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 ".

The second meeting of the Study Group on the Framework for Certification in the Field of Education

Last Updated:

Overview

  • Date and time: Friday, March 21, 2025, from 15:00 to 17:00
  • Location: online meetings
  • Agenda:
    1. Opening
    2. Business
      1. Study on Certification Infrastructure in the Educational Field
    3. Closing

Material

Minutes

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much for taking time out of your busy schedule to attend today's meeting. However, we will now hold the second meeting of the Study Group on the Ideal of the Certification Infrastructure in the Educational Field. Before starting the proceedings, please explain the additional report from the secretariat on the hearings with the people concerned.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
This is Hisayoshi from the secretariat. I look forward to working with you again today. Last time, I reported on the hearings with the people concerned, but they were still being conducted for people related to private schools and those related to nursery schools, so the outline was not yet finalized. What we are displaying now is the opinion from the people related to the nursery school. While the study data is valuable, it contains personal information, so it is understandable that it will be provided to medical institutions and public institutions, but it is necessary to consider how much it should be shared. However, it is assumed that elementary schools will receive data from nursery schools and kindergartens, and discussions on this are required. I believe this is basically about organization-based data linkage. On the other hand, in regard to the issue of individual-oriented data collaboration, in order to eliminate the barriers in the first year of elementary school, it is necessary to strengthen collaboration not only between schools but also between elementary and junior high schools, and early implementation of this in society may be necessary. As for the people involved in the private sector, they were basically the same as the others. There was one point that was said to be in the form of a reservation, but the possibility of some increase in the burden on the school was not zero, and he pointed out that he wanted the school to carefully explain it to the people concerned. In addition, he said that he had high expectations for the creation of an introduction manual and explanatory materials, as well as measures to reduce the burden on the site. It was pointed out that understanding and acceptance on the ground would be promoted by clearly clarifying these matters and clarifying the merits. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much for your explanation. I would like to start the proceedings right away. Today, we will discuss the implementation pattern of the certification infrastructure in the field of education, and then discuss individual issues. Then, please explain the implementation pattern candidates from the secretariat.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Next, Hisayoshi from the secretariat will explain. I would appreciate it if you could give me some time, although I may overlap with what Mr. Murakami in Director-General explained at the last meeting. First of all, regarding the process for implementation, it is assumed that there will be a flow of research and study to scrutinize requirements, etc., technology demonstration, field demonstration and implementation support, and advance introduction. Currently, in FY 2024, the red line indicates the adjustment of direction, and this is exactly the term discussed in this review meeting. Based on the progress of GIGA School Concept and the development of next-generation school affairs DX environments, the secretariat proposed last time that we would like to advance the development with the aim of utilizing the certification infrastructure nationwide around the time of the next terminal renewal. From that perspective, the schedule is plotted in the following format, which is the shortest format, and we need to move forward steadily and carefully from one fiscal year to the next. In addition, as the people concerned pointed out, we recognize that we need to communicate carefully to the people concerned at key points as soon as possible. On top of that, it is a candidate for the implementation pattern. It is written that the development of infrastructure unique to the field of education based on the needs of the field of education can be considered. For example, the idea of establishing a common ID and establishing a new certification authority at the national level can be considered. Assuming the schedule on the previous page, we believe that it is desirable to use technologies that have been used for stable infrastructure development and operation. In that sense, as I wrote at the bottom, self-sovereign ID, so-called DID, and ID management using blockchain are also described as future R & D issues because there are few examples of their implementation as social infrastructure. The so-called "mature technology" must be used. Furthermore, considering that digital infrastructure has a network effect of improving convenience as the number of users increases, it is important to develop it with a sense of speed, so it may be difficult to start from scratch. Therefore, the secretariat conducted a close examination and suggested using gBizID for organizational certification and Public Personal Authentication, or My Number Card, for personal certification. As I added last time, the My Number will not be used. I believe that the combination of these two ideas can be mentioned as a candidate for the implementation pattern. I will briefly explain about gBizID. It is a service that allows you to log in to various administrative procedures systems with one account. It has already been used by local governments as well as corporations and sole proprietors. As of the end of January 2025, a total of 1.21 million accounts have been issued, and the number of connection services has reached 196, indicating that the system has matured. Regarding the types of gBizID accounts and how to use them, gBizID Prime is given to corporate representatives or sole proprietors, under which admins who manage the IDs and members who use the IDs are assumed. So, this is just for the moment, but for example, in the Board of Education, gBizID Prime will be appointed as the superintendent, gBizID Admin will be appointed as the manager of the section in charge of information systems and general affairs, and gBizID members will be appointed as the actual head of the school. Next, I would like to ask about My Number Card. Digital Authentication App is released in Digital Agency. This is an application that makes the functions of identity verification using My Number Card safe and simple. By using APIs, it can be incorporated into various services such as government, city hall, finance, and membership. A considerable number of applications have already been made, and the actual implementation has already started. For example, as you can see here, the official application of Higashikagawa City, the opening of an account at MUFG Bank, and other various applications are being used for the first identity verification. That's all the explanation from the secretariat.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you for your explanation. Now, I would like to start the proceedings. First, as an exchange of views, please raise your hands if you have any comments. I would like to nominate them one by one. What do you think? Of course, you can ask questions. Mr. Fuji Sakae, please.

Committee Member Sakae Fuji:
Yes. I look forward to working with you again today. I have a few questions. Last time, I briefly mentioned gBizID, but this time, I would like to ask you again about how the system will be structured. As for the pros and cons of using gBizID, what I mentioned last time is the level that gBizID guarantees the risk of the information it handles. The level of identity verification and the level of certification, right, the level of certification for the person in question. The terms "IAL" and "AAL" are used to refer to the level of personal data handled by gBizID, and in particular, as you mentioned earlier that the principal of the school is a member of gBizID, the guarantee level of the member of gBizID is considered to be quite low, so I would like to point out that even if there is an account in gBizID in such a state, even if it is usable, whether it is really OK to use it remains quite questionable. This is the first point. Next, I would like to ask about individuals who use My Number Card or Digital Authentication App. In the case of using Digital Authentication App, I think there is a use case of using digital signatures in addition to Public Personal Authentication, but as far as I am looking at the previous slide, it is not a function of digital signatures or electronic signatures, but using Public Personal Authentication. And, although there was a description of confirmation of intention, I interpreted it as using the authorization function at the time of API access and using the consent at the time of authorization. In addition, I am not a legal expert, so I would like to ask for Professor Itakura's opinion. In fact, I interpret that affixing a signature is equivalent to affixing a registered seal. Is it really unnecessary to express one's intention by signing it? I would like to confirm whether or not it is really OK to simply grant permission for accessing the API and ask whether or not it is OK to cooperate. And in the case of e-signature, in My Number Card, if you are under 15 years old, you can't use the e-signature function, so basically. In that case, who is willing to permit the data linkage, and in that case, how will the parent-child relationship and the expression of the parent-child relationship be done in the parent's My Number Card? I would like to ask a few questions about your thoughts on this matter. These are the two points.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you for your questions and comments. Then, do you have any comments on your second question?

