Minister Nominee Yong Hye-in Insists on Dual Office to Save Party's Sole Seat
Yong Hye-in has made it clear that she will not relinquish her seat in the National Assembly even if she becomes a minister.
Yong Hye-in, a lawmaker for the Basic Income Party nominated as the candidate for Minister of Gender Equality and Family, expressed her feelings, stating she feels a heavy responsibility as a working mother in her thirties. However, what caused a bigger stir ahead of the confirmation hearing was not her personal statement but her declaration to retain her assembly seat. She even publicly explained the reason: the moment she resigns, the Basic Income Party will be pushed out of the National Assembly.
"Even if I become a minister, I will maintain my position as a lawmaker. If I resign, the Basic Income Party will become a non-parliamentary party."
The Weight of a Single Seat
The Basic Income Party holds only one seat in the National Assembly, which belongs to Yong. If she steps down from her assembly seat following her ministerial appointment, the party will be pushed out of parliament overnight. If classified as a non-parliamentary party, the calculation for the allocation of state political subsidies becomes significantly disadvantageous. The number of policy research personnel supported by the state also decreases. The benefits of broadcast time allocated to parliamentary parties during elections also disappear. The fate of the party, built since its founding, effectively hangs on the career path of a single individual.
Controversy over legality does not hold water. Under the current system, State Council members may concurrently serve as National Assembly members, and there have been past cases where current lawmakers became ministers while retaining their seats. Justice Minister Park Beom-kye in 2020 is a representative example. Therefore, the key battle lies not in the law but in the sense of fairness. The crucial point is how the public will perceive a structure where one secures their party’s parliamentary status while passing a confirmation hearing to become a minister.
Designing the ‘2030 Privilege’ Offensive
The People Power Party is tying the dual office issue to a generational frame for its attack. Their argument is that there will be no one among the 2030 generation who would understand such preferential treatment. The core logic is this: even if the government appointed a woman in her thirties as a minister to expand support among the younger generation, the benefits accruing to a specific party in the process constitute a "privilege." They are poised to unleash a barrage of criticism centering on this logic during the confirmation hearing.
Park Ji-won launched a direct rebuttal. He asked back, "Is a female minister in her thirties not a fresh choice?" He urged that the symbolism of the generational and gender composition of the Cabinet should be evaluated first. The confrontation—whether to separate the significance of the appointment from the pros and cons of the dual office or to attack them as a combined package—has already heated up ahead of the confirmation hearing.
The Landscape of Solidarity Shaken
The impact of this personnel appointment does not end with the individual in question. Democratic Party leader Kim Min-seok has already revealed a plan to accelerate solidarity with democratic and progressive parties. Consequently, the interpretation is gaining traction that President Lee Jae-myung's nomination card is a strategic move to secure a lever for cooperation with the Basic Income Party targeting the next election. Although the number of parliamentary seats is just one, its weight in joint bill sponsorship and vote mobilization is by no means insignificant.
The temperature within the Rebuilding Korea Party is different. Their stance is that "one swallow does not make a spring." They point out that an alliance does not automatically mature just because of a single personnel appointment. This highlights the coexistence within the progressive camp of wariness regarding absorption and expectations for an equal coalition. It seems the temperature difference at the negotiation table will not be easily bridged even after the confirmation is concluded.
The Confirmation Hearing and Beyond
There are three main points of interest. First, the dual office will be at the center of scrutiny during the confirmation process. As the People Power Party maintains the generational frame, a fierce battle is expected over the justification of maintaining party status. Second is the speed of alliance negotiations. If the confirmation proceeds smoothly, the framework of cooperation between the Democratic Party and minor parties will be refined more quickly. The final point is the direction of public opinion among the 2030 generation. Whether the label of "privilege" or the assessment of "diversity" remains will serve as a variable in the future political landscape.
The essence of the controversy is, ultimately, not about one person holding two positions. The structure itself—where resolving the dual office means the party disappears, while saving the party means enduring the controversy over "privilege"—vividly exposes the survival conditions of minority parties. If one swallow does not bring the spring, the task for both the government and the progressive camp remains to create a sky where the next birds can fly in.
