This essay, dated November 21, 2019, is based on an article from the Sankei Shimbun.
It introduces testimony by a hotel insider regarding the 5,000-yen fee for the dinner party held on the eve of the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party.”
It shows the reality that hotels may agree to low prices by considering the number of guests, timing, lodging packages, and economies of scale, and criticizes the opposition’s pursuit of the issue.

November 21, 2019.
The people of Miyagi Prefecture who voted for a person like Jun Azumi must be ashamed not only that they have gravely damaged the credibility and dignity of Miyagi Prefecture, but also that they are intellectually disqualified.
The following is also from an article in the Sankei Shimbun published on the same page.
The parts marked with ＊～＊ are mine.
“A 5,000-yen fee and individual receipts are possible.”
A person connected with the hotel that hosted the prime minister-sponsored “dinner party.”
Regarding the prime minister-sponsored “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party,” the opposition parties have criticized the 5,000-yen fee setting as “too cheap” for the “dinner party” held the previous day, where people connected with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s support group gathered.
However, on the 19th, a person connected with the hotel that served as the venue clearly stated to the Sankei Shimbun, “There are cases where we accept it even if the price is low.”
Regarding the fee for the dinner party, Jun Azumi, Diet Affairs Committee chairman of the Constitutional Democratic Party, explains, “When I checked with the hotel, it was at least more than 10,000 yen per person.”
Their scenario is that if the prime minister’s side paid the difference, it would amount to a donation to voters and give rise to suspicion of violating the Public Offices Election Act.
There are consultations regardless of ruling or opposition parties.
Regarding this, the hotel insider prefaced his remarks by saying, “We do not answer questions about individual parties,” and then stated, “For example, if there is a consultation asking us to keep the total amount within this range, we have no choice but to respond.”
The insider emphasized, “If we refuse the order, the revenue becomes zero, and changing it to another day is also impossible.
We consider economies of scale and other factors comprehensively.”
Regarding the fee, he also pointed out, “If it is divided by the number of participants, it can result in various amounts.”
In such cases, how is the overall cost kept down?
The insider explained that the decision is made by considering the timing of the event, the number of people, the quality and quantity of food and drinks, the package with lodging, and the frequency of use by the applicant.
The prime minister explained that the number of attendees at the dinner party was about 800, but it also seems possible that the hotel provided food for a smaller number of people.
The insider also said, “I think there are such consultations from lawmakers, regardless of ruling or opposition parties, when they hold political fundraising parties and the like.”
＊The people of Miyagi Prefecture who voted for a person like Jun Azumi must be ashamed not only that they have gravely damaged the credibility and dignity of Miyagi Prefecture, but also that, as people of Miyagi Prefecture, whose prefectural capital is Sendai, the City of Trees and a city of learning, they are intellectually disqualified, and are also disqualified as human beings living in the twenty-first century＊.
If asked to issue them for the number of people.
Regarding the dinner party, the prime minister explained that there was no income or expenditure by his own support group or office, saying, “The office did not issue receipts, nor did it receive any.”
However, some reports have pointed out that receipts would not be issued in the hotel’s name for each participant.
On this point as well, the insider refuted the claim, saying, “Naturally, there are cases where they may be issued.”
He explained, “If we are asked, ‘Please issue receipts for the number of people, not for the total amount,’ it is conceivable that we would hand them over in that form.”
The opposition parties are demanding disclosure of the itemized statement, but the insider refused, saying, “It would destroy the relationship of trust with the customer.”