Multi-billion-baht scheme launched for rural development

[webfact]

Multi-billion-baht scheme launched for rural development

By THE NATION

 

Agriculture Minister Krisada Boonraj

 

THE AGRICULTURE, Interior and other ministries will kick off a multi-billion-baht Thai Niyom rural development programme later this month, Agriculture Minister Krisada Boonraj said.

 

Starting on February 21, a total of 7,663 teams, representing each of the country’s tambons assigned by the Interior Ministry, will visit villagers across the country to gather personal and household data on their needs, under the programme.

 

The Thai Niyom programme is aimed at tackling rural poverty in a more sustainable manner through reform of the country’s agricultural sector, Krisada said.

 

The programme also aims to highlight villagers’ active participation in the government-led efforts, which cover more than 20 projects for |occupational training and other measures to generate more income for villagers.

 

Initially, the projects will be financed by a combined Bt35-million budget from the Agriculture Ministry’s mid-year budget, with the rest coming from other sources.

 

Krisada said villagers are expected to get economic benefits from the projects to help tackle rural poverty at the source.

 

Advisers will be assigned to households where members have registered with the government as low-income earners, so that they can provide recommendations and help select suitable training and other measures to help them address their economic needs.

 

According to Krisada, government advisers from the Interior Ministry’s 7,663 teams would first conduct in-depth interviews with each of the households to analyse their financial problems to determine the best course of action.

 

The reform programme involves several major projects. First, Bt3.2 billion will be spent to help farmers to switch to economical crops to reduce the risk from low prices and oversupply. Some farmers have been stuck with crops whose market prices are not enough to cover their production costs resulting in the need for the government to intervene.

 

Second, Bt3.4 billion will be used to develop new crop varieties and seeds as well as livestock for farmers to diversify their sources of income.

Third, Bt6 billion will be used to increase the value of agricultural products to solve the oversupply problem and avoid low prices.

 

Fourth, Bt15 billion will be used to reduce economic inequality and promote a better quality of life. Details of these measures have not been announced.

 

Fifth, Bt19 billion will be used to upgrade the rural irrigation facilities, while another Bt769 million is earmarked for the so-called Big Data management project.

 

Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda said a Bt2-billion budget has been set aside for officials to meet villagers in more than 70,000 villages nationwide, with most of the money earmarked for food and related expenses during a total of four visits later this year.

 

These visits will include in-depth interviews, a recommendation of solutions, occupational training and other measures to tackle rural poverty.

 

Overall budget: Bt47 billion

= Population coverage: More than    70,000 villages nationwide

= Objective: Tackling rural poverty    at root cause

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30337747

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-02-02

[Samui Bodoh]

Why are the words "massive, pre-election slush fund" reverberating around my brain? 

[isaanbanhou]

the government better get that cash out quickly if there is going to be an election this fall... oops next spring maybe

[JAG]

It will be fascinating to see how far down the chain this money 'trickles"...

[gunderhill]

Is it free beer and hammocks?

[steven100]

More good work done by this government to improve economic sustainability within the agricultural sector.

Projects are being implemented continuously which help create jobs and provide much needed income.

Khun Prayut Chan O Cha has always stressed the priority & need to help farmers throughout Thailand and this is just one program. Another program he implemented was the handing out of plots of land to farmers who don't have enough or others who need land.

 

[Cadbury]

56 minutes ago, steven100 said:

More good work done by this government to improve economic sustainability within the agricultural sector.

Projects are being implemented continuously which help create jobs and provide much needed income.

Khun Prayut Chan O Cha has always stressed the priority & need to help farmers throughout Thailand and this is just one program. Another program he implemented was the handing out of plots of land to farmers who don't have enough or others who need land.

 

 

Rubbish! Surely Steven you don't really believe that gobbledygook dished up by the Agriculture Minister. They are only words dressed up as action. There will be no action or positive outcomes.....there never is. This is a monetary form of frog kissing by the PM to try and improve his waning popularity.

And most of the money will disappear along the way into the pockets of parasitic do-gooders, village leaders, civil servants and consummate fraudsters. 

