Song Eon-seok, floor leader of the People Power Party (PPP), fiercely criticized President Lee Jae-myung's address on the first supplementary budget bill for fiscal year 2026. Song called it "nothing more than a political speech rationalizing a vote-buying supplementary budget that uses war as an excuse, rather than presenting solutions to overcome the crisis facing our economy."
Song made the remarks to reporters immediately after the president's address on Wednesday. "He brazenly declared his intention to hide the true state of Korea's economic crisis and throw a debt-fueled party for election purposes under the pretext of war," Song said.
Song particularly pointed out that "the president emphasized the Middle East war and the crisis in the livelihood economy, but the actual content of the supplementary budget is heavily weighted toward cash handout programs such as subsidies for the bottom 70% of income earners and local currency."
"He is misleading the public by calling it a debt-free supplementary budget," Song continued. "What matters is that the assumptions made last fall when the main budget was drafted — a growth rate of 2%, an exchange rate of 1,380 won per dollar, and international oil prices of $64 per barrel — were shattered long ago."
"While he claims this is a debt-free supplementary budget, there are also concerns about tax revenue shortfalls due to slowing growth in the second half, yet none of this was considered," Song said. "If cash handout-style spending is executed under current conditions, the Korean economy will face a very serious crisis in the second half."
Song also noted that "the government raised its growth forecast from 3.9% to 4.9%," adding that this "completely ignores the risk of economic downturn and tax revenue shortfalls caused by the war."
"The claim that the national debt-to-GDP ratio has fallen, based on a false growth forecast, is nothing but an attempt to mislead the public," he said.
Song further added, "In the end, the government is exposing its own contradiction — arguing for the need to minimize the burden of high oil prices and high inflation while simultaneously pushing for massive cash-type spending that could fuel inflation."