Commissioner Itakura:
Yes. There is no separate agreement on how to confirm the will of the person involved in a type of act under administrative law, so as Commissioner Fujiei understands, we will decide at what level the act will be conducted according to the risk. It depends on whether it is valid or not even if the person himself doesn't affix his registered seal. It depends on the information to be handled. At the moment, the details have not been decided yet, but I think it is quite possible that if a student wants to provide his or her learning history comprehensively to some business operator, not to put it into the system of the school he or she is currently enrolled in, but to send it to a private company, or to find a job upon request, one or two levels higher than that would be necessary. When I move money at the bank, I change the level between looking at the passbook and moving money. Currently, online banking often requires two or three steps, so it's about how much I require in relation to specific use cases. It's difficult for children. For children, the Act on the Protection of Personal Information will be revised so that notices and announcements will be properly delivered to their parents. I was told to get my parents' consent as well. I think I'll hang up at the age of 16. This kind of thing is supposed to happen, but in reality, as the committee members say, there is a problem of how to confirm whether a person is really a parent or a person with parental authority. So in the end, this is 18 years old after the child actually became an adult and turned 18? According to the Act on the Protection of Personal Information, it is said to be 16, but I think there is no choice but to guarantee it by saving it so that people can move it by themselves when they turn 16 or 18. That's all I can answer right now.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. Commissioner Fuji Sakae, do you have any questions about this answer?

Committee Member Sakae Fuji:
Thank you very much. It was very clear. Based on that, what do you think about the systematization this time?

Chairman Fujimura:
That being the case, I think the statements made by the two committee members have made it clear that decisions must be made at each level. Do you have any comments on these two points from the Digital Agency side?

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Thank you very much. With regard to the points raised by Commissioner Fujiei and Commissioner Itakura, I believe that this is one of the issues that the Secretariat needs to consider thoroughly. In that case, we need to consider extending or enhancing the functions, and I believe that we need to explore this in our research. In that sense, thank you very much for giving us the homework.

Chairman Fujimura:
I think it is very important, so I would like to ask you to respond based on that.
Then, do you have any other opinions or questions? I would like to ask them from anywhere without hesitation. What do you think? I think this discussion is quite important. Mr. Ikeda, please.

Mr. Ikeda:
This is Mr. Ikeda from Toda City. Nice to meet you. First, I would like to talk about a few things. First, I would like to ask the secretariat about the schedule. I would like to ask you about the fiscal year in which you are looking at the situation where it can be distributed and used anywhere in the country. I thought it was not always clear from the current schedule, but what do you think?

Chairman Fujimura:
Yes. Could you explain it to me?

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes, thank you. As you pointed out, this is a bit wide. The figure shows the period until 2034, but during the interviews with the people concerned, some pointed out that it could be introduced in advance, while others pointed out that it would be possible to start in 2030 or 2031 depending on the situation of the introduction. In particular, in this case, the Secretariat recognizes that the balance with the renewal of the School Affairs DX and the School Affairs Support System is very large, so if this is progressing sequentially, it will be from the next fiscal year in some prefectures, and it will be in another fiscal year in other prefectures, so to be honest, it is difficult to say this much about this. On the other hand, as Mr. Murakami explained last time, and as I mentioned the network effect earlier in my explanation, unless we create a situation where we can move forward as quickly as possible, it is difficult to feel the so-called merits. In reality, it is a matter of chicken and egg that we will not be able to move forward without merit, and I would like to coordinate with the people concerned and those in the field in future communication. In any case, I honestly feel that it is quite difficult to make a definite decision at this point in time until this fiscal year. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you. Is there anything else I can do for you, Mr. Ikeda?

Mr. Ikeda:
Thank you. You're right. You mentioned that you will not cut your buttocks, and I think it is important that you do not cut your buttocks. However, I think it is also necessary to make some sort of appeal to the people of Japan, saying that they will be able to do it from this year, and that preparations should be made, so I would like to ask you to keep an eye on them. In addition, the next generation school affairs DX environment is being developed at the same time as this study, and each local government will continue to use the system for 5 years once it is developed. We have been doing it so far, we will build it first, then we will sign a maintenance contract for 5 years, and when the maintenance expires, we will build it and operate it. It is very closed network and has a history of being done on the intranet, so it is like this, but I think it is necessary to say that it is different this time. Also, I think it would be good if you could proceed with understanding the premise that there is such a custom. In relation to that, I would like to leave the use of gBizID and My Number Card for the implementation of this certification infrastructure to the opinions of experts, but I think it is necessary for the City Board of Education to sort out how many schools are already connected to the Internet, and what conditions are necessary to realize this, for example, to include gBizID. Therefore, I believe it is necessary to develop guidelines or laws and ordinances to ensure that the situation is and should be the same. That's all about the schedule and the system, but there are two more points. I would like to clarify whether or not it is OK to understand that the content of the data with a schema will be linked, not the files, as is the case with the authentication between organizations and individuals. I think I need to explain what's different from sending attachments to each other by e-mail with a proper electronic signature when I drop them off at the site and see them at the school. It is not possible to send anything, and the format and method of sending are fixed, and I think it is necessary to explain what kind of divine favor it has in order to expand it. It doesn't mean that such a schema has been decided, but the business operator or the local government has decided to customize it. It's not Aoi no Gomon, but I think it's better to use it as something like an Inro. That's all for now.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. As you stated at the beginning, I thought it was a very important discussion on what to do about the process by when, and I was actually thinking about expressing my opinion earlier as well, but I would like you to consider the burden on the school site on page 5 of Handout 1. As you can see in the fourth line from the bottom of page 5 of Handout 1, from the perspective of the school, the revision of the 2028 Courses of Study and the revision of textbooks is a very big event, and it is a busy time, and the Board of Education will have a very hard time to support it, so I would like you to consider a schedule that takes into consideration so that the burden on the site does not increase, and I would like you to consider that it is necessary to have a plan by that time. As you just mentioned, I would like to add that I would like you to consider the reason why the Board of Education should do something, what the premise is, and that it will not be possible to make a plan unless it is cleared early, so I would like to add that I would like you to consider the process.
As for the second point, it is a necessary requirement as a premise for including this. As for making it into guidelines, it will probably be the Board of Education and the schools that will implement it, and I don't think the Board of Education in particular will know without it. In the first place, I think most Boards of Education will start with "What is gBizID?" We also want to clarify that at a separate meeting, the Special Committee on Digital Learning Infrastructure in Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, a committee of the Central Council for Educational Reform, and I hope that the requirements will be clarified in cooperation with them.
Regarding your third question, I completely agree that consideration is really needed for that, and I would like to ask Digital Agency if there are any comments on this.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes, thank you very much. Well, thank you very much for all the things you pointed out, which I mentioned earlier as homework, but they are all important issues. So, to the people concerned, when we start the actual operation, if the Board of Education suddenly starts talking to the students, how will we explain it to the school and how will we explain it to the parents? If we don't make sure in advance that this kind of system will start in the next fiscal year or the year after that, various things will probably pile up. That is one point. Then, it has actually come, but at the moment when we are in a situation where we don't know what to use to explain, it will be a little difficult next fiscal year. As the Chairman pointed out earlier, there will be various big events in the educational world, and I think it is quite possible that such things will be put off. Therefore, we recognize that the Board of Education, including the people related to the schools, will have to make sure that they can explain with confidence and simply. Thank you very much.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Mr. Nakabayashi, please.

