The broad social reach of language policy's implementation makes it a key player in framing the manner in which language is handled in a particular society. It acts as an important device for the legitimisation of particular uses of language which coincide with social expectations, i.e., it encapsulates and articulates the national thinking on language (language ideology) and cannot stand outside the culture and the times in which it is created. Therefore, it is imperative that language policy evolves to reflect contemporary social realities and does not remain fossilised, reflecting circumstances now past. Both increased immigration and technology-related language change have made their presence felt in Japan for thirty years now; they are in no sense temporary aberrations. It is clear that they have important consequences for society at large and that language policy must therefore be extended to address them. As we have seen, at national level only one of these issues has resulted in action, namely the revision of the kanji policy to reflect the influence of information technology on reading and writing.

I would argue that the provision of JSL learning opportunities at national level and the expansion of opportunities to learn languages other than English are the most important language policy matters facing Japan today, far more significant than the forthcoming establishment of English as a curriculum subject in elementary schools, because of their deep and enduring import for future social cohesion. What has emerged in this book from the discussion of community language needs and practices and responses to them by government and other groups is a picture of rich, diversely textured language management activities (language policies) being adopted in a multiplicity of areas by bodies ranging from groups of concerned individuals to the highest levels of the national government, with many local government levels in between. What is at issue now is the direction in which Japan will next move. At what stage will the government decide that a critical mass of long-term foreign residents sufficient to justify national intervention into language provision has been reached?