[mok199]

(multi as per websters : more than one)...multi billion baht scheme - 2 billion (already spent on lunches)...I don't think they will have enough for desert...Amusing thailand

Edited February 2, 2018 by mok199
speliing

[mick220675]

Any thing that helps poor farmers is welcome. But looking at the figures quoted 35 billion is money already budgeted for (irrigation/ crop development etc). The remaining new money 12 billion less the 2 billion for officials leaves 10 billion for the 70,000 villages. If each village has an average of say 200 residents, they will be lucky to get a couple of hundred baht spent on them.

 

I can only comment on what I see in my village and the people I know and from what I see the biggest problem is debt. When you have 3 or 4 family's living on a 24 rai farm and have made the mistake of borrowing money to buy a tractor of car. They find them self's borrowing against the farm to cover there repayments and in no time the profits from there farming do not cover the repayments.

 

Not all poor farmers can blame the government for there problems, but when the PM thinks cutting down rubber trees and replacing them with coconut trees is a good idea, it is obvious the government is not qualified to teach farmers how to farm.

[mok199]

8 minutes ago, mick220675 said:

Any thing that helps poor farmers is welcome. But looking at the figures quoted 35 billion is money already budgeted for (irrigation/ crop development etc). The remaining new money 12 billion less the 2 billion for officials leaves 10 billion for the 70,000 villages. If each village has an average of say 200 residents, they will be lucky to get a couple of hundred baht spent on them.

 

I can only comment on what I see in my village and the people I know and from what I see the biggest problem is debt. When you have 3 or 4 family's living on a 24 rai farm and have made the mistake of borrowing money to buy a tractor of car. They find them self's borrowing against the farm to cover there repayments and in no time the profits from there farming do not cover the repayments.

 

Not all poor farmers can blame the government for there problems, but when the PM thinks cutting down rubber trees and replacing them with coconut trees is a good idea, it is obvious the government is not qualified to teach farmers how to farm.

I will admit we have seen several improvement in Nhong Hong (burriram) a newley paved road was very much welcomed .

Edited February 2, 2018 by mok199
speliing

[mick220675]

3 minutes ago, mok199 said:

I will admit we have seen several improvement in Nhong Hong (burriram) a newley paved road was very much welcomed ..all improvments are welcome...

The area I live in has improved much in the last 15 years and that is something that many poor farmers have benefited from. The massive irrigation work had made a big difference. The road building is defiantly welcome.

 

The problem is while houses are now made from block instead of wood and buffaloes have been replaced with tractors the poor now have very high levels of debt. Until they can make there repayment affordable they will remain poor.

[Samui Bodoh]

There are some interesting comments from the posters above.

 

The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Notwithstanding the above, I do think there is a great deal of room for government(s) at all levels to assist the rural poor. And I should note that the program noted in the story above bears no resemblance to any anti-poverty program I have seen; it smells like a slush fund to buy votes and spread out some cash to government employees in return for their attempts at rigging a vote and nothing more. 

 

Why not try a 'one tambon/one tractor program? Is it not possible to have a tractor that could be used by many farmers? If not, why not?

Why not try to amalgamate a few farms in order to benefit from economies of scale?

Why not have greater infrastructure development? I agree strongly that a good road makes for a large increase in economic efficiency; is there not further infrastructure projects that could help? Build a new market building?

Why not carve out some of the budget for schools (mainly by slashing wasteful staff at the national and provincial levels) to enhance local productivity initiatives?

Why not help establish a greater emphasis on cooperatives for farmers in an area? I don't know if that would work here in Thailand, but I saw it work very well in rural Indonesia

 

There are several successful rural anti-poverty programs that have been implemented across rural Asia (I worked with several) that could be adapted to Thai needs; why not import experts in rural development from other ASEAN countries?

 

Respectfully, I don't think Thai farmers/rural dwellers are much different from rural dwellers in other Asian countries; I think that the problem is mainly one of will and desire for change.

 

I'd love to hear from members who live in rural areas (I do not); if you were given a mandate and some money for development in your area(s), what would you do?

 

Cheers

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

[robblok]

I don't get it all those people here complaining something is done for the farmers. Its as if they worry that the money will buy votes. Though its often those same people who say the election promises and vote buying of the PTP has no impact.

 

So what is there to worry the farmers get some improvement and they won't vote army anyway (following the logic always displayed here about vote buying)

 

 

 

[robblok]

24 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

There are some interesting comments from the posters above.

