Talk:House of Councillors

*The national seats

(now 48, in the beginning 50) were elected by SNTV until 1980(?) and by list-PR sinde then.

• A table indicating the number of seats per prefecture (changed in 2007) is missing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.17.162 (talk) 12:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Color mismatch

The party colors in the infobox diagram don't match those in the legend. Neither match the colors in the table. I'm aware that a party doesn't always correspond to a caucus, but where they do, the same color could be used to make it less confusing. Do parties/caucuses have canonical colors?--92.214.184.83 (talk) 11:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

In the infobox, not only the colours, but the parties themselves don't match: At the given time (between 24th H.C. election and 191st National Diet) the LP was still named PLP or rather PLP&list of members&friends.

More generally, as far as I know: There are no canonical colours for political parties (that's a unit of time in the National Diet), let alone kaiha/parliamentary groups/caucuses (a smaller unit of time in the Diet, with different length in each house). I think, not even the parties themselves are consistent in their use of colours over time (at least those parties that exist for longer than a few weeks). News media graphics all vary, although there are some recurring patterns.

A somewhat consistent pattern in news media coverage of recent, at least 21st century national elections has been to group parties in 2 [or depending on circumstances of the election/party system at the time, sometimes 3/4] blocs, often with a [US-analogue] red/blue-colour scheme at the core, usually: red for L&K&varying allies, blue for D&allies if any (but mainly Nikkei, I think, and others have frequently used blue for L and red for D), plus more recently some other colour for the various "tea parties" (Ishin etc.), or sometimes just a generalized red/blue for ruling/opposition parties. In the latest 2016 election mainly: red for the ruling parties L&K, blue for [anti-revisionist] opposition (D, C&micro-allies), and if differentiated: another colour for the pro-revisionist opposition (Osaka Ishin&micro-allies), grey for independents and minors in neither camp. 2016 election front page graphics in major newspapers: Yomiuri red/yellow/blue, Asahi red/violet/grey/blue, Mainichi (inverted) with individual party colours (blue for L, light blue for K, red for D, ...) and a summary blue/grey/red, Sankei just gov./opp. red/blue, Nikkei (inverted) blue for gov./a pinkish red for opp.

As for the colours used here in templates, I have been confused by recent changes in en.wp, though I have no doubt that they have been made in good faith in order to further bring order into the pre-existing chaos [which I have contributed to but not invented; but as I pointed out, there is no canon, and I had to start somewhere; and the somewhere I started from were the Commons:Category:Pie charts for Japanese general elections and regular elections existing for all national elections since 1890; although I personally would have coloured some parties differently, there at least, you already had one consistent colour scheme for pre-war and post-war parties, so I used it. More recently I've tried to use the new dedicated en.wp colours, unless a blocwise blue/red is clearer (as in election summaries such as the pre/post-election bar graphs in HC elections). But the benefits of the latest en.wp colour scheme for individual parties (which has of course already been copied to other language versions) evade me.]. Why use colours to represent parties in graphics and tables at all, if different parties in opposing blocs/alliances or on opposing ends of the political spectrum have almost indiscernible similar colours (e.g. PLP (anti-revisionist opposition, joint nomination strategy with D, C, S)/LDP or PFG (at the time, probably the most revisionist party [Ishihara's insistence on demanding a completely new "self-determined" (jishu) constitution was one major reason for the break-up with Hashimoto during the merger talks with the constitutionally more moderate Yui party])/SDP (like the JCP bites into any hand that tries to touch the constitution)), and on the other hand precursor/successor parties or even parties that just changed their name without any change of organization/composition are represented by totally different colours (e.g. JSP/SDP or PLP/LP)? --Asakura Akira (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Still not fixed. Kaihsu (talk) 11:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

The introduction text has at least one error, but I don't know what the error is

The second paragraph of the introduction says that the House of Councillors has 248 members, and that only half the members stand for election at a time. The same paragraph says 121 members stand for election at a time. 121×2=242; how do the other six members gain their seats? Or is the "248" or "121" number (or both) incorrect? Rob Kelk 18:18, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I have corrected that sentence. It was 242 (73+48=121 each election) until the 2016 election, it is 248 (74+50=124 each election) since 2022. I have made a apportionment table on Talk:List of districts of the House of Councillors of Japan-- Bancki (talk) 15:19, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Centrist Reform Alliance

This page needs to be updated to reflect the Centrist reform alliance now being a thing. I'd do it myself, but I'm not aware of the independent that sits with the CDP at the bottom of the article. Retr0r0cket (talk) 06:50, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

The parties haven't merged in the House of Councillors yet. Mispoulet (talk) 11:20, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 25 July 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved back to original title. As the original move was undiscussed and clearly contested, I have restored it to its original title. Anyone wanting to move it to Senate should start an RM. However, I would also point out that even if the 'official' English name changes, that does not necessarily mean the common English name also changes. Number 57 14:19, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

---

• Senate (Japan) → House of Councillors
• List of districts of the Senate of Japan → List of districts of the House of Councillors of Japan
• President of the Senate of Japan → President of the House of Councillors
• Japanese Senate national proportional representation block → Japanese House of Councillors national proportional representation block
• List of current members of the Senate of Japan → List of current members of the House of Councillors
• Talk:Japanese Senate national proportional representation block → Talk:Japanese House of Councillors national proportional representation block
• Talk:List of current members of the Senate of Japan → Talk:List of current members of the House of Councillors
• Talk:President of the Senate of Japan → Talk:President of the House of Councillors
• Talk:List of districts of the Senate of Japan → Talk:List of districts of the House of Councillors of Japan
• Talk:Senate (Japan) → Talk:House of Councillors

– The English language name change to the Senate from the House of Councillors has not been made official yet, only announced. For example, this Nippon.com article on 25 July 2026 from the Jiji Press still uses the House of Councillors name. News articles from various news sites such as the Yomiuri Shimbun , NHK , and TBS state that the official change will take place in October, though this Kyodo article states that the rollout will be gradual. As such I believe that we should wait on renaming these articles and revert any changes in articles or templates until the name change is official. Average Pennsylvanian (talk) 07:58, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't see the utility on doing this rename if it'll be reverted back three months later. Glide08 (talk) 10:20, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.