Commissioner Nakabayashi:
Yes. Thank you in advance. Now that you mentioned it, I would like to talk about the introduction schedule and explanations to the field. When introducing such a standard technology network, network effects are also mentioned as a keyword, but unless the number of organizations and people participating in the network increases, there is a concept of network externality, which means that the cost of introducing the network will not be met. In short, the value of the network increases depending on the number of organizations or people participating in the network. If we simply calculate, for example, if there are three organizations called ABC, and A and B participate, but C does not, the participation rate is 2/3, but the effect is 1/3. Only between A and B. If you think in this way, in other words, how many local governments, boards of education, and schools have to be included before he can get the value that matches the cost of introduction. Also, for each organization, we are not saying yes or no just because we participated. In fact, if there is no one to communicate with, in the end, even if we introduce the system, it will be of no value at all. That's what we are talking about. There is a way to say, "That's why we are in a bit of trouble," but on the other hand, I think there is a way to say, "If you don't join, the other party won't get any advantages." Quantitatively, I think it can be used as an indicator to predict the introduction effect and introduction cost quantitatively to some extent, such as how many organizations are involved and how much benefit can be obtained, and how much cost can be reduced by that, so I think it is not convincing to just say that we will do it or that we will do it. On top of that, when I said that the burden on the front line is probably huge, as mentioned in the earlier hearing, and what are the advantages, I thought it would be important to say that we should appeal from a comprehensive perspective and cooperate together. Thank you in advance.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I think this is a very important point about our basic stance and how we will move forward in the future. Also, Mr. Ishizaka, who is involved in the work of moving the world of education by creating data standards and data-linkage standards in the field of education, I would like to hear your own opinions, including your comments on the current opinions. Thank you very much.

Member Ishizaka:
Thank you. This is Ishizaka speaking. There is a lot of overlap with what Dr. Nakabayashi just said. Yes, I was also wondering when and how I could create a network effect, or how the other party was doing. I would like to confirm the basics. I understand that the world we aim for is to ensure the so-called portability of data and to do it in a stable manner. Naturally, we need a mechanism for the sender and a mechanism for the receiver. If it is between schools or starting from an individual, there may be a transfer from a school educational institution or a public educational institution to a private organization, I think it will be a fairly wide story, but first of all, I will match your image. It may be just me, but as a confirmation. I don't think it makes sense to authenticate without both the sender and receiver, so that's the picture. In terms of the number of applications, the term "school affairs support system" is currently being used, but considering the situation in public education, it is not necessary for all applications to support this system, and I believe that school affairs support will be the base. Or, when it comes to learning only, the e-portal for learning is designed as a hub for learning, and the e-portal for learning will also be included in this, but even if all standard ones are introduced by local governments and schools, I think that the total number of applications will be only 30 or 40. That much is subject to empirical public education. I have no idea about the private sector. It may be possible to make it more and more convenient, but first of all, how to ensure reliable data portability for things like entering and transferring schools, I think there will be that many people, and one of the things I would like to confirm is whether this is in line with the views of the secretariat. Plus, as Dr. Nakabayashi mentioned, there was a case of chicken and eggs earlier, but business operators are very reluctant to invest in things that cannot be used or are not expected to be used. From the users' point of view, I think that the use will advance only when it can be used universally. So, in that sense, I understand that it is a difficult device to gradually expand. On the other hand, I have a feeling that you will not be able to enjoy this benefit unless you go to a certain level all at once. If that is the case, it would be an overstatement to say that some kind of incentive or force is necessary, but it is necessary to create a strong introduction factor, and it is necessary to create it in a relatively short period of time for both the provider and the user. I think this is one of the keys to smooth implementation in society. In that case, I think it is necessary to verify the concept in a small number of companies. We will conduct demonstrations under certain scenarios and sort out the know-how and issues that came out of them. Or, in the case of the Learning e-Portal and the Standard Model, as we did in the Digital Agency project, when we implemented the system, for example, by asking them to provide sample source code, we can lower the hurdles for the operators and users who will follow us later, and ask them to document their know-how. We believe that we should take some policy steps to consolidate and expand our know-how at once. First of all, I would like to confirm whether the idea that both sides are necessary is correct, and whether the number of people who are eligible for public education corresponds to the views of the secretariat. Thank you in advance.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. By the way, this review meeting is not limited to people specializing in the field of education, so I would like to talk to you for confirmation. The school affairs support system that you mentioned earlier is an administrative system for school teachers. It is a system that manages grades, health and health information, and student register information. This data must be linked according to transfer, promotion, and advancement. Currently, even schools in the same local government are not yet able to communicate with each other. Of course, it is necessary, but transfer is not limited to within the local government, and transfer and advancement are not limited. In order to do that at the national level, a certification infrastructure is required. This is a possible use case. The number of school affairs support systems is limited to some extent, and the number of learning e-portals is also limited. The learning e-portal functions as a hub.
Now, if there are any comments from the Digital Agency side on that, please tell us. I believe there were three points that were discussed.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes, thank you. The first question is whether or not both the sender and receiver sides need to be certified. We understand that this is as you said. In terms of secure communication, that's exactly right. Also, in terms of the scope this time, or in terms of Step 1, Step 2, and Step 3, which I explained last time from the secretariat, basically data portability will be realized. There may be different ways of expressing this depending on the person, but I am basically aware of what Mr. Ishizaka just pointed out. Next, regarding the number of systems and business operators that are subject to data-sharing, which may be said to be the starting point of school affairs and organizations, although I do not have detailed figures in the dozens at hand, the Secretariat is basically aware that the number is about the same as the number that Commissioner Ishizaka just pointed out. In addition, regarding the development of next-generation school affairs DX environments currently being promoted in Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, it is said that a school affairs support system will be considered through bulk procurement within the prefecture. The reason for this is that the educational administration is basically moving on a prefectural basis, including the personnel affairs of teachers, and based on the idea that the usability of school affairs should be basically the same within the prefecture, such a direction has been set out. For this reason, the Secretariat is aware that it is more likely that the figures mentioned earlier will be raised or narrowed down. Yes, is that all?