 

The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Notwithstanding the above, I do think there is a great deal of room for government(s) at all levels to assist the rural poor. And I should note that the program noted in the story above bears no resemblance to any anti-poverty program I have seen; it smells like a slush fund to buy votes and spread out some cash to government employees in return for their attempts at rigging a vote and nothing more. 

 

Why not try a 'one tambon/one tractor program? Is it not possible to have a tractor that could be used by many farmers? If not, why not?

Why not try to amalgamate a few farms in order to benefit from economies of scale?

Why not have greater infrastructure development? I agree strongly that a good road makes for a large increase in economic efficiency; is there not further infrastructure projects that could help? Build a new market building?

Why not carve out some of the budget for schools (mainly by slashing wasteful staff at the national and provincial levels) to enhance local productivity initiatives?

Why not help establish a greater emphasis on cooperatives for farmers in an area? I don't know if that would work here in Thailand, but I saw it work very well in rural Indonesia

 

There are several successful rural anti-poverty programs that have been implemented across rural Asia (I worked with several) that could be adapted to Thai needs; why not import experts in rural development from other ASEAN countries?

 

Respectfully, I don't think Thai farmers/rural dwellers are much different from rural dwellers in other Asian countries; I think that the problem is mainly one of will and desire for change.

 

I'd love to hear from members who live in rural areas (I do not); if you were given a mandate and some money for development in your area(s), what would you do?

 

Cheers

 

I also feel farmers themselves are responsible for their debt. If you look at all the new cars and pickups also in farming communities then why would other people have to bail them out. 

 

As for cooperatives I have asked myself the same question countless times. But if you look a bit here about all the cheating that goes on on so many levels. How would they find honest people to operate it and let the sharing be done reasonable too. 

 

As for sharing a tractor.. problem is often that all the crops are ready for harvesting around the same time. There might be need for more then one tractor and then who gets use first ect. 

[MyFriend You]

Sounds familiar  -  Yingluck back in town ??

[spidermike007]

4 hours ago, steven100 said:

More good work done by this government to improve economic sustainability within the agricultural sector.

Projects are being implemented continuously which help create jobs and provide much needed income.

Khun Prayut Chan O Cha has always stressed the priority & need to help farmers throughout Thailand and this is just one program. Another program he implemented was the handing out of plots of land to farmers who don't have enough or others who need land.

 

Highly amusing post. Talk about giving credit where credit is not due. The extent to which Little P. has not done anything for the common people of Thailand is astounding. 

[spidermike007]

Wow. This administration doing something that actually benefits the average person? Amazing. Extraordinary. Revolutionary. Beyond belief. 

[robblok]

48 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Wow. This administration doing something that actually benefits the average person? Amazing. Extraordinary. Revolutionary. Beyond belief. 

Nah.. just the same as the PTP.. trying to give som crumbs to the average persons to placate them and stay in power to steal more money from the treasury. 

[jonstarjon]

Must be all pig farms... Make sure there's enough space for the snouts in the the trough..

Edited February 2, 2018 by jonstarjon

[Psimbo]

7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Why are the words "massive, pre-election slush fund" reverberating around my brain? 

'Gov't plans infrastructure projects immediately slammed by Thaigeezers' should have  been the headline.

 

What elections- they look like they are being put back even further as of today. Why not try the glass half full for a change?

 

As for crop diversification what's wrong with that?  Las year I was in an area where the tomatoes were just rotting on the vines as it was not worth picking them for the return they would have made. It's not easy at the bottom of the food chain.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Psimbo

[Eric Loh]

A big question overhang these multi billion Bahts projects. Where are the accountability and transparency. No parliament and no

oppositions to provide the check and balance. No one allow to question and probe the projects because of harsh laws. Blatant corruption by cronies and aligned military men swept aside. Almost like a blank check for the junta. 

[Samui Bodoh]

55 minutes ago, Psimbo said:

'Gov't plans infrastructure projects immediately slammed by Thaigeezers' should have  been the headline.

 

What elections- they look like they are being put back even further as of today. Why not try the glass half full for a change?

 

As for crop diversification what's wrong with that?  Las year I was in an area where the tomatoes were just rotting on the vines as it was not worth picking them for the return they would have made. It's not easy at the bottom of the food chain.

You seem to think that I am against a government infrastructure plan; nothing could be further from the truth (see my second post, not just the first). Unfortunately, when I read this story, I don't see anything that looks good.

