hammered

It has been obvious for a number of years the Dems need a radical reform but seems the dinosaurs will not allow it. What was stated in another article about the proposed changes seemed like far too little & far too late. Dems need a whole new generation of pro active politicians which is not likely to happen in one year & so Mr Alongkorn will still be able to take up a lucrative post elsewhere. It is tragic the likes of Abhisit, Korn, Alongkorn are being held back by stone age party tradition. One major breakthrough they could easily do is to hire a capable PR machine.

Abhisit is one of those Alongkorn sees as holding the party back, probably Korn too. Alongkorn is closer to the current secretary general of the Dems. When he refers to fluid leadership, it does not take much to realise who Alongkorn is referring too. He actually has said that real reform (as he sees it) will change the leadership. Dem MPs in their inner Bangkok safe seats and those of the south and it is these that utterly dominate the party structure and who do not want meaningful reform, see things differently from MPs in other areas who know that while the southern dinosaurs maintain sway and while Abhisit is leader, they cannot win elections. The Dems need to listen to those from these areas as they cannot increase their seats in the south and will likely see them reduced in Bangkok. However, while seen as a southern party led by a man linked to a massacre they will struggle to do better in the central and lower northern areas and have not got a hope in Isaan or the upper North.

The big problem is it all becomes a self fulfilling serial election disaster for them if they lose people from the areas where they need to improve. To date that is what has happened. This may be the last opportunity for them.

The country deserves an electoral alternative to PTP but right now it does not have one and from what is being said of how limited reforms will be, that is not going to change.

It is ironic that a party that is seen as the mouthpiece of the elite bureaucracy is only really changing its own internal bureaucracy. What the electorate clearly want and demonstrably voe for are policies that local MPs or politicians can convince them that they will deliver, not some guy with a new deputy party leader title poncing around among people who do not trust him and think he is a mouthpiece of some old shadowy figures in Bangkok. That is what the Dems need to learn. They are no longer in touch with the people of their own country and are seen as just representing an old and disliked version of what Thailand was a few decades ago. The Democrats have a difficult task even if they were to really have a go.

Oh and distancing themselves from coups would also help especially in areas where they need votes to even come close to PTP.

The utter failure of the Democrats is one of the biggest disasters for Thailand in recent years. Their failure to denounce the last coup and their willingness to be part of everything that stemmed form it have wrecked them electorally and done nothing good for Thailand.

Interesting that people are more bothered about this than attempts to reform the increasingly divided Democrats that could open up a fratricidal split over the leadership.

He is a brave man doing this.

Hopefully they all without exception still at least oppose all coups, or they will have abandoned their principles along the way. Political differences can be sorted out in the political/democratic arena and they can have different opinions on that. Interestingly the other English language organ with strong links to the Democrat party takes a very different view from this report. Always interesting to see how the propaganda machines spin things.

On a separate note it was excellent to see that it is reported in the Nation of all places that Anand has joined the Banharn reform council. That is by far and awau the biggest news of today of the Nation have got it right.

No chance of them getting that considering how involved in the political conflict the press are. Luckily most Thais do not read the English langauge papers, so that takes a couple of players out straight away.

I think people should read what Wasant said earlier this year. It is far more revealing bout how the courts make decisions in cases of dissolution.

Many people complain that foreigners think they are better or are wrong to comment about issues in Thailand because it is not their country. I say that is cobblers. Sure the Thais don't like being told they are doing something stupid, or things would be better another way and I am sure many people would feel similarly if the roles were reversed.

However I believe the Thais are a long way behind in many things and I think it is right to comment on it and try to change things for the better through discussions with others and examination of different opinions. I think the West is also a long way behind the Thais in some things too, politeness in relationships, respect for the family elders and supporting one another in the family for example.

I don't think they can offer anything about how to educate their children, national financial economics or anything that requires high level knowledge.

My children grow up in this society and I think I have a right to want it to be better and to say so. I would like to see some of the obviously better systems of government and law, education and maybe morals in business of the western nations, learnt from and improved here through open minded implementation. If wanting Thailand to improve is a bad thing then that is a very twisted point of view to adopt.

morals in business of the Western Nations?

you're a comedian, right?

Don't need morals for business, just laws.

Dont try telling that to that nutter Stephen B Young and his lunatic organization. Bet he will be rearing his arrogant ugly head again soon to tell the Thai people what to do

Good news for Thailand. The economy right now is not so strong and needs government expenditure to keep it healthy. The big worry in business circles was that the economy would tank if this was declared unconstitutional. Luckily especially considering the unbelievable reasons put forward for unconstitutionality this did not happen. It is also sets a good indication that courts recognize separation of power. Let's hope this continues in other decisions. It is a good test of the political maturity of Thailand.

Interesting article in the Nation today, not because of any of the arguements but because it openly talks of the political role of the courts in stymieing the government: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/A-few-more-charter-traps-remain-30216324.html Someone must have been particularly angry to have openly written about what the Thai people will tell you to your face but the elite and their handlers will totally deny. It is not quite as big a slip as when the previous head of the constitutional court admitted a decision was made not on law but on politics, but continues in that vein. Interesting.