Chairman Fujimura:
What do you think about the need for an incentive to spread it all at once?

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes. That is exactly what I touched on in the section on support for the implementation of the matters to be considered later, but of course we recognize that what has been implemented in the demonstration projects that have been conducted in Digital Agency so far must be minimized. In addition, as other committee members pointed out earlier, they pointed out that unless it is introduced all at once to some extent, there will be no benefits in the end, and there will be no incentive for all the parties concerned. We are also very aware of that, and I made quite bearish remarks earlier, but we need to carefully weigh that and try to gain the understanding of the parties concerned, so we will think carefully.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. Next, let's move on to Mr. Ishii. After this, if we delve into the earlier discussion, I believe we will be discussing the following issues for consideration. After Mr. Ishii's speech, I would like to move on to the discussion of each issue for consideration. Mr. Ishii, please go ahead.

Mr. Ishii:
Yes, thank you. I have a few follow-ups and questions in Mr. Itakura's comments. When the Act on the Protection of Personal Information is revised, it will become clear that the consent of a legal representative is required for children under the age of 16, and the question will be, is it correct to understand that it is basically the guardians who access the My Number Card of the Digital Authentication App? I believe that Dr. Itakura was very clear in his comments, saying that we need to think separately about the extent to which we agree to the provision of information and the proper conduct of identity verification. Outside the country, for example, the Council of Europe has issued guidelines on the handling of educational data. When a child is treated as an adult, it is necessary to hand over the right to the handling of data to the former child who has become an adult so that the right can be exercised. There is an item to that effect. In addition, although it is an old law, in the US in 1974, a privacy laws and ordinances for educational data was established. Even under that laws and ordinances, a person can exercise his or her rights independently when he or she becomes 18 years old, but in order to exercise rights, the preconditions must be in place, so when children are treated as adults, they will be able to exercise their rights smoothly. Or, I thought it was important to manage the data so that it could be properly handed over to the person himself, so I would like to add something. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. The points you pointed out are really important. Currently, the Board of Education and other organizations are procuring the system, but when the system is updated, the data disappears completely. We are doing this without any concern. So, from a very important point of view, I have been listening to you while thinking that it will be necessary to clarify it in the future and communicate it throughout the country. Thank you very much for your valuable opinions.
Then, I would like to consider the direction. Earlier, I analyzed the risks for each use case, and in the next discussion, I would like to consider in detail whether or not to approve, not certify, as in the case of electronic certification. First of all, you mentioned mature technology as a candidate, but I would like to consider using gBizID and Digital Authentication App in combination as a candidate, and if there are any problems, I will consider it. Is that correct? Mr. Ishii has just provided information on the guidelines of the Council of Europe in a chat session. Thank you very much. Is that correct? If there is no particular objection, I would like to do so. Is that correct?
Then, as a candidate, I would like to do so. Based on that, on the next agenda item 2, I would like to start the discussion after hearing a summary explanation from the Secretariat about each consideration. Then, please explain each consideration from the Secretariat.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Now, let me explain what we need to consider. As for the list of matters to be considered, it is as I explained last time, so I will omit it and first of all, it is to guarantee the authenticity. In order to ensure the authenticity of the subject and the authenticity of the data, signatures are used. Organization-based data collaboration and individual-based data collaboration are shown in the form of (I), (ii), (iii), and (iv) below in the list. In both cases, we recognize that it is important to ensure the authenticity of the entities and data that will be the source and destination of collaboration. Isn't it necessary to combine authentication and signing using gBizID and Public Personal Authentication? As for the way of thinking in that case, I understand that it is necessary to ensure the strict authenticity of official documents such as student records and certificates of academic achievement. On the other hand, for items that are not expected to be used for official certification at this point, such as learning history in learning apps, I believe that the level and method of certification required when scrutinizing requirements definitions will be detailed and necessary modifications will be implemented. As for the identity verification factor, as I explained last time, I will omit it. As for the signature method, as it is also a preaching to the Buddha for the committee members who are familiar with it, I will omit it for a while. On top of that, from the perspective of operation and personal information protection. For the purpose of personal information protection, the use cases assumed for this are described as follows. Of course, it is necessary to take into account the review of the Act on the Protection of Personal Information in the future and the deepening discussions on data utilization, but I would appreciate it if you could listen to me briefly. As for the organization-based data-linkage, as you discussed last time, we basically assume that the data-linkage is based on the administrative procedures set forth in laws and ordinances. This corresponds to the case where the data-linkage is based on laws and ordinances. In short, whether or not the data-linkage should be properly organized in this laws and ordinances, including the necessity of the process itself, will be considered. There are a few things that need to be considered, as I explained last time, but we will basically position the data-linkage in laws and ordinances. I think it is good to understand that it will become a use case for this by that. On that basis, in terms of individual-based data linkage, I recognize that educational data, data that is constantly expected to be provided to the individual, and the certificate of academic achievement that I mentioned earlier fall under this category. However, if this is not properly positioned in the purpose of use, I recognize that it will be operated in a way that it is properly positioned within the scope of the purpose of use. On the other hand, with regard to other data, for example, when it is provided to an external party or a third party organization, I believe that it may be necessary to scrutinize it individually. Next is the operation. In terms of the on-site burden, in terms of organization-based data-linkage, from the perspective that it is essential for the Board of Education Office, which will be the user, and the teachers and staff of the school to be able to operate it easily, I recognize that it is necessary to elaborate on what kind of form of gBizID management within the Board of Education is expected, when the gBizID will be used, and what kind of movements will be required of each user at that time, and then create an introduction manual and explanatory materials for the people concerned. In the same way, as for the on-site burden and individual-based data linkage, there are places where the user is the learner, that is, the child, and there are places where the guardian supports the child, so it is essential to consider an increase in the burden on the board of education and the school site, but it is also necessary to firmly recognize such things. In addition, the points of discussion are the timing of the use of My Number Card, such as when transferring or advancing to a higher school, when to use it, what kind of action each user and related person is required, and especially for children, the support of schools and parents is necessary. On the other hand, we need to take action based on the fact that the people involved and digital literacy are diverse. Furthermore, if we do not have a My Number Card, we need to pay attention to what kind of response we will take. Next, regarding the hardware that needs to be maintained, implementing the card reader function is of course essential. Currently, I am aware that the number of people who have a card reader function on a smartphone or PC at home is increasing considerably, but for those who do not have a card reader function, it will be necessary to complete the necessary procedures at school. In that sense, implementation of the card reader function in schools is required, but consideration is also required from a perspective other than the education field, and I believe that consideration is necessary based on that. In any case, the fact that it is necessary to create an introduction manual and explanatory materials for related parties is exactly the same as the organizational starting point. Also, regarding implementation support for business operators, we have just started to receive comments from Commissioner Ishizaka. Currently, gBizID and Digital Authentication App have published implementation guidelines, but I believe that the current ones will naturally be insufficient in terms of what kind of functions will be expanded in the future. Support will also be provided for the implementation of APIs and other technologies developed by the national government through technical demonstrations involving business operators. This was pointed out earlier mainly in relation to the school affairs support system. Furthermore, we will closely examine what kind of system requires what kind of modification, the expected cost of modification, etc. I believe that this "etc." includes the disclosure of the source code, but I recognize that it is necessary to consider the creation of guidelines specialized for implementation in the field of education and to detail the contents of the description. Last but not least. In terms of future expandability, the use of Verifiable Credentials and secondary use of educational data can be assumed in the future. It is desirable for the Architecture and infrastructure to be able to respond to these needs, and in that case, it is necessary to anticipate collaboration not only with education but also with other fields such as employment, medical care, disaster prevention, and social welfare. Therefore, I recognize that it is necessary to avoid proprietary specifications as much as possible and design with consideration for expandability, such as utilizing technologies and infrastructure used in other fields. That's all from the secretariat. Thank you in advance.

