Skip to main content

This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.
If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

Digital System Reform Study Meeting (1st)

Overview

  • Date and time: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 from 10:00 to 11:00
  • Location: Online
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Proceedings
      1. Development of the Base Registry and improvements to promote its use
      2. Progress on "Technology-based regulatory reform"
      3. Report on the Results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes Survey on the Review of Issue in local governments
      4. Exchange of opinions
    3. Adjournment

Materials

Minutes

Secretariat (Dai): Now that it's time, I would like to begin the first Digital Relations System Reform Review Meeting.

Start the meeting
Nice to meet you, too. I'm Dai from Digital Agency. Nice to meet you.
First of all, regarding today's meeting, each member is participating online.

Before the discussion, I would like to have an address from Parliamentary Senior Vice-Minister for Digital Affairs Yohei Ishikawa.
Parliamentary Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Ishikawa, I

Senior Vice-Minister : Hello, I'm Senior Vice-Minister Ishikawa.

Thank you very much for your cooperation at the recent RegTechDay, Mr. Ahn and all the members. It seems to have been a high evaluation in general. Thank you very much. Please continue.

Until now, the members have actively discussed at the Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Working Group and have given us very meaningful suggestions.
As the Digital Ad Hoc Committee has been progressively reorganized with the establishment of the Digital Administrative and Fiscal Reform Council, the Digital Ad Hoc Committee and the Working Group will be abolished as a council body in October this year.

However, at the same time, the efforts made by the Digital Policy Consultation and the Working Group will continue to be made in Digital Agency. In addition, at the first Digital Administration and Fiscal Reform Conference, Prime Minister Kishida instructed Minister for Digital Transformation Kono to steadily advance the review of regulations on paper and in-person processes.

The review of regulations on paper and in-person processes is a central theme that has been discussed in the Digital Rincho and the Working Group. Based on the discussions there, Digital Agency has formulated a road map for the review of law, which is a regulations on paper and in-person processes of about 10,000 provision, and has been following up on it. In addition, we have prepared and published a Technology Map to support the review work of each ministry and agency.

In addition, regarding the review of regulations on paper and in-person processes, we have commissioned private business to estimate the economic effects. In the interim report released in August this year, it was estimated that it would be possible to reduce costs by approximately 2.9 trillion yen and increase GDP by approximately 3.6 trillion yen. Therefore, I believe there is no doubt that this review is a very important initiative that will have a significant impact on the Japanese economy.

Following the regulations on paper and in-person processes Working Group, this Study Group will be held as a forum to hear the opinions of experts mainly from a professional and technical perspective on various themes related to the Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Review. We would appreciate if you could actively discuss the inspection and review of compliance with the Digital Principles, the process of confirmation of compliance with the Digital Principles for law and new law, and the establishment of a system at this Study Group.

Today's agenda consists of three points: the development of the Base Registry and improvements to promote its use, the progress of "Technology-based regulatory reform," and the report on the results of the Issue Survey on the Review of regulations on paper and in-person processes in local governments. We would appreciate your candid opinions on each theme.

Secretariat (Dai): .

As Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Ishikawa has just mentioned, the Study Group will continue to be held as a forum for receiving expert and technical opinions from experts following the Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Working Group. As for the members, except for one person who has declined, the same experts as the former Working Group will participate.

The meeting will be conducted in the same manner as the Digi-in Working Group, and the minutes and materials of the meeting will be made public in principle.
Regarding what I have just mentioned, please refer to Materials 1 and 2.

In addition, we have asked Mr. Annen to be the chairman of the Review Committee, who will conduct the proceedings and summarize and organize the opinions of each member.

At this point, I would like to ask for a few words of greeting from the Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Ahn.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for 's predecessor to continue to chair the proceedings.

As for the change in the institutional positioning, it is as explained by Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Yohei Ishikawa and Councilor Masaru. I am very happy that we can proceed with discussions with almost the same members. Thank you very much.

Continuing from the Working Group, I believe that the strength of this Study Group is the "goodness" of the Secretariat staff, "goodness" being both a lot of color and a lot of talent, and the very strong commitment and leadership of the Minister and the teachers of political affairs. This is exactly the same for this Study Group, so I would like to make every effort to fulfill our mission as much as possible. Thank you very much.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Next, I would like to hear a few words from each of the members.

I would like to ask you to do it in the order of the Japanese syllabary. First of all, Mr. Inadani, please.

Member Inadani: Thank you very much for Kyoto University.

I will continue to participate in the Working Group. We will continue to do our best. Thank you very much.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Next, Mr. Iwamura, nice to meet you.