It always looked like a pretty weird reason to try and derail a budget. Good to see it did not fly.

Coups and a refusal to accept the Thai people's will, would be up there as habits that keep the country underdeveloped. While opportunity is mostly only allowed to a small group human capital (to use a vile expression) is greatly underutilized resulting in underdevelopment.

The PM the people elected and trust offers help. Floods are a seasonal event.

She will annihilate the opposition in the next election too however much more the oppositon try to spend in procuring votes and MPs. People reading the Bangkok centric print propaganda rags dont get it. There is a good reason why people vote for and like the Thaksin parties and it has to do with policies that other parties cannot replicate. A few flood hardships that people are used are not going to change that, and anyway the impact of floods upcountry has become worse since Bangkok was walled off and floods were no longer allowed there a decade or so ago and of course that mitigates away form those trying to blame the PTP.

Oh plus if the courts decide to put the boot in on the PTP either over their charter or infrastructure plans their majority will get even bigger and maybe on a mandate of dissolving all those bodies.

The real issues are political conflict between a party backed by a huge groundswell of the poor (for whatever reason) and a traditional elite used to controlling the political arena via bureaucratic bodies for the benefit of an oligarchy who cannot compete within a democratic system but who have used the bureaucracy to institute a system of bodies to protect their interests from democratic control. Pretty much everyone in Thailand knows this but the media an delite will go bonkers if anyone actually says it loudly and the utterly useless English language media would never mention it (excepting the occasional English language Khao Sod or Prachathai article which are basically hardly read.)

Interesting times for those who like to follow politics and particularly historians who in this day and age probably do no get other chances to see vestiges of feudalism in action.

She has to submit it because of a previous ruling by the constitutional court. If she did not submit it within 20 days, she could be charged fro not carrying out her duty and the whole thing would fall. That she has forwarded it before the court meet is an interesting gambit. Will they say their previous ruling was wrong? Will they make an "and" means "or" ruling or will they back down on the forwarding it issue? It is an interesting one. And even if the court reverse their previous ruling, the PM will have forwarded as the law stood on the day she sent it. Will there then be a retroactive interpretation or not?

I don't know which CC ruling your are referring to but the one she has deliberately ignored is that changes to the constitution must be put to a referendum before becoming law.

For a party who constantly trumpets their mandate from the people, is is just hypocrisy to ignore voters when it suits them. I hope the CC points that out very forcefully.

The court previously ruled that constitutional amendments were in a category that had to be forwarded within 20 days. No doubt that it why today they refused to issue an injunction. To have done so would have looked worse than the "and" means "or" decision. By the way, you should read the full constitutional court decision on when a referendum is needed. They stated there were two ways one of which required a referendum. There is a lot of selective and erroneous statement son this board but hey aint that the beauty of everyone having an opinion.

There is also the separation of power debate which considering Thailand has a parliamentary system and not a presidential one is closer to say British than American political theory and where the power of the legislature trumps that of the judiciary or government. It is a standard supremacy of the legislature over other estates argument if there is a clash that is accepted in many countries that use parliamentary systems. PTP are just stating this. Their opponents like to take US presidential system political theory to counter the argument which obviously is ridiculous in a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary system. It is interesting watching the spin that flies out an dhow ridiculous some of it is. Still none of it is as vile as so called educated calling the people buffaloes because they do not vote the way the so called educated wanted.

She has to submit it because of a previous ruling by the constitutional court. If she did not submit it within 20 days, she could be charged fro not carrying out her duty and the whole thing would fall. That she has forwarded it before the court meet is an interesting gambit. Will they say their previous ruling was wrong? Will they make an "and" means "or" ruling or will they back down on the forwarding it issue? It is an interesting one. And even if the court reverse their previous ruling, the PM will have forwarded as the law stood on the day she sent it. Will there then be a retroactive interpretation or not?

Interesting that he got bail

Interesting that the captain had it halved along with two others but that most of the lower ranks were left with longer sentences.

I wonder how much is donated to parties across the board that doesn't get declared?

It is going to be interesting to see if he gets bail. The red lot don't ever get it.

The opinion of one person. It is rather badly headlined as "Thai Opinion". The Thai people as a whole can have their say at the next election. Simple. That is how democracy works.

The last bunch actually spent 1.4 trillion on giving people 1000 baht notes in their hands and there was hardly a quibble from all those moaning now. And yet the people voted them out clearly not trusting them to run the country in a way that actually helped the majority. The current opposition after being unceremoniously booted out in this way should learn the lesson and adapt and try to get elected instead of spending all their time throwing tantrums, chairs, insulting the rural poor and locking everything up in a myriad of court cases to prevent any policy being implemented. Thailand needs a viable electable alternative to the current government. Right now they lack one. The history of the initial rise of Thaksin shows it is possible to appeal to the majority and electorally come from virtually nowhere and defeat established parties. It just means finding common ground with the majority. The opposition would be well served by learning form their nemesis and modernising their own archaic regionally hampered party structure although admittedly getting the inbuilt southern executive control to agree to give up their power of controlling the party without consideration for others is going to be hard and beyond a lightweight like Abhisit.

