North Korea parliament holds rare second session
North Korea cannot grow enough food to feed its people
North Korea's parliament has convened for a rare second session amid speculation that it might be introducing economic reforms.
But this session ended after endorsing a law extending compulsory education by a year, KCNA news agency reports, with no mention of any other reforms. There were reports about plans to allow farmers to keep more of their crops.
The session comes months after Mr Kim reshuffled his top leadership and replaced his army chief.
The assembly usually meets in April and a second annual session is rare.
Aside from changes in the educational system that were "aimed at helping the younger generation", the assembly also made minor changes to parliament's standing committee, KCNA reports.
Food fears Rumours about possible economic reform in North Korea have been circulating for months, says the BBC's Lucy Williamson in Seoul.
These included unconfirmed reports that economic changes aimed at boosting food production could be introduced. But there has been no official announcement of any such plans.
Farmers in North Korea are currently required to hand over almost all of their production to the state, after keeping a portion for their families.
But reports from both inside and outside North Korea suggested that they would able to keep any surplus after a government quota is met, creating an incentive for higher production.
North Korea was hit by severe famine in the mid-1990s and remains unable to grow enough food to feed its people. Recent flooding is thought to have exacerbated problems in some areas.
Kim Jong-un - who inherited power after the death of his father Kim Jong-il in December 2011 - has been quoted in state media as stressing the importance of improving living standards in the impoverished, economically-backward nation.
His uncle Chang Song-taek - seen by some as the key power behind the young Kim - visited China last month for talks believed to have focused on economic issues and investment.
(dominic R.)
I think it is a good idea to have farmers keep any surplus after government quota is met. It will make the farmers work harder so they can have more food for their families. I believe it allows them more freedom in a way because they don’t have to give every little extra grain to the government. -Kylen H.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the proposal for farmers to keep their surplus has pros and cons. I definitely think it would encourage more production and it would stimulate growth. However, I have to wonder, as far-fetched as this may sound, if it could create a class system of sorts. If the farmers with surplus keep their crops instead of giving them to the government, while the poorer people are living off government rations, the gap between have and have-nots could increase. If the farmers gave all of their surplus to the government, then maybe the poorer people could get more food. However, I do think that if they work hard they should keep their products- maybe the government should just raise the quota and then let farmers keep their surplus. -Cecilia G
ReplyDelete