Member of Iwamura: Thank you, Business Federation. Thank you for your continued support.
I understand that the initiatives that have been discussed by the former Working Group will continue to be discussed by this Study Group, and the schedule that has been pinned up until now, including the intensive reform period, will mostly be carried over. I would like to contribute in various ways so that there will be no cases that will not be discussed and become lost. I look forward to your continued support.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Next, Mr. Uenoyama, nice to meet you.

Uenoyama Member: Thank you, PKSA Technology. Thank you for your continued support.

I feel that the discussions are being implemented more and more, and I feel the real impact. In the future, I would like to do various things that will lead to further impact of the discussions, and it has become a setup in which discussions can be held not only at this meeting but also at other meetings. The area or evolution of AI is moving at a tremendous speed, but I would like to continue my efforts, so please continue to support me.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Next, Mr. Ochiai, nice to meet you.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said. Atsumi Sakai Law Office.

I look forward to your continued support.

I believe that continuing this initiative will serve to create a social infrastructure for the use of data and the aggressive part of AI. I have participated in the regulatory reform Promotion Conference for several years, and I am the chairman of the Investment Startup Working Group this year. I believe that the original Working Group was very strong in expanding the scope of projects that are difficult for regulatory reform to handle. I would like to take over such past experience well, and connect it to the use of good data and AI. Thank you.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Thank you, Mr. Masushima.

Masujima Member: Thank you, . I'm Masujima.

I will continue to be a member of this newly formed study group.

Basically, I believe that the Study Group will support the flow of various rules from analog to digital. However, rather than converting existing rules to digital, as you have said, I believe that there are many stories in the world that can be done in another form if digital was the premise. I believe that this is a world that we call Phase III, and I believe that the final realization of this is probably the part that is required in the medium term. Therefore, based on the current situation, discussions tend to be centered on what should be done and how it could be done if it were replaced with digital. Instead, it is the way of using the essence of digitalization in regulation to make discussions that go back to what was the case in the first place. I would like to point out this in various ways and provide suggestions for thinking in this way. Thank you very much.

Secretariat (Dai): .

Then, I would like to ask the chairman to proceed with the proceedings from now on.

Thank you, Dr. Annen.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for , thank you very much.

Let's get down to business.

The agenda of the first session is the following three items.

First, the development of the base registry and improvements to promote its use.
Second, regarding the progress of the "technology-based" regulatory reform.
Part 3. Report on the results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes survey related to the review of Issue in local governments.

These are the three items.

First of all, I would like to discuss the development of the base registry and improvements to promote its use. In this regard, MOJ and Personal Information Protection Commission are also participating.

Then, Counselor Keiho Ura, please explain.

Councilor Base Registry. I look forward to your continued support.

Regarding the Base Registry, we have received advice from all of you many times, and I would like to ask you to discuss three main points today. The first is what kind of items will be shared with whom through the cooperation of registration information. The second is what kind of institutional measures are necessary to make it possible to omit the change procedure by information linkages. The third is what kind of roadmap we are going forward with regarding the development of the system. We have organized these points, so I would like to report today and receive your comments.

First of all, regarding the cooperation of registration information in the corporate field on page 4, I would like to review a little. In this case, the Ministry of Justice has the registration information, and by information linkages it in public authorities, various procedures and exchange of information are efficiency, and we aim to produce economic effects.

On page 5, the basic principle is the same for the real estate field, but in addition to the cooperation of registration information, base registry for address is now promoting the utilization of the real estate by developing a database in which the information of addresses managed by local government is linked to the information derived from the registration.

The specific information linkages items are summarized on page 7.

Regarding commercial registration in the corporate field, we have conducted a hearing survey with the relevant public authorities and others, and they have identified what kind of information is necessary in the registration information. Based on this arrangement, we are thinking of design the system in the future by handing over only the necessary information.

On page 8, we are basically conducting similar investigations in real estate registry, and we will continue to make adjustments going forward so that information will be passed on to many related public authorities in this way.

As a second big story, I would like to report on institutional arrangements.

On page 10, first of all, we will work on the provision of registration information as a base registry. As for its institutional positioning, we are thinking of positioning it in a document approved by the Cabinet. In Digital Agency, for example, there are documents approved by the Cabinet such as Priority plan and the Information Systems Development Plan. We are thinking of positioning the base registry in the same way.
Among them, the second point is that it is necessary to organize the protection of personal data. To be specific, as described in the third point, the provision of personal data is limited to the purpose of use, or in principle, it is used within the purpose of use. There are options such as whether to apply the exceptional provisions or to arrange the purpose of use itself. This time, we are thinking of providing registration information by arranging the purpose of use.

There are two specific steps, but the purpose of use related to the registration information held by the MOJ already exists, so we will first change it. In addition, since it will be distributed from Digital Agency, we would like to create a new purpose of use related to the registration information in Digital Agency. In that process, we are currently conducting consideration in the direction of clarifying that we will do so based on the content determined by the Cabinet decision in the purpose of use as I mentioned at the beginning.