Chairman Fujimura:
Yes. Thank you for your explanation. Now, I would like to move on to an exchange of views on each of the considerations you have explained. Please raise your hands if you are a teacher or a committee member who has an opinion. Mr. Itakura, please.

Commissioner Itakura:
Yes. Thank you. I would like to comment on the relationship with the Act on the Protection of Personal Information Held by Administrative Organs mentioned earlier. First of all, I think it is true that the school affairs DX, or rather the part that says paper is unnecessary, will be submitted based on laws and ordinances. As for the other learning data, it doesn't necessarily have to be based on the Personal Information Protection Act, and even if it is based on the Personal Information Protection Act, there are things you need to be careful about. As Professor Ishii has just explained, the amendment of the Act on the Protection of Personal Information is being discussed. First of all, there is a rule about the consent of the person who has parental authority over the information on minors. However, even in Personal Information Protection Commission and other places, there has not been much discussion about the relationship between this rule and administrative organizations. I'm not sure if the finished product is exactly the same as this one. The other is that the Legislative Council of the Civil Code is discussing the adult guardianship system, and although there is no direct mention of minors, there is a possibility that the discussion will spread. Also, those discussions are not necessarily limited to the educational data or use cases, so if that is not convenient, it does not necessarily have to be based on consent for personal data protection, so I think it is OK to write separately (in laws and ordinances) that we will follow these rules for that part as well. If you want to send the data to a completely outside company, such as a cram school, I think you should follow the rules in principle. However, if the data is not sent out when the child transfers to another school, for example, there may be a situation where the child wants to send the data when there is a dispute with the parent and the parent says, "Don't send your education data at the new school." In such cases, at the moment, the will of the parents is respected, or rather, the base is a property under the Civil Code, so we are not going to use it, but in such cases, for example, why don't the school or the board of education intervene and submit it? I thought it would be good to have a system to help those who submit it. We do not necessarily have to go back to the principle of the Personal Information Protection Act, and I wanted to emphasize that even if the rules are similar, they can be legislated once again. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much for your expert knowledge. I think you are right, and in the case of organization-based, it is a legal task, so it is already automatic. That is exactly what you say, and we will consider other use cases, assuming that. Thank you very much.
Mr. Kozaki, please.