 

You mention the elections being put back and that I should see that as a 'glass half full' thing. Sorry, I do not agree. I think the Thai people have a right to select their own leadership through a democratic election rather than have something imposed on them via coup. I guess we will have to disagree.

 

Second, I simply do not see much of a plan. They have ear-marked several billion Baht for 'consultation' (read free lunches) and data collection. There already is a great deal of data on Thai people, the only conclusion that I can see for the collection of more is to include information regarding voting. What do you see different? Why do you think they are planning even more meetings? 

 

I see virtually no specifics or action plan. I have worked with international development projects across Asia for decades and thus have some experience in these matters. I do not see any specifics, deliverables, goals or outcomes. Perhaps you see something that I don't? What will this 'plan' accomplish? And how will you know?

 

Finally, given the egregious track record of Thai governments (all, not just coup ones) regarding accountability, transparency and responsibility in their governance, the logical conclusion based on the newspaper story is that this will be a massive waste of money, the use of government money for holding meetings in order to build political networks, and a slush fund for their supporters.

 

To sum up, I see a giant pile of money to be spent with few or no controls, objectives, accountability or even clear purpose. Based on everything that I have seen in Thai politics over the last few months, I think it'll be used by the Junta to try to influence an election.

 

Respectfully, what do you see different? 

Edited February 2, 2018 by Samui Bodoh

[billd766]

7 hours ago, steven100 said:

More good work done by this government to improve economic sustainability within the agricultural sector.

Projects are being implemented continuously which help create jobs and provide much needed income.

Khun Prayut Chan O Cha has always stressed the priority & need to help farmers throughout Thailand and this is just one program. Another program he implemented was the handing out of plots of land to farmers who don't have enough or others who need land.

 

 

It would be a good idea to make ALL farming land chanote so that the farmers and owners have full legal title to the land.

4 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

There are some interesting comments from the posters above.

 

The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Notwithstanding the above, I do think there is a great deal of room for government(s) at all levels to assist the rural poor. And I should note that the program noted in the story above bears no resemblance to any anti-poverty program I have seen; it smells like a slush fund to buy votes and spread out some cash to government employees in return for their attempts at rigging a vote and nothing more. 

 

Why not try a 'one tambon/one tractor program? Is it not possible to have a tractor that could be used by many farmers? If not, why not?

Why not try to amalgamate a few farms in order to benefit from economies of scale?

Why not have greater infrastructure development? I agree strongly that a good road makes for a large increase in economic efficiency; is there not further infrastructure projects that could help? Build a new market building?

Why not carve out some of the budget for schools (mainly by slashing wasteful staff at the national and provincial levels) to enhance local productivity initiatives?

Why not help establish a greater emphasis on cooperatives for farmers in an area? I don't know if that would work here in Thailand, but I saw it work very well in rural Indonesia

 

There are several successful rural anti-poverty programs that have been implemented across rural Asia (I worked with several) that could be adapted to Thai needs; why not import experts in rural development from other ASEAN countries?

 

Respectfully, I don't think Thai farmers/rural dwellers are much different from rural dwellers in other Asian countries; I think that the problem is mainly one of will and desire for change.

 

I'd love to hear from members who live in rural areas (I do not); if you were given a mandate and some money for development in your area(s), what would you do?

 

Cheers

 

 

quote from your post about rural debt.

 

"The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Perhaps the farmers borrowed during the PTP gravy days of the ridiculous rice scheme and believed that it would go on at that price for every grain of rice forever.

 

To be fair Yingluck did drop the purchase price at one point but quickly put it back when the farmers protested.

 

I live in rural Khampeang Phet  and locally this government has and still is improving the road network. A couple of years ago they dug a load of storage ponds and last year they dug a borehole to ensure year round water. In 2016 we had no government water supply for 6 months and the local fire trucks were out 5 days a week filling everybodies storage ongs. Last year the borehole came on line and for the first time in 6 or 7 years we had water all year round.

 

The main crop out here used to be man saparang (tapioca) as it is fairly hilly and that is easy to grow, sugar cane seems to be coming on now and rice in flat places with access to adequate water supplies.

 

If a budget were availabe here then the biggest problem would still be adequate water supplies so that people could have fish farms or perhaps grow fruit.

 

There are quite a few tractors around here but I can't think of a farmers co-operative anywhere local.