On page 11, as one of the institutional measures, I would like to talk about institutional measures that allow the omission of change procedures.

To give an example of change notification, if it is a corporation, it is a place where commercial registration has been issued. For example, when an address is changed, the same corporation has to take procedures for the change of address separately in the registration of notification to other related organizations, etc., but by linking it with registration information, we are thinking that such notification of change to an individual public authorities is unnecessary.

Since there is no such provision under the current law, we are currently considering and adjusting the status of the de facto system in the law.

In particular, as stated in Part 2, we would like to stipulate that if each public authorities receives information that a information linkages has been changed from the public authorities system without receiving a notification of change, it will be deemed that a notification of change has been made. We are currently conducting consideration and coordination.

The above is the institutional positioning.

I would like to talk about the system roadmap.

On page 13, originally, as a roadmap, at the Digital Extraordinary Administrative Advisory Committee Working Group in May, the system of registration information of the Ministry of Justice will be renewed, and within that, design, development, etc. of the system will be advanced in Digital Agency, and when it is completed, the provision will be started, which was stated as a declaration in a sense.

Now, I can show you a little breakdown on page 14, so please take a look here.

As for the roadmap, this fiscal year, we are working on the development of rules as I mentioned earlier, but from the second half of this fiscal year to fiscal 2024, we will consider specific requirements definition, etc., and from the twenty twenty-five stage, we will enter the design and development phase, and after that, we will provide a new information linkages function around fiscal 2026.

As a result, we are thinking of realizing that it will be possible to do things online, such as office work that requires certificates to be attached, visit local government to view registration information, and make official requests.

In addition, in the review of the notification of change that I mentioned earlier, there is also a process of cleansing the data, which requires adjusting the quality of the data, so although it will take a little time, we aim to realize it after the data is improved.

In addition, in the real estate field, base registry for address is currently building a pilot system up to the granularity of town letters, so we aim to expand it and start providing it in advance when we are ready, so we aim to start providing it in advance in the twenty twenty-five of the year.

That's all for the explanation. Thank you very much.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Next, I would like to hear your opinion from the Ministry of Justice.

MOJ (Director of Ohtani Division): Ministry of Justice. Nice to meet you.

MOJ recognizes that it is important to aim to reduce the burden on related public authorities by promoting the use of the Base Registry, and we will continue to provide necessary cooperation.

In addition, as mentioned in the materials this time, I believe that there are four Issue that I will mention in order to realize this. As I have been stating, the Ministry of Justice believes that this is important, so I would like to reiterate this.

First, regarding the subject of provision and cooperation of registration information, it is essential to unify and consolidate the acquisition of registration information by information linkages via the base registry, including using it as an alternative means to local governments, etc., which has obtained paper certificates by public use request, in addition to public authorities using various existing electronic data.

The second point is that it is necessary to fully coordinate with the relevant public authorities on the premise that there are some that can be handled under the registration system and some that cannot.

The third is that it is necessary to give consideration to the budget for system development and operation in public authorities, based on the fact that it has been implemented at the cost of Digital Agency, which is the recipient, so to speak.

The fourth and final point is that the system development schedule in Digital Agency needs to be fully consistent with the development schedule unique to the registration information systems under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will continue to play a leading part in Digital Agency and firmly cooperate toward the resolution of the Issue issue. Thank you very much.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

We received an explanation from Counselor Keiho Ura and opinions from the Ministry of Justice.

If you have any comments or questions, please let us know.

First of all, I have just received four points from the Ministry of Justice. The first three points were pointed out by the Director of the Commercial Affairs Division in May, and I have heard that they are quite reasonable. Today, as the fourth point, I believe that you asked us to consider synchronizing with the system that the Ministry of Justice is conducting development on its own. I understand that Digital Agency has been fully aware of this point because not only the Ministry of Justice but also other ministries and agencies are facing the same problem. Is that correct, Mr. Imamura?

Councilor .

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Member Uenoyama, please.

Uenoyama Member: Thank you, .

The items have been decided, and I think it is good that we are making progress. I wonder if it will be discussed in the future, but at present, which items will be stored has been decided. At the next timing, I wonder if authority management will be decided in the future, such as who can create, read, upload, and delete so-called "clad" databases. If there are any items that have been decided, please tell me where to find them. If it is decided in the future, I wonder if it will be done. At that time, I am sorry for being specific, but I think it is better to look ahead to the possibility that use cases will spread further into the future than anticipated in advance. When deciding on specifications, it is probably important not only to decide on clad, but also to decide in advance the rules for how to change it when it changes. What is said is that if it is actually deployed in 2030 or some other time, new players who are not currently expected will read this data, or perhaps new items will be added. Broadly speaking, there is a possibility that these two changes will occur, but if we decide in advance who will decide these things and how they will be decided at the time of design of specifications, there will be no regression, and I think we will be able to respond to the changes in 2030, so I think it would be good if we could take that into consideration when considering specifications.