Acting President Kosakiza:
Yes, please. In addition to the content of the previous hearing, there were several issues. First of all, in the hearings, the situation was different between the preceding local governments and the ones that have not yet introduced the system, and between those that are making progress and those that are lagging behind. In the end, as mentioned earlier by the committee members, I believe that the system will not progress unless it reaches a certain level at the same time. In that regard, I think design is going to be important. It is a goal in the first place. I believe it would be good to indicate in the process of the plan whether it will be realized or not. In the end, I would like to clarify the goals that I am aiming for, the incentives I mentioned earlier, and from the perspective of the school and the board of education, what will happen to the budget for each fiscal year? Even if you take money, it will be a burden in the short term, but in the long term of three or five years, things may move because it will be cheaper. So, when there is a transition period and there are various situations, I feel that it is necessary to clearly show the goal and to go with this flow in the design. There are very few local governments that want us to step forward or do it first. In that sense, we need to move forward with a sense of speed. Therefore, I think it is good to show that the adjustment and design of such things are like this for the field, like this for the school, and like this for the board of education. It may be acceptable to some extent how it takes time after it actually starts to work, but I think it is necessary to proceed smoothly at the planning stage. Second, regarding the authenticity of data, I believe that everyone is aware that electronic signatures and other functions are very important, so it is not necessary for the government to bear the full cost of these functions. At the very least, I think it would be better to clearly state that there is support for this kind of support and that there is something that can be used for this kind of support, not in the form of direct subsidies, but in the form of local property measures. I would appreciate it if you could make a proposal with a little awareness of the financial burden in that sense. The government can think about the burden in this way and provide support, and depending on the situation, the ideal is to move something that is necessary and big, so the government will hold on to it, and when the operation starts, I will ask everyone to take care of it. I think there are four points of operation. The first one is the issue of cost that I just talked about, and the second one is usability, user-friendliness, or, "Oh, this is convenient." In other words, it's better to use this from the user's point of view, usability is very important. I think the name gBizID is one of them, but anyway, I hope that the usability that we want to do as our own is considered. The third point is that local governments tend to be reluctant to deal with the burden of the time and effort involved. The time and effort involved are overcome in this way, so it is necessary to devise ways to do things well. In this regard, I would like to ask you to consider the time and effort involved so that you will not be pressured by the anxiety of not being able to see how many requests there are. Lastly, as I have been visiting each local government, when I have heard from the central government about the organization and the person in charge of the operation, and where to hold it, or when I have heard it during discussions, in a bad way, I can say that it is the work of the other side or the work of this side in the vertical division of pushing each other, and in a positive way, it is the time after receiving it that it goes smoothly by who pays for it. In the first place, since the person in charge has changed all of a sudden, it is very stressful to know why we have to do it. So, in that sense, when we notify or contact them, I would like them to not only say hello to everyone because we do this kind of thing all of a sudden, but also say that they want us to be in charge of this kind of place or that they want us to take the lead in this kind of place. I feel that it is still too vague even if I want prefectures to lead. I think it would be good if the prefectural government, in charge of this kind of work, could come up with a way to encourage the prefectural government to create an organization to operate the system, such as asking the prefectural government to give proper guidance to the students because it is a matter of learning, or asking the prefectural government to give consideration to the maintenance and environment. Over the past year, I've talked with many people, and I've talked with the members of the school board and the teachers, but I have a lot of expectations, so I really hope that I can arrange things with a sense of speed. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I have been listening to the opinions of both of you while sympathizing with each other. Next, Mr. Fuji Sakae is raising his hand. After receiving the opinions of Mr. Fuji Sakae, I would like to ask Digital Agency if he has any comments on the comments from these three members. Mr. Fuji Sakae, please.

Committee Member Sakae Fuji:
Thank you. Including this part, there are two points. One is about signatures. As for signatures, I think it would be easier to understand if we classify and organize the definitions in more detail. Broadly speaking, I would like to confirm the subject. The so-called identification or identification of the person in question. And I want to be sure of my intentions. In terms of the documents written here, the part that says it is an approval signature, and the rest is about a certification signature that wants to confirm the authenticity of the data. Based on these three points, I think it would be easier to understand if you organize what kind of tools will be mapped from the organizational perspective and the individual perspective. Looking at the situation now, in the first half of the meeting, as I commented earlier on the level of verification, including gBizID and Public Personal Authentication, it exists, but when it comes to approvals and signatures, I think there are some parts that correspond to the digital Authentication App's digital signature certificates, but there are no corresponding functions in gBizID. When we talk about ID signatures, we are talking about a different system. For example, in the case of universities, there is something like UPKI, but I thought that if I did not write about the necessity of such a system at this stage, it would be a bad idea. This is a comment. And the last one is the future development. You mentioned Verifiable Credentials, but I am aware that Digital Agency and verification test are making progress on how to implement the student registration certificate in society, such as how to implement student discounts like those being implemented by JR West. In this context, Mr. National Institute of Informatics intends to standardize the certificates issued by such universities. Standardization, including schema, is being promoted, and I believe that there is a certain level of consensus that it will not work unless it is implemented not only in universities but also in primary and secondary schools. I think it would be a good idea to refer to that. For the OpenID Foundation, there is a global organization called SIDI Hub. Last year, we held an event and received a lot of cooperation from Digital Agency. We will cooperate with SIDI Hub to develop standardization and governance, including cooperation with other countries. So is NII. The National Institute for Academic Degrees (NIAD) is also working with us, and I believe that it would be easier for us to meet each other halfway if the direction of cooperation with this movement is written somewhere in the guide. Yes. These are my two comments.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I have been listening to you thinking that you gave me very good advice. Now, I would like to ask Digital Agency to give us some comments. What do you think?

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Thank you very much. I believe that all of the points raised by each committee member are important issues, so I recognize that they must be clearly stated in the summary and explored in the next fiscal year's research and study. On top of that, if I may add a comment, I would like to say that from the perspective of our administrative organization, even though it looks like a high ball, from the perspective of the expertise of the committee members, I recognize that they are being pushed by the back that it is not high. Thank you very much.

Chairman Fujimura:
Yes. Thank you very much. I am very encouraged. Next, if anyone has any comments, please raise your hand. What do you think? Then, Mr. Izumi, please.

Mr. Izumi:
Hello, this is Izumi. I would like to make some comments. This is partly related to the previous section, but it is not because the schedule is tight, or because we are going to do it in this order, but rather it is important how we can minimize social costs, and I believe it will be developed as a social infrastructure. On that basis, I would like to make a few comments. This overlaps with my previous comment, but again, please clarify who the owner of the information is. Because, for example, my activity history is recorded by an organization like a school, and if it is possible to share it between organizations for a certain purpose (without my consent), I would be in trouble if Google or Apple were to claim that the information they recorded might be about you, but it was their corporate information. In short, it is very important who owns such information and who keeps it. In this context, as Mr. Ishii commented, it is very important to ensure that the delegation of authority is restored correctly over time, and I believe that the overall structure is important in terms of how it will come down to in the event of temporal changes while sorting out the owners of information. I don't think we should be swayed by market forces in this regard. We should carefully consider whether it is not possible to enter because the cost is high, or whether it is really good to spread this because it is cheap. On top of that, since technology inevitably changes (evolves and develops), it will continue to be replaced or transferred several times, and since technological innovation will advance, it may not be possible to do it once, but it is important to take it in the direction of social homogenization. Otherwise, there is a possibility that a specific technology, which was the background of the previous replacement, will be incorporated and will remain as a legacy. As an expert on information systems and social infrastructure, I would like to make a comment on thoroughly homogenizing the technology, which is related to the social infrastructure that I commented at the beginning. Finally, with regard to the discretion of technology, the adoption of technology should not be left to the discretion of the organization. Rather, the social infrastructure should be homogenized as much as possible. The discretion of each organization should be given to whether or not to issue IDs, and IDs that contribute to Public Personal Authentication should be covered by the social infrastructure. Regarding student ID numbers and the refusal of admission, each organization should issue a number, and the discretion of the organization and the development of the social infrastructure should be considered separately. I think this is the whole Architecture. In that sense, we should make sure that information originating from individuals is not affected by changes over time. It is of course important for administrative organizations to share information among themselves in accordance with the Administrative Law, but if that is the case, it would be difficult to decide whether or not to dispose of the information within five years. In this sense, information originating from individuals should be shared across organizations without fail, and this should be done while confirming the intentions of individuals. In addition, I think it is important to consider how much the original information should be perpetuated and how it should be guaranteed as a social infrastructure. From the above point of view, even if we give an incentive for each organization to introduce it, we should give an incentive in the direction of homogenization of the actual situation, and it should not be something like if you use it temporarily like a bargain sale, you will be exempted from a certain obligation. I apologize for the unorganized comments, but that is all from me.