Do you have ANY PROOF at all that the Democrats spent 1.4 Tr baht of giving people 1,000 baht notes or is that the opinion of ONE person, YOU?

If you do then PUBLISH it and then send a copy of ALL of your evidence to the DSI, c/o Tarit.

If you don't then please stop spouting unverified and unprovable crap.

Proof is a good thing to have. Allegations are worthless.

I guess you were not around when everyone who earned under 15K if I remember correctly, was handed a few crisp banknotes under the Democrat administration. It was front page news in every paper. If you want to research it do so. I have better things to than post links for people who dont even know what was widely reported in all local and some external media. The electorate booted out that government. They had never even given them a mandate in the first place. If they do not like this scheme the electorate can likewise boot this lot out.

Without one side backing down this is going to end in tears.

Expect either this to be cranked up to a high level or more likely some smoke filled room deal. The elite still control the important parts of the bureaucracy and the government are still very very popular.

The minority that hate her will rant on and use more misogynistic attacks which will backfire. If she is seen as doing to little for the country she can be kicked out at the next election. That is what happened to her predecessor when the Thai people judged him. That is how democracy works. The current hatred towards her is not only ridiculous but backfires badly and undermines the opposition who are in desperate need of new leadership and a move away from the politics of vulgarity and hatred, so that the country will actually have a viable and electable alternative at the earliest opportunity.

So just like most other reports, Fitch is not going into meltdown over Thailand's infrastructure plans and sees risk as lower than in the US or Europe. No surprise there.

Given that PT hardly represents the establishment in Thailand (the Democrats' ultra-conservative position does to a far larger decree), the notion that Khao Sod would be pro-establishment is quite a faulty assumption.

Depends on your point of view. New money has won out over old money in this country, in my accounting of the facts, so I would call PT and the red tide the new establishment.

The Democrat Party is now the opposition party, with little chance of unseating the current political establishment. To think that the Dems do would be a 'faulty assumption' or more clearly understood, a logical fallacy.

There can be no rational argument that the Phua Thai and cohorts are not the establishment.

From wikipedia "The establishment is a term used to refer to a visible dominant group or elite that holds power or authority in a nation or organization. The term suggests a closed social group which selects its own members (as opposed to selection by inheritance, merit or election)."

That the Phua Thai stands for nepotism, cronyism, double standards, erosion of law and order, end to jusicial checks and balances, corruption and are led/owned by an unelected billionaire fugitive from justice further reinforces their position as bastions of the establishment. The democrat party are positively progressive by comparison, and any attempt to argue otherwise can be attributed only to having swallowed the lies and expensive propaganda campaigns that the Phua Thai have, and continue to, propagate.

Unseating this establishment will be a hugely difficult task, proved by the extreme violence used against the Abhisit govt which came to power by ordinary democratic means. A future election win by the democrats or any other opposing party will be met by more of the same. The theories of NN above are nonsensical emotional rantings without a shred of factual evidence to back them up.

As for this snipers bizarre testimony that he was firing blanks, I can think of three possibilities. He wanted to make himself look stupid, he wanted to make the army look stupid, or he was under order to give this ridiculous testimony to further muddy the waters surrounding the red riots for Phua Thai's benefit. The last option is of course the most likely.

You should read the wikipedia (really!) quote before concluding from it. The PT were chosen to lead the country by an election held under the control of their opponents. I think mos Thai people including a fair number who don support the Yinguck administration could give you a long list of groups that would actually be included under that definition. Mos people in this country know the unelected groups that control power. It is not really a secret. I also do not think you will find too many people who will be able to keep a straight face at the notion that PT may be able to influence the evidence given by serving snipers.

Can't speak for the Thai languge newspapers as my reading of Thai is very basic but the English language newspapers, whilst aspiring to be accepted as impartial mainstream media, are sadly biased. In the case of B.P. I'm convinced that articles are deliberately skewed to be sympathetic to the right-wing bigots who, until recently, filled up the letters page with their PAD drivel. I say until recently because there seems to be a slow emergence of correspondence from more liberal contributors. Early days but way to go guys!

Follow the family:

Supakorn Vejjajiva President and Chief Operating Officer of Post Publishing Public Co. Ltd.

Kalaya Sophonpanich, daugther-in-law of Chin Sophonpanich, Bangkok Bank founder is a leading Democrat MP. Chartsiri Sophonpanich grandson of Chin is a Director of Post Publishing Public Company Limited.

Now just imagine heads exploding if the COO of the premier foreign language news media organ and associated Thai ones happened to have the family name Shinawatra. Imagine the ruckus if one of the nations biggest banks was linked to the Peau Thai party and a major news organ. You will not find many Thai people who believe the BKK Post to be impartial. Then again personally I believe there is nothing wrong with partial media sources (as in reality all news sources are bias!) provided those sources openly make their leanings and connections clear. In fairness the organs of the PAD and Red shirts are a lot more honest in this respect as they are blatant about where they are coming from.