That's all from me.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for . I will decide who will decide.

We would like to have a response from the Secretariat after we receive one statement from the members.

Ochiai, please.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said. .

In particular, I think it is very wonderful that you proceeded with the preparations despite the difficulty of coordinating with Personal Information Protection Commission.

Based on that, I believe there is a reasonable possibility that there will be an addition based on what Mr. Uenoyama has just mentioned. For example, regarding the de facto ruler of a corporation, there will be various discussions on whether or not to immediately include it in the commercial registry, but I think it is important to consider how to cooperate with such a company when it is viewed as a base registry.

In addition, in that case, I think it may be necessary to consider whether or not there is a possibility that not only a simple change but also partial disclosure or disclosure limited to interested parties will be made to the base registry. I think there will be such cases even in relatively large places, so I think it is important to discuss the possibility of expansion.

I have one more point. As an important point for expansion, in the case of using it for private sector companies, I think there was a case in the past where the example of the Public Finance Corporation was discussed with the Personal Information Committee. I think there will be various examples, not limited to that example. In that case, I think it will be necessary to add an organization that includes personal data, so perhaps the institutional side is more important than the system side, but in any case, I think there are several possible directions for such expansion, so I would like you to consider them.

In addition, I would appreciate it if you could tell us more specifically what the Ministry of Justice is saying about the content that you said you could not deal with in terms of registration.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for Member Inadani, please.

Member Inadani: Thank you very much for .

I would like to tell you that I have the same impression as what Mr. Ochiai said. I understand that this arrangement was made by working very hard within the framework of the current law, and in order to solve both the specific problem of the purpose and the problem of how to respond quickly when adding it later, the Cabinet decision will be made. However, as Mr. Ochiai said, there is a possibility that there will be cooperation with private sector in the future, and there will be talks that are not currently expected to be used. Therefore, while looking at such points, if there are problems in the way the Personal Information Act should be, I would like you to raise questions and discuss them. I would like you to continue with a mindset that can change the construction around here to agile.

That's all. Thank you very much.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Mr. Masashima, please.

Masujima Member: Thank you, : Basically, I think it is the same as your perspective, and it is the same as what I talked about earlier. If information can be coordinated, there is no need to stipulate that it will be deemed to have been done after there is a regulation to notify at the time of change. If it is premised that cooperation will be made in the first place, the obligations themselves should be eliminated without stipulating that if such a thing is done, it will be deemed to have been done. I believe that you are doing this with your understanding, and I believe that it is necessary for you to recognize that we are in a state of transition in a sense.

What we are doing now is something like II in terms of phases I, II, and III, and in terms of rules, we should go so far as to not even require the submission of a notification when such a thing is changed. However, we cannot jump to the point, so I would like to clarify that we will work hard to abolish the rule of submitting a notification of change as soon as possible, while leaving that part as it is for the time being, and understanding the whole situation by saying that we have done it first if it was a procedure.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Then, I would like to ask Mr. Ohtani, Director of the Ministry of Justice.

MOJ (Director of Ohtani Division): .

This is the second point I mentioned earlier. It is about the part that I said that it is necessary to make adjustments based on the premise that there are things that can be handled and things that cannot be handled in terms of the registration system. I would like you to understand that the data that can be issued in terms of the registration system is premised on the fact that there are things that can be issued and things that cannot be issued in terms of the registration system, for example, when there is a registration application, there is a unique problem that the data cannot be issued because it is locked, and there is also the problem of personal data, which I have been saying.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for Ochiai, please.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said. If it is locked, I think it means that you cannot see either paper or digital. Of course, it is better to shorten the period, but I understand that.

On the other hand, I wonder if there are various issues related to personal data. Are there any issues that remain? The Ministry of Justice said that there are issues that cannot be resolved under the personal data Protection Act, but I understand that public authorities has generally been resolved. If there are issues that remain in the case of private sector, I am aware that there are matters that need to be discussed again. Is that the understanding you have?

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for , Director of MOJ Ohtani, if you have any views, I would like to hear them.

MOJ (Director of Ohtani Division): , we are working to sort out our relations with public authorities and others, but when we think about how to provide information, there will always be issues with personal data, so I believe it is as Dr. Ochiai said.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said. .

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

However, this is not just a matter for the Ministry of Justice, so we have to study and work on it in the future. Thank you very much.

All right, Counselor Keiryuura, please.

Councilor .