Chairman Fujimura:
I believe this was an extremely important point. In particular, the first point, which is about who owns the information, has become extremely ambiguous in the educational field and is currently being used, so I would like to clarify that point. While using IaaS and SaaS, the SaaS vendor says that all this information belongs to us, and on the contrary, the school board cannot even touch it. It is a matter of course for the children, but I think it is exactly as you say that it should be organized properly. In regard to this consideration, the Advisory Council on the Utilization of Educational Data in Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Special Committee on Digital Learning Infrastructure of the Central Council for Educational Reform are also conducting consideration, and I would like to request that it be organized in cooperation with them. I also believe that the way it should be as a social infrastructure is absolutely true, and I would like to request that it be promoted based on that. Thank you very much.
Mr. Nakabayashi, please.

Commissioner Nakabayashi:
Yes. I am a bit of a system implementer, and when I talked about supporting the implementation of the previous handout to business offices, I am not really an expert on learning e-portals around here, so I don't know much about the actual situation. I thought it would probably be easier to define the data that will be exchanged between organizations, but it's still more difficult to make decisions with a learning app, but from the point of view of the school, it has a bigger impact. Especially from the perspective of improving education depending on the digitalisation in the future, I think learning apps will have a bigger impact. However, considering the nature of the learning application at that time, not only the authentication but also the exchange of various content and data between the server side and the application side must be decided. In the end, from the point of view of the business operator who implements the application, the authentication is good, but if the exchange of such original content and learning history data is not possible, in the end, the application will not be able to exhibit its merits. In particular, for learning history, there are cases where individuals use the app individually, and collaborative learning, recent group work-like exploratory learning, when we try to do such things, things like what other students are doing are also shown on the student's screen. In fact, I think that such things are very important to demonstrate the educational effect. So, I don't know much about this learning e-portal or how much progress it has made in terms of standardization, but it's probably a use case to support the implementation including such things. In the case of this learning style, this kind of data exchange occurs, and at that time, up to here, for example, it's okay to bring any platform. If I don't think about such things, I think it will be difficult to make progress. In fact, I thought it might be a killer app, so I would like to make a comment on the implementation.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I was glad to hear that. So, Mr. Ishizaka, who is familiar with that, could you give me some supplementary explanation?

Member Ishizaka:
As Dr. Nakabayashi pointed out, if we don't have all the data, we can't ensure portability, so we're having a hard time with that. In Japan, compared to other countries and regions, it is even more difficult to obtain grade information across the board. In that sense, the standardization of the xAPI standard has reached a certain point in the world view of the most fine-grained so-called learning behavior recording and learning analytics. On the other hand, there is a higher social need for coarse-grained ones, but it is quite difficult to standardize them. So, I was just about to make a statement. Well, as mentioned by another committee member earlier, it is extremely difficult to define these things individually. There are many social needs like these, and things like standardization and utilization of digital badges are happening in various fields around the world. While using these standards, I am not talking about directly targeting this certification, but I have a feeling that if we move at the same time, the value will increase dramatically. In the same way, there was a discussion in the Secretariat about how strict certification should be. Communication between organizations is regulated by law, so it has to be done very strictly. But, guidance and records are regulated by law, but the format is not always the same. As Professor Fujimura is a specialist in this field, such standardization is being carried out at the same time. There is definitely a need to promote data standardization and certification at the same time. Yes, I am aware of that. Then, as a technical plus, as Mr. Fuji Sakae mentioned earlier, Verifiable Credentials have a very high value in education, so I am aware that this should be considered as a use case. In that sense, it is even more difficult to show a roadmap. Schools are naturally asking us to clearly show the merits of what will be easier if we can do this. It is about communication between schools, guidance notes, entrance exams, and so on. In reality, teachers in the field and the board of education are having a hard time. We clarify that it will be this much easier by clearly organizing them. At the same time as the standardization I mentioned earlier, I think we need to balance both while keeping in mind that there is a future possibility that it will be this much more convenient if we incorporate such a standard into society. I'm sorry, that's all I have to say.

Chairman Fujimura:
No, not at all. Thank you very much. As you just mentioned, I think the idea of parallel discussions is very important, so it is not included in the scope of the Study Group. It is being considered by a different organization, and I would like to proceed in cooperation with that organization. Fortunately, I am also included in that organization, and I would like to proceed with that well. Also, regarding Verifiable Credentials and other issues, our university is talking about doing something about it, so I was thinking that including it in the scope would be absolutely right. Thank you very much. Also, is there anyone else who has an opinion? Regarding individual issues to be considered, have you almost exhausted all of your opinions?
Mr. Ikeda, please.

Mr. Ikeda:
Yes, thank you very much. Earlier, I talked about what should be coordinated on page 19. For example, I think I made the same comment last time, but the Board of Education, the school, and the parents are working on an individual support plan. For children with disabilities, we are working on an individual education support plan. Regarding this, I don't think it will be the certification by laws and ordinances of organizations and institutions based on this gBizID, but with this arrangement, I think it will be individual-based data-coordination. However, if we are going to communicate in this way, I think it would be good to do so. Professor Itakura, I think you mentioned at the beginning that people under 15 years old cannot use electronic signatures and it would be better to focus on saving them for the time being, but I think there is a lot of information that should be communicated between administrations based on individuals but not based on laws and ordinances, so I would like to make a comment. Sorry, that's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I would like to keep that in mind.
Then, Mr. Izumi, please.