[robblok]

32 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

You seem to think that I am against a government infrastructure plan; nothing could be further from the truth (see my second post, not just the first). Unfortunately, when I read this story, I don't see anything that looks good.

 

You mention the elections being put back and that I should see that as a 'glass half full' thing. Sorry, I do not agree. I think the Thai people have a right to select their own leadership through a democratic election rather than have something imposed on them via coup. I guess we will have to disagree.

 

Second, I simply do not see much of a plan. They have ear-marked several billion Baht for 'consultation' (read free lunches) and data collection. There already is a great deal of data on Thai people, the only conclusion that I can see for the collection of more is to include information regarding voting. What do you see different? Why do you think they are planning even more meetings? 

 

I see virtually no specifics or action plan. I have worked with international development projects across Asia for decades and thus have some experience in these matters. I do not see any specifics, deliverables, goals or outcomes. Perhaps you see something that I don't? What will this 'plan' accomplish? And how will you know?

 

Finally, given the egregious track record of Thai governments (all, not just coup ones) regarding accountability, transparency and responsibility in their governance, the logical conclusion based on the newspaper story is that this will be a massive waste of money, the use of government money for holding meetings in order to build political networks, and a slush fund for their supporters.

 

To sum up, I see a giant pile of money to be spent with few or no controls, objectives, accountability or even clear purpose. Based on everything that I have seen in Thai politics over the last few months, I think it'll be used by the Junta to try to influence an election.

 

Respectfully, what do you see different? 

But Samui Bodoh,

 

I thought that elections could not be bought.. that is at least what the red side always says. The money offered does not influence anyone that is the official line of people on here.. what is different now ? I mean why would this money work but red money not work. 

 

Maybe your worried more about the influence of money then you want to admit. 

 

Other points I agree.. Thai governments have never been good about accountability and transparency. Would be nice if that could change.  

[Samui Bodoh]

29 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

It would be a good idea to make ALL farming land chanote so that the farmers and owners have full legal title to the land.

 

quote from your post about rural debt.

 

"The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Perhaps the farmers borrowed during the PTP gravy days of the ridiculous rice scheme and believed that it would go on at that price for every grain of rice forever.

 

To be fair Yingluck did drop the purchase price at one point but quickly put it back when the farmers protested.

 

I live in rural Khampeang Phet  and locally this government has and still is improving the road network. A couple of years ago they dug a load of storage ponds and last year they dug a borehole to ensure year round water. In 2016 we had no government water supply for 6 months and the local fire trucks were out 5 days a week filling everybodies storage ongs. Last year the borehole came on line and for the first time in 6 or 7 years we had water all year round.

 

The main crop out here used to be man saparang (tapioca) as it is fairly hilly and that is easy to grow, sugar cane seems to be coming on now and rice in flat places with access to adequate water supplies.

 

If a budget were availabe here then the biggest problem would still be adequate water supplies so that people could have fish farms or perhaps grow fruit.

 

There are quite a few tractors around here but I can't think of a farmers co-operative anywhere local.

Hi billd766

 

Thanks for your post; while I lived in rural areas in other Asian countries for many years, I haven't in Thailand and do want to learn a bit more (Koh Samui cannot really be described as 'rural' to my eyes).

 

I'll leave aside the issue of new trucks; you might be right re: the rice scheme (don't know), but as a 'development' purchase I simply don't have sympathy for truck buyers, whatever the reason. If your family is in debt because of the truck, sell it and walk is my view.

 

I find it is interesting that you mention the road network; my own opinion is that it is one of the most important but most underappreciated elements in rural development. 

 

It is good to hear about the water issue. You mentioned that the main crop used to be tapioca but that it is changing to sugar cane. Is there a reason for that? Was that a decision made by locals or based on input from outside? I am getting at the idea of whether there is good Agriculture extension work going on there or not. Any idea? Are outside ideas entering your area?

 

Are there any government-sponsored economic development projects? A new market building? Crop (or other) promotions? Any effort to find new markets for the tapioca and/or sugar cane? Any demonstration gardens for new crops? Is there any effort to introduce some kind of local industry for the off-season?

 

Sorry- lots of questions, but I am curious 

Cheers

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by Samui Bodoh
Lack of coffee

[JAG]

4 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

There are some interesting comments from the posters above.