With regard to future scalability, I believe there are discussions on both the system side and the institutional side. In terms of the system, in terms of how to secure capacity due to the increase in users, I believe it will be necessary to take measures such as increasing the capacity of the systems that we distribute, as well as those that receive data from the MOJ and the Legal Affairs Bureau. As the MOJ commented, I believe it will be necessary to consult on securing capacity and functions while carefully coordinating with the schedule for system renewal and development.

In addition, with regard to the institutional aspect, as you discussed earlier, I believe that there is some prospect that a certain arrangement will be made for public authorities, including personal data. In terms of further expanding and expanding the scope, while discussing again the arrangement with the current system and framework of the Ministry of Justice, I believe that we will continue to advance coordination, including to what extent it can be done within the current framework and what needs to be changed if it is to be further expanded.

In addition, as Dr. Masashima discussed that this is not the end, I believe that the transition is true in that sense. It is natural that it is not necessary to accept a notification if it can be accepted, and while various efforts are being made in Digital Agency, such as one time only, there are naturally opinions that it would be better to have fewer procedures in the future, so I would like to work hard on how to make specific efforts on this matter.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

From what you've told me, I feel like it's going to be a permanent transition.

Thank you very much, Director Ohtani of the Ministry of Justice. We look forward to your continued support.

MOJ (Director of Ohtani Division): Thank you very much. Good-bye.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Next, I would like to ask Mr. Suga to explain the progress of technology-based regulatory reform.

Secretariat (Suga): . We look forward to your continued support.

First of all, under the newly established Study Group, we would like to continue to establish the Technology-based regulatory reform Promotion Committee, and we have prepared the purport papers in Appendices 1 and 2.

There has been no change, including the members, but we would like to continue to invite people with technical knowledge, and although we are very luxurious members, we would like to report what we have discussed to you.

In the main document, there are three main matters to be reported today. Basically, we are proceeding according to the policies you have explained and guided so far, and we will report on the differences. The first is Technology validation on page 2. We have received a budget of 4.5 billion yen, and we are steadily working on the specifications with each ministry. We have made several rounds with the business operators who will be in charge of testing to determine what kind of technology, what kind of performance, and in what form validation will be conducted. We have reached a state where we can announce the business operators who will be in charge of validation, and who are additionally colored in yellow. We would like to announce it on our website immediately after the review meeting.

I would like to report on the current situation. We have divided the technology validation into 14 types, and for each of the 14 types, we are conducting validation in cooperation with the ministries and agencies responsible for each regulation, thereby sharing knowledge across public office boundaries. Interestingly, there is Type 2, which is grayed out in the third public offering on the lower right, but there is a type in which we have invited proposals twice, but we have not received any proposals. In other words, the regulation authorities have positively said that they would like to see validation if there is room for new technology, but we have not received any technology proposals.

For the third public offering, the most difficult type remained, so even among the types other than Type 2, there are types that are said to be impossible for this provision. Currently, we are analyzing the causes of why it is not established, so if there is any knowledge that can be extracted from it, I would like to report it.

Other than that, each operator has already used various experimental facilities to demonstrate and validation some of them. We will determine what specific performances we have confirmed from these validation and whether the authorities believe they can be put to practical use one by one, so I would like to make a report while carefully looking at the contents.

The pages from here on describe the details of the validation project, so if you have any items of interest, I would appreciate it very much if you could look at them later.

Moving on to the second item, this is the catalog on page 11. Regarding the catalog, first of all, we have invited applications for technologies that can already be used without going through Technology validation, and we have started to show that there are such technologies on the website, so please use them when you comply with regulation.

However, we will not submit the results of the public offering as they are. In Supply Chain Risk Management, the government will receive and confirm the risks of Cyber security. To this end, we have established the Technology Catalog Operation Task Force. As we reported last time, we have set up the Technology Catalog Operation Task Force. We will also report on the specific installation of the Technology Catalog Operation Task Force.

This catalog task force will be held in writing in principle because you will be able to see information on a large number of technologies.

As I reported last time, this is organization, which has very much power in a sense, and the key is organization, which will make a decision not to be listed in the catalog. So, I would like to maintain integrity by not disclosing the members of the committee while they are making decisions, and then disclosing them after the entire period is over.

On page 14, we have been soliciting entries for catalogs one by one, and we have held the first and second rounds, and we are currently soliciting the third round. There are two types of catalogs that we have been able to submit to the third round. One is to remotely monitor and grasp the situation of a wide area, including natural environments, and the damage situation in the event of disasters. It is assumed that a large amount of AI analytics will be performed by monitoring or grasping the situation in a wide area using a drones or camera.

In addition, we are soliciting applications for technologies that allow us to conduct on-site inspections of workplace management and business conditions by using smart glasses and receiving various supplementary information. We are also soliciting applications for technologies that can be conducted online or remotely.

