(February 5, 2026) Assessment of the Plenary Session of the 22nd National Assembly Special Committee on Pension Reform
- #연금특위
(The Pension Future Forum publishes the following assessment of today's session of the National Assembly Special Committee on Pension Reform in the Statements category.)
1. The members of the National Assembly serving on the Special Committee appear not to properly understand the purpose for which the 22nd National Assembly Special Committee on Pension Reform was established.
2. The amendment to the National Pension Act of March 20 last year faced criticism as an unprecedented change for the worse, one that further increased the burden on the younger and future generations, and in the face of that criticism
even though deliberating on enhancing intergenerational equity and pursuing structural reform of the sustainable National Pension system was the single most important reason for forming the committee,
judging from today's remarks, particularly those made by members of the ruling Democratic Party on the Special Committee, no trace of this problem awareness can be found at all.
3. This is because, while the structural reform of the National Pension that matters most and, above all, the introduction of an automatic adjustment mechanism are being relegated to the back burner, there are signs of an intention to steer the discussion toward less central topics such as the Basic Pension, the retirement pension, and closing the coverage gaps in the National Pension.
4. A passage that particularly warrants attention is "There is a need to set a term for the activities of the Special Committee's advisory committee. Instead, we should first select the main agenda items and then go through a public deliberation process"—so stated Representative Nam In-soon. This sounds like a call to curtail the term of the advisory committee.
It sounds as though the intention is to employ, once again, the same approach as the 2024 Public Deliberation Committee!
5. In the portion of the attached video that begins after the 30-minute mark, Special Committee member Representative Nam In-soon states the following."A financial projection is scheduled for 2027, so the fiscal state of the National Pension can be gauged by watching the outcome of the sixth Financial Estimation Committee's deliberations. Accordingly, rather than focusing on measures to stabilize the National Pension's finances, the National Assembly Special Committee on Pension Reform would do well to concentrate on the other side, namely the public deliberation process with citizens"—such was the remark made.
These remarks are problematic in two respects. They are so because they amount to a self-negation of the very role of the Special Committee on Pension Reform, which was established in the 22nd National Assembly to deliberate on structural reform.Moreover, they are also at odds with the facts. This is because the sixth National Pension Financial Estimation Committee is not scheduled to submit its results to the National Assembly until October 2028.
6. On the content of today's session of the National Assembly Special Committee on Pension Reform, the Pension Future Forum hereby sets out the following position.
The Pension Future Forum is especially concerned about the following attempted approach. This is because of the experience in which the 2024 Public Deliberation Committee was run in a flawed manner that distorted the decision-making of the citizens' panel.
The most essential information was withheld from the citizens' panel; that is, proper information was not provided, and the experts who took part likewise proceeded by unilaterally instilling in the citizens' panel content that was at odds with the facts.
Yet today, at the Special Committee session, remarks appear to have been made suggesting that this same distorted public deliberation procedure should be gone through yet again.
This appears to be a development that the Pension Future Forum must watch closely going forward!
https://www.youtube.com/live/jMbCTiL10pk?si=NWdzavpXMm0RTcgU