 

The issue of rural debt is one that I have worked with in other Asian countries, and is one of the trickier issues to face. Ultimately, one has to put the onus on the debtor for the problem, as difficult as that seems to be. If a poor farmer buys a truck that they cannot afford, where is the responsibility on the rest of us to bail them out? Forgive me for being a bit hard-hearted, but...

 

Notwithstanding the above, I do think there is a great deal of room for government(s) at all levels to assist the rural poor. And I should note that the program noted in the story above bears no resemblance to any anti-poverty program I have seen; it smells like a slush fund to buy votes and spread out some cash to government employees in return for their attempts at rigging a vote and nothing more. 

 

Why not try a 'one tambon/one tractor program? Is it not possible to have a tractor that could be used by many farmers? If not, why not?

Why not try to amalgamate a few farms in order to benefit from economies of scale?

Why not have greater infrastructure development? I agree strongly that a good road makes for a large increase in economic efficiency; is there not further infrastructure projects that could help? Build a new market building?

Why not carve out some of the budget for schools (mainly by slashing wasteful staff at the national and provincial levels) to enhance local productivity initiatives?

Why not help establish a greater emphasis on cooperatives for farmers in an area? I don't know if that would work here in Thailand, but I saw it work very well in rural Indonesia

 

There are several successful rural anti-poverty programs that have been implemented across rural Asia (I worked with several) that could be adapted to Thai needs; why not import experts in rural development from other ASEAN countries?

 

Respectfully, I don't think Thai farmers/rural dwellers are much different from rural dwellers in other Asian countries; I think that the problem is mainly one of will and desire for change.

 

I'd love to hear from members who live in rural areas (I do not); if you were given a mandate and some money for development in your area(s), what would you do?

 

Cheers

 

I live in a rural area, some 25 kilometres from Chiang Rai. My wife and her family work two small farms, a total of about 18 Rai, belonging to my father in law and my wife and I respectively. They grow rice and vegetables( for our own consumption and to sell), raise fish to sell and bananas and pineapples.

 

If it were "up to me" then I would wish to establish a nationwide network of genuine cooperative ventures, initially funded with government money, to reduce the production costs ( purchasing seed and fertilizer in bulk) and cutting out many of the dealer's and middle men who keep a disproportionate amount of what money the crops raise. Such a network, governed by and in the interests of the farmers, and not by "people of influence" would perhaps be better able to resist the pressure from the major food processors to cut prices.

 

Dangerous radical stuff I know...

[Samui Bodoh]

15 minutes ago, JAG said:

I live in a rural area, some 25 kilometres from Chiang Rai. My wife and her family work two small farms, a total of about 18 Rai, belonging to my father in law and my wife and I respectively. They grow rice and vegetables( for our own consumption and to sell), raise fish to sell and bananas and pineapples.

 

If it were "up to me" then I would wish to establish a nationwide network of genuine cooperative ventures, initially funded with government money, to reduce the production costs ( purchasing seed and fertilizer in bulk) and cutting out many of the dealer's and middle men who keep a disproportionate amount of what money the crops raise. Such a network, governed by and in the interests of the farmers, and not by "people of influence" would perhaps be better able to resist the pressure from the major food processors to cut prices.

 

Dangerous radical stuff I know...

Radical stuff indeed! 

 

I worked for a while in a province in Eastern Indonesia where the 'middle men' had to hire new agents/representatives for every visit to the area as the locals hated them so much that none would ever make a second visit! However, the locals still got screwed...

 

Eventually Thailand will have to take action to cut down the influence of the proverbial 'persons of influence', but I suspect that (sadly) it is going to take a while. Perhaps there is some bright young thing at university now who will return to the area and act as an honest agent in the future.

 

Yes, I know, but one can dream...

[Srikcir]

11 hours ago, webfact said:

Initially, the projects will be financed by a combined Bt35-million budget from the Agriculture Ministry’s mid-year budget, with the rest coming from other sources.

 

I propose the rest come from the military.

It has all that privately generated funds from it's own resources. What better way to protect the nation than to improve the welfare of its people?

[wayned]

Thai government officials excel at devising Schemes " make plans, especially in a devious way or with intent to do something illegal or wrong".  Isn't that why Yingluck has flown the coup?

[AGareth2]

9 hours ago, steven100 said:

Another program he implemented was the handing out of plots of land to farmers who don't have enough or others who need land.

and where did this land come from?