Page 15 is the fourth and subsequent technical catalog recruitment, and after this, we would like to move on to the fourth and fifth recruitment of remote technology, remote technology, and digital technology for safety management of structures, equipment, and so on.

On page 16, Consortium, this is the last item. Thank you very much for the report on the RegTechDay, which was held with the cooperation of all the members of the committee.

On the next page, what I originally wanted to do at RegTechDay was to establish a consortium and increase the number of participants. On October 27, 447 people participated, a total of more than 1,000 people, and it was held in a very successful manner.

However, as I am ashamed to show you in the lower right on page 17, the number of applicants to the consortium has increased a little since the RegTechDay was held, but it has not increased as much as expected. We are well aware of the cause, and the Slack community we launched as a consortium is not working. We need to correct it so that we can have substantive discussions here. Now, the Secretariat is tweeting unilaterally, so launching this community online requires quite a few skills, so I would like to learn them while doing so.

Page 18 is the RegTechDay event, and in the comments from the participants, they said that they found out that they were doing their best, and that it was good to know that they could not feel it only on the website.

There are so many things going on around validation and Technology Map, so I think it is meaningful to have people watch this video to feel the atmosphere and heat.

As for page 19, the questionnaire of the participants also showed that the satisfaction level was relatively high.

On page 20, I would like to report on the overall schedule once again. The map is published once on October 6. In addition to preparing a catalog for each publication item and announcing it by dividing it into five public offerings one by one, we will determine the operators for the Technology validation project in the first, second, and third phases and implement them. We will list the technologies that can be used here in the catalog.

Up to that point, we can work on it, but what is important is that the technology in the catalog listed here can actually be used for compliance. I believe that this will ensure that the new market is unlocked, and that will be the place we want to work on after the beginning of the year. We would like to intentionally create some excitement so that the people concerned will join the consortium and be organically connected.

That's all from me.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

If you say Slack is not working, how is it not working?

Councilor Suga: There are relatively few people who are registered as Sites, but there has been no daily interaction at all. I myself am also wondering what to say here, and the team is currently considering improvement measures.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for I understand. Thank you very much.

Member Inadani, please.

Member Inadani: Thank you very much for . I understand that progress is being made smoothly in the direction of full-scale technological substitution of regulations on paper and in-person processes, so I would like you to continue as it is.

I would like to ask about some of the points that I was slightly concerned about. I may be asking you a question. First of all, as Mr. Suga explained, it is very important to clarify the pattern of why there are few applications for this and why this point is difficult. In particular, if the way of regulation is that the function can be decomposed for the time being, but it is too qualitative to be done with a machine like this, I think it is necessary to have a process of how to quantify it. In other words, it is about how to change the way of regulation. I believe that the solution of these problems will be done by multi-stakeholders, and I think it will be a point that will lead to the way of regulation and how to make it. As you probably recognize, I would like you to do so.

Also, at the time of the validation project, I think it would be better if we could successfully develop a method of demonstrating how to satisfy the Technology Substitution Standards. At present, I believe that Technology validation is basically publishing unnecessary items in the catalog. When going beyond the current scope, I think it is important to clarify the standards to be published in the catalog in the future, the standards for developing the catalog, and the method for creating the catalog together. Therefore, I would be grateful if you could consider how to demonstrate that the Technology Substitution Standards are satisfied in demonstration projects as an object of demonstration together.

Lastly, with regard to the catalog, as you pointed out, there are various interests and other matters, so it is very clear that it is dangerous to disclose who is doing it all of a sudden. On the other hand, if we do this, as a matter of course, regarding the publication standards, I think it is possible that there will be disputes over why my proposal did not pass and why the proposal of the other party passed. Therefore, if possible, we could gradually clarify the procedures and even the formal publication standards, and further optimize the procedures related to the catalog publication, which would be better for the overall development, and I thought that we could expect great synergy in the relationship with demonstration projects.
That's all from me. Thank you very much.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Mr. Iwamura, please.

Member of Iwamura: Thank you, .

I have heard from various managers that there is a critical labor shortage, mainly among essential workers, in various industrial sectors. If we don't do it now, it will leave a root of trouble in the future, so I am very grateful for the smooth progress of our efforts.

In addition, we are very grateful that start-ups are among the business operators implementing the validation project. We hope that start-up technologies and services will be actively taken up in the future.

Next, regarding the Technology Catalog, the current preliminary version is in a list format, and there is a restriction that you need to open the details one by one to find the service that matches your desire. I think that you have already considered it, but from the viewpoint of encouraging the active use of government operators, I would like you to make a implementation for the detailed search function. Please make it easy to understand, easy to use, and user-friendly.

