visas for many years. It takes 10 years for a single person to become eligible for PR, so how else would a single person stay in the system? To spin off from your remark above, though, just how long on a work visa would the MOJ consider a person to be a "long-term resident"? 3 years? 5? 7.3426? Less than 10% of foreigners who come here (excluding those who stay only 6 months or less, essentially tourists) remain longer than 3 years. So, why even bother testing that small number?

Yes, I believe 5 although it wasn't clarified in the article. And workers exempt ?? Other than the reference epigene made to the Canadian model testing applicants on work visas, the original is equally vague if not more so. Because obviously it is a policy still under works so to speak, in the initial stages of development. And finally, please appreciate the translation work that goes into this before misquoting and becoming semi-hysterical. :sorry:

The first sentence just FYI, loosely told, reads something like this :

就労目的などで増加傾向にある外国人が地域社会に溶け込みやすい環境整備につなげるとともに、来日する外国人にも日本語学習意欲を高めてもらうのが狙い。

As the number of foreigners seeking work in Japan increases, it is our aim to ease their integration, as well as visitors, into society by asking for an increased desire to learn the language.

 

[Dogen Z]

One would have to wonder why the sudden shift, if this is truly their reason? Decades have gone by with absolutely no inkling of this. Japan is happy telling people it is difficult/impossible to learn its language, and many live happy existences based on the notion that Japan is a "homogeneous" nation.
Of course, I think you can tell I am being sarcastic above, but I thought I should just point that out.
Besides, the article clearly states that this potential policy change is based on protection from terrorism, not any real sort of integration or alleviation of the negative birthrate. Let's hope that along with the language policy (if it ever surfaces) comes language lessons available for those who desire them (especially the Brazilians) and a tearing down of the "no foreigners" signs, many of which are aimed at Brazilians themselves.

Just for your information, IMO means "In my opinion". I'm not a government spokesman...unless the government decides to send me a truckload of cash with bills that have lots of zeros on them. I't's not easy or cheap cleaning up all those horrible PR blunders that the Ministers fall into.....I wouldn't be able to do the job for anything less than 2 oku en...oh, but I digress..sorry.

IMO (In my opinion), foreigners who chose to plant their behinds here should not have a feeling of entitlement. Moving to another country is not like moving from one part of your country to another like say New York to California. If they are facing hardships then they will have to make efforts to overcome those hardships. Find a class or study in their spare time. Whatever it takes.

Of course, if you have some expertise that is needed, the company you work for will make those hardships disappear--through the standard expat package, classes, interpreters, etc. Actually, the HR dept. will handle everything for you.

 

[thatsme]

common sence

If someone decide to reside in Japan, or for the sake of argument in any other country, obviuosly if there is not a huge amount of human that can understand his/her language, the common sence will dictate that is better to learn the language.
No need to make special law about it.
As long as you don't give extra burden to the community, should'nt be a problem.

If we look at the general human way of living and I say it again (GENERAL) We only need the language spoken to whatever country, for shopping, in case we can't find what we need, transport in case we get lost or need direction, anything else? realistically speaking?

 

[Glenski]

Misquoting? Semi-hysterical? Puh-lease, Elizabeth.

Your own words show my feelings on this article: "it wasn't clarified in the article", and "the original is equally vague". About all we can do on this forum is speculate, and I don't like speculating without much background. All I have to go on is the MOJ's history of doing things (often the wrong way towards foreigners).

Ocean Dude,
I recognized your "IMO" and made sure of that by quoting you entirely. My comments were not directed at you so much as they were at the MOJ. Sorry if you took it the other way. My point is very simple: if this article truly represents a shift in the pattern, why so suddenly? It doesn't fit the pattern, and the article tried to slip in terrorism as a partial reason with no support. That's all.

thatsme,
I would like to have Elizabeth explain much better what sort of "extra burden" she feels exists with people who have stayed here a long time yet not learned a great deal of Japanese. I'm not disagreeing that people should learn the language, but her previous use of the term "freeloader" seems to equate with your use of "burden". Perhaps you could also explain what you mean...? What I object to in the article is twofold:

1) the poor reasons they give for doing this, and
2) the huge vagueness in what they intend and for whom.

 

[JimmySeal]

1) the poor reasons they give for doing this

The aim of the measures is to make it easier for the increasing number of non-Japanese in Japan to blend into the community

I think the above is a perfectly good reason.

People who live in a foreign country for several years and are determined not to learn the local language are freeloaders. Not in the monetary, strictly literal sense, but freeloaders nonetheless. They take for granted the kindness and patience of service people and other members of society to interact with them, while at the same time putting in no personal preparation to make those interactions easier for either party. It's their responsibility to do that, and if enacted in a rational way, I wouldn't fault the Japanese government for trying to enforce it.

So far, nobody has made any response to what I said about driver's licenses above. I am curious to hear what people have to say to that.

 

[Anatoli]

If we talk about difficulty of spoken Japanese, do you really think it's a very difficult language? IMHO, it's not harder than many European languages, especially taking into account the huge influx of English words. People usually learn Japanese by also learning the complex script but there are shortcuts, if you're only interested or have to learn only the spoken language (without Kanji). Japanese is considered very complex because of its writing, everything else is either the same or easier.

We don't know but if the test is only for spoken Japanese, then one can get from the basic to the intermediate level just by using heaps of romanised or supplied with Furigana materials. Would you agree? Even JLPT tests usually don't really on good knowledge of Kanji, would government tests be more complex?

Anyway, I know that anyone who attends conversational classes gets a good grounding in spoken Japanese, even if they don't live in Japan. Doing it in Japan only makes it much easier.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

1) the poor reasons they give for doing this, and
2) the huge vagueness in what they intend and for whom.

Few governments have clear reasons on why they're doing something because the age of the monarchy is complete and input from a hundred or so politicians will do that.

Vagueness is a great tool for governments to employ so that they can apply their policies with greater flexibility. I don't think this is inimical to the Japanese government alone. (And I'm not saying you think it is, either).

I don't see what the big deal is. If you're worried about more rights and freedoms being taken away from foreigners living in Japan as you usally are then what freedom is being threatened here? The right to ignorance?