Mr. Izumi:
Thank you very much. We may not have been able to reach a conclusion earlier, but I would like to take a look at the direction of the discussion. In addition to the verification of the identity of the individual and the accuracy of the content, I would like to ask Mr. Fujiei to clarify what should be done if the time changes. In addition, as Mr. Ishii explained, which technology can be used is a current factor related to the maturity of a specific technology. Therefore, first, it is important to clearly identify the owner of the information, and then, in addition to the identity verification and the content certification, it is important to consider when and what kind of intention should be expressed digitally, not on paper, together with the time scale. If we introduce a technology that can be used without organizing the information, it will become a legacy. Therefore, as I asked each committee member, it is important to clearly identify the identity of the individual, his or her intention, and how it relates to his or her work. Thank you very much.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much. I think you made a very important arrangement.
Then, Mr. Fuji Sakae, please.

Committee Member Sakae Fuji:
I would like to ask a few questions about Digital Agency. I would like to ask you a few questions. I understand that in the case of the use of electronic signatures using Digital Authentication App, APIs for verifying signatures and APIs for verifying the validity of signatures are basically not provided to the private sector. In this case, there is a scenario in which data is exchanged with a private business operator, or there is a case in which data is exchanged between private schools. In that case, I think we will have to consider opening some of the functions for verifying signatures to the private sector. What do you think about this?

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you for your question. How about a Digital Agency?

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes, thank you very much. Regarding the point you pointed out, we are aware that we have to think about it, and we are currently considering it with the person in charge. In any case, we are aware that we have to come to some conclusion before we can actually demonstrate the technology.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much.
Next, I would like to ask Mr. Ishii.

Mr. Ishii:
Thank you very much. What I would like to confirm in the personal data section is that the other committee members mentioned earlier commented that there may be quite a lot of data that is not based on laws and ordinances. Regarding organization-based data linkage, it is assumed to be based on the administrative procedures set by laws and ordinances. For example, when transferring schools, will there be quite a lot of data that is not based on laws and ordinances but that they want to provide but are not subject to organization-based data linkage? When considering use cases, I thought it would be necessary to sort out what kind of data to assume after all, so I would like to ask you again about your thoughts on that. I thought perhaps the secretariat could answer that.

Chairman Fujimura:
This is a table on page 19. If you have any supplementary explanation on what the Digital Agency side is thinking now, I would appreciate it if you would add it. Now, Digital Agency, please go ahead.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Yes, thank you. As for the table in this document, I believe that the guidance notes, medical examination sheets, and survey reports are currently positioned in laws and ordinances, and that they will be subject to data-sharing ex officio, starting with organizations. On the other hand, regarding the enrollment certificate and the enrollment status of the Disaster Mutual Aid Benefit Program, which are written here, I believe it will be based on the organization, but at present, it is not based on the positioning of laws and ordinances, but it is based on the fact that it is necessary. For example, regarding the status of enrollment in the Disaster Mutual Aid Benefit System, it is given to the parents and the parents take it to the next school, so I believe that there is no problem because it is actually given to the person. Like the individual education support plan of the special support I mentioned earlier. We are supposed to hand over such information with the consent of the parents. However, in terms of educational activities, the information is being used very thoroughly, and it is necessary to hand over such information. When I interviewed the person in charge, everyone would say yes, but the consent of the parents would be required, or the information would be handed over in the form of phone calls or other inquiries to the previous school in the form of how the teacher at the new school spent his or her time at the previous school. However, I am aware that we need to carefully examine each use case. If the report is classified as a guidance document or a report similar to a survey report, it will be the decision of the laws and ordinances government, which is the competent agency, and we will have to consider it. On the other hand, if the report is classified as an individual-oriented report, we will have to carefully examine the process and the confirmation of the intent of the individual, which you mentioned earlier, and try to realize it as an actual use case. This is our recognition. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

Chairman Fujimura:
Am I correct in that regard? Also, considering that we are currently communicating all on a form basis, as we are currently conducting educational digital transformation, for example, we always send a textbook certificate to the other party at the time of school transfer. We just need to generate it automatically and send it as data. It does not contain the person's personal information. For example, I have heard that it is necessary to scrutinize use cases, including such matters. Is that correct?

Mr. Ishii:
For now, yes, I understand. Thank you very much.

Chairman Fujimura:
Mr. Ikeda, do you have anything to add?

Mr. Ikeda:
Especially, I think the explanation of Digital Agency is necessary and sufficient.

Chairman Fujimura:
Thank you very much.
Then, Mr. Itakura, please.

Commissioner Itakura:
Yes. At the moment, if I have a selfish image, I don't want to write such details in the law. Instead, I want it to be reduced to a ministerial ordinance, and depending on the situation, the ordinance of the local government can add it. In ordinance, for example, something that is not done in other prefectures is included in the DX, and if there is something that is good in that prefecture, I think it would be good to add it to the overall ministerial ordinance. If it is written in the law itself, it would have to be revised.

Chairman Fujimura:
You're right.

Commissioner Itakura:
The idea of using My Numbers is written in the appendix of the Act on the Use of My Numbers, and it is supposed to be deliberated by the National Assembly once and for all. However, from the beginning, it was assumed that this would be added to the cabinet and ministerial ordinances, and it could be added in ordinance as well. In ordinance, of course, it is a prefectural unit, so it may be within the prefecture, but I have an image of trying it out.

Chairman Fujimura:
I see. Thank you very much for your advice as a legal expert. I've been listening to you with great satisfaction.
What else would you like to know? Does anyone have any comments or questions? Would that be all right?
Thank you very much for your comments. I really think I was able to receive a lot of opinions for future research and study. Then, for the next meeting, I would like to ask the secretariat to organize the opinions that have been presented so far and prepare a draft summary. However, at that time, please proceed with the draft while consulting with each committee member. I would like to ask for this without fail. Then, at the next meeting, I would like to discuss the draft summary. Also, if there are any omissions of opinions today, please let the secretariat know by email or other means later so that it can be reflected in the draft summary. Finally, please let the secretariat know about the next schedule and other matters.

Hisayoshi Director for Policy Planning:
Thank you very much. It really took one and a half hours, but I would like to thank you very much for giving us more than two hours of opinions. The next meeting is scheduled for April 14. Like this time, it will take two hours and will be held from 13:00 to 15:00. As you instructed earlier, I would like the secretariat to compile the draft report as soon as possible and consult with each committee member individually. Regarding the schedule adjustment, I would like to contact you by e-mail or other means after the meeting. That's all.

Chairman Fujimura:
Okay, thank you very much. That's all for today's meeting. Thank you very much.