Finally, I understand that the facility inspection under the ground level of the non-destructive inspection technology, which you explained that there was no proposal from the Technology validation Implementation Operator, is also related to the National Comprehensive Development Plan for Digital Lifeline. I would like to ask you to cooperate and proceed with the review. Thank you for your continued support.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Search is right, but I kind of want you to see it all.

Ochiai, please.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said. Thank you very much.

I think this is also becoming a very excellent initiative.

First of all, I believe that there is a digital marketplace in Digital Agency, and it will be an important part of the digital procurement. There is a cooperation with the marketplace, and of course, there will be a talk about using this catalog in private sector. I think it is good that it is separate from the talk for government and public offices, but I would like you to do such a part.

In addition, from the perspective of startups, I think there is a possibility that there will be a digital procurement, especially SaaS, so I think there are parts of procurement reform that will make it relatively easy for the government to adopt such a thing, and parts that have already been promoted in Digital Agency as a whole, and I thought that if you could promote those parts, it would lead to the final adoption more efficiently.

The third point is that we would like to eventually aim for automation as much as possible. At the meetings of each ministry, there are cases where people say that they are making a digitalization by incorporating digital technology in a way that inhibits automation. Could you please give us a summary of the technology that can be automated in this way again as feedback? In reality, it is possible to process text, but we are talking about having a meeting or a web meeting. If we do so, it will take a lot of time and effort. In reality, it takes 30 seconds to process only text, but it may take a week to adjust the schedule. In order not to think about such things, could you please summarize the feedback from the results here? There are some things that cannot be understood by mouth, so I would like to ask you to come back from the site again.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for . Let's go back.

Member Uenoyama, please.

Uenoyama Member: Thank you, .

In short, it is basically very good, and I would say it if I had to, but I have a sense that we can do public relations, especially public relations for startups, if there is a need. The old Twitter should be a fairly interactive and interesting story. The previous one, "There are no applications," is a very interesting story, in other words. No one has solved this, but is anyone unable to solve it? This is quite easy for engineers to respond to, and it is a new business from a startup, so there are many such things, so I don't know if it is the old Twitter, but I feel that if it can be an engine for expanding recognition interactively, various secondary effects and implications will spread, so I thought there was one.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for . It is true that places where there are no applications smell somewhat like blue ocean strategy.

Member Masashima, please.

Masujima Member: Thank you, .

First of all, I think I have to apologize to the people of Digital Agency, including Mr. Suga, for the fact that the people here in the Control Tower, who are saying a lot of things, are not properly involving various people due to your isolated efforts. I think I have to reflect on myself.

I don't think Mr. Suga will say this directly, but I think he is saying that Masushima, Ochiai, Iwamura, Uenoyama, and Inadani, what are you doing? I think he is saying that you should speak up on Slack. First of all, I think he is saying that you are registered on Slack and that you should be involved in Slack. I didn't say anything big, but we are not big at all, and we are colleagues who are working hard to solve the same Issue. I felt very much that I was told why you are being evaluated and viewed from above like that.

In that sense, we have been reflecting on ourselves very much, and although we have been included in Slack, we have not been able to use Slack well and have not been able to make a proper statement yet, but we have reflected on ourselves very much on this point, and I feel that we should make a proper statement, for example, we should make a proper reply to Mr. Digital Agency's statement or make it livelier.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Mr. Ochiai, please.

Mr. Ochiai: After reflecting on my past, I first thought of opening Slack and writing a few words the moment I finished my remarks. In addition, in the sense of trying to involve as much as possible, I think METI has created a startup community, so I think it would be good if you could send it through there. As for the part covering about 700 companies, I have already asked the relevant organizations to make it known and have it sent. At least that much has been announced, but if I send it by email, I think there are cases where start-ups do not notice it after looking at it once, and there are cases where it is clogged up, so I think it would be more efficient if you could implement various methods as Mr. Uenoyama said.

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Then, I would like to have a comment from Counselor Suga, including a reprimand for us.

Secretariat (Suga): No, no, no. Thank you very much.

Finally, I would like to thank the elite influencers for their help. However, what I wanted to say was that we have not yet developed enough grounds to ask you to come and we are reflecting on it. So, I am sorry that it does not become exciting even if you suddenly say it now. For example, for the case that was not concluded in Type 2, I am actually sending a message on Slack saying, "I could not conclude the case, but do you know anyone who can do it?" However, there is a possibility that the message is not sent in a way that will be exciting, and the text may be extremely unpleasant to read. We need our experience, including how to communicate, so I would like to start it up firmly while consulting with Special Advisor Uenoyama.

In addition, as you pointed out many times from the beginning, first of all, we will conduct pattern analysis and sort out the criteria based on the knowledge we have obtained, although it is a fragment, as Dr. Iwatani said. Otherwise, there are places where it is decided by the authorities of each regulation, and I feel that it is very meaningful to formalize or formalize them. I would like to allocate resources to such places.

The catalog posting procedure is also determined by our resource constraints, so I would like to consider the standard processing period carefully.

As you just mentioned, we would like to make it possible to search catalogs. This is a restriction on the specifications of the Digi-cho website, but CTO Fujimoto himself is in charge of the website, and we are considering improving its functions. Therefore, we would like to make it possible to search at least the catalog map of the second phase.

In addition, Mr. Ochiai has been telling us about the Digital Marketplace, and we would like to be included in the Digital Marketplace, and at least in terms of administrative procurement, we would like to have SaaS and others adopted immediately. Due to the schedule of the Digital Marketplace, we are waiting for it now, and when the catalog is ready and ready to be accepted, we would like to have it posted one by one, and then we would be able to understand the price feeling.

Finally, there was a talk about wanting to automate. In terms of Phases I, II, and III, I think we are working on lifting the ban on technology from I to II, but the final purpose is III. If we do not do so, we will not be able to address the place where we are short of manpower due to the declining population. After the validation is over, I would like to not only disclose individual technologies, but also seriously look for successful cases of how simple the business itself can be automated and how much it can be automated when it is packaged well, and show them to everyone, including posting them in articles, so that we can have an integrated image and an image of a completed form. I would like to do that. digital completion

That's all.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for , thank you very much.

Next, I would like to ask Mr. Mayu to explain about the report on the results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes survey related to the review of Issue in local governments.

[The "Report on the Results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes Survey on the Review of Issue in local governments" is closed to the public.]

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

Finally, I would like to hear a few words from Director General Tomiyasu.

Director-General Tomiyasu: I am Tomiyasu from Digital Agency, .

I would like to thank Chairman Annen and all the other members of the Working Group for their continuous support, and I would like to ask for your continued guidance at the Review Meeting. Thank you very much.

Today, I reported on various matters that we have been advancing through various consultations at the Working Group, and I also received input. The base registry is also being organized in the direction of submitting a bill, so I introduced the current situation, and I believe that you suggested that we proceed firmly in the future while being aware of scalability for the future. Thank you for your very important comments.

In addition, I would like to report on the current situation of technology-based regulatory reform. Councilor Hitoshi Suga said that there are still highly difficult matters to overcome, and I believe that we need to overcome them while receiving various wisdom. I would like to ask for your continued support.

Lastly, with regard to regulations on paper and in-person processes, I believe that this is a theme for the entire country right now, and we are making area-wide efforts to review systems and regulation so that they can be replaced by digital ones. However, the concept created by the Digital Administration and Fiscal Reform Council is a big concept that we need to utilize the power of digital in order to prevent the decline of local public services, which may be the case for the national government, amid a declining population and a decrease in local public servants.
In this context, one of the major themes is whether the various systems of local governments, including enforcement, will be implemented by each of them, or whether there will be some parts that the Government can implement in common.

The approach of the Digital Administration and Fiscal Reform Council is, as I see it, to accumulate specific examples of each local government, and even if we suddenly call it a principle, there are various parties involved, so it does not go smoothly in some cases. However, we will dig down into the problems in each prefecture one by one, and whether there is actually a solution like this, it will be compiled by the prefecture or the country, so I think that approach will be taken and the final principle will be discussed, but I believe that this is a major theme of the entire country. I believe that the revision of our local governments manual will be part of that, in a sense, but I believe that we must also consider what we can do about the common parts, so I would like to ask for your continued guidance. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for your comments today. We look forward to your continued support.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for , thank you very much.

However, it is the capability of the ordering party or the client that is decisive, whether it is to make it scalable or to make a technical validation. I think it is very difficult. But I firmly believe that the fact that we are achieving results thanks to the hard work of the office staff, everyone, means that we were able to place an order successfully. Thank you very much for your continued support.

Then, the Secretariat will explain the schedule of the next review meeting.

Secretariat (Dai): Finally, I would like to explain the schedule of the next review meeting and the handling of the minutes.

First of all, the next review meeting is scheduled to be held on December 5 (Tue) from 3 pm. Thank you very much.

In addition, among today's proceedings, if there are no objections to the report on the results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes survey related to the review of Issue in local governments, which is Agenda 3, we will keep it closed to the public. For the other parts, we will prepare minutes later and make them public after everyone has confirmed them.

In addition, with regard to the handling of today's materials, we would like to disclose them on the website of the Digital Relations Institutional Reform Study Group, except for the materials on the report on the results of the regulations on paper and in-person processes survey related to the review of Issue in local governments, which is Agenda 3.
That's all.

Thank you for joining us today.

Chairman Annen: Thank you very much for .

With that, we conclude the first Digital Related System Reform Review Meeting.
Thank you very much, everyone.

Related Links