Scrutiny committee bans entertainment activities during election campaign

[webfact]

Scrutiny committee bans entertainment activities during election campaign

By Thai PBS

 

 

The tri-partite scrutiny committee on Monday (Feb 19) resolved unanimously by nine votes against nil to restore the original provision of the election of MPs bill which bans the holding of entertainment activities during the election campaign period.

 

Election Commission chairman Supachai Somcharoen said the scrutiny committee headed by Mr Wittaya Piewpong agreed unanimously rejected the amended MP election bill allowing entertainment activities to be held during electioneering and restored the original provision that bans entertainment activities which was proposed from the beginning by the Constitution Drafting Committee.

 

The scrutiny committee also agreed to review some details of Section 35 of the MP election bill regarding the withdrawal of the rights of eligible voters who do not exercise their voting rights.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/scrutiny-committee-bans-entertainment-activities-election-campaign/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2018-02-20

[cornishcarlos]

So no campaigning until we say you can. Then only miserable campaigning !!!

 

Come on Junta, let the people Partaaaay :) 

[darksidedog]

I would like to know what exactly constitutes "entertainment." Does that mean, no singing, no dancing, no music etc? Tourists are going to have a fairly miserable time if so, and they cant even vote.

[canuckamuck]

You can't have a party at the election campaign that we aren't going to have.

[Samui Bodoh]

The only conclusion that I can draw is that no entertainers were willing to perform for the Junta party.

 

Just like Trump...

[webfact]

MP bill committee bans election campaign entertainment

By The Nation

 

THE JOINT committee reviewing the contentious MP election bill agreed unanimously in its first meeting to ban any form of entertainment during election campaigns.

 

The development was announced yesterday by Supachai Somcharoen, head of the Election Commission (EC) and a member of the joint law-review committee.

 

The committee remained uncertain about whether to adjust a clause that would bar anyone who failed to exercise their voting rights from becoming a political office holder, he said. 

 

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) previously had overturned the original draft written by the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) and allowed entertainment in campaigning, on the grounds that amusement could encourage political participation.

 

However, the CDC viewed the provision as increasing the odds of vote buying.

 

The clause is one of several that have been fiercely debated by the NLA, CDC and EC. Their disagreement led to the establishment of the joint committee to review the bill despite its passage by the NLA in three readings.

 

Supachai said the committee would meet again today to discuss other controversial clauses. 

 

The NLA appeared to have no problem with the latest revision, he said, adding that members were willing to listen to the CDC’s reasons.

 

While disagreement over the bill appeared to indicate conflict among legislators, Supachai said the NLA, CDC and the EC remained in “harmony” and were rational in their deliberations.

 

The joint committee reportedly will convene every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. They have until the end of the month to complete the revisions before presenting them to the NLA for endorsement.

 

The MP election bill is among the four organic bills necessary for the holding of an election. It is also one of the final two bills the CDC submitted to the NLA. 

 

The other, the Senate selection bill, was equally contentious and is currently being reviewed by another joint committee.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30339237

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-02-20

[tracker1]

Hasn't the election campaign been going for 4 years now ?

[Thailand]

Removing happiness from the Thai people!

[JAG]

Doesn't really look like a chap who "does entertainment" does he?

[canuckamuck]

The Junta is in charge of entertainment and they don't like competition

[Cadbury]

6 minutes ago, webfact said:

"........amusement could encourage political participation".

Voting is a serious matter and laughter and levity cannot and will not be tolerated. Seems that political participation in an election is not wanted or needed. 

This madhouse government is getting even madder, if that is humanly possible.

 

[baansgr]

Every weekend in late 2007 the bars were shut, 

[SABloke]

"Election Commission chairman Supachai Somcharoen said the scrutiny committee headed by Mr Wittaya Piewpong agreed unanimously rejected the amended MP election bill allowing entertainment activities to be held during electioneering and restored the original provision that bans entertainment activities which was proposed from the beginning by the Constitution Drafting Committee."

 

Is that in the scope of the scrutiny committee's ability? Weren't bills supposed to be approved/rejected by the "governement" also know as the NLA. Don't bother - they just make it up as they go along anyway. 

[PatOngo]

The Fun Suppression Squad is watching!

[baboon]

43 minutes ago, JAG said:

Doesn't really look like a chap who "does entertainment" does he?

"Is it safe?"

[quadperfect]

Its all so grim

[yellowboat]

[Hayduke]

So...does this mean no public appearances by Uncle and his jolly little sidekick?

[YetAnother]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

and restored the original provision that bans entertainment activities

what foolishness; does that mean my restaurant cannot play muzak 

does it mean i cannot play golf ?

the intent was to focus on the election and try to herd cats, that being the voting thai public;

yet i cannot vote yet will be penalized as thais will cave into this idiocy

[cornishcarlos]

4 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

does it mean i cannot play golf

 

Golf is not entertainment, it's mental torture.... So yes, you crack on and whack those tiny balls of yours :)

Edited February 20, 2018 by cornishcarlos

[YetAnother]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

scrutiny committee

curious name; do they convene with the Non-Scrutiny Committee ?

[Enoon]

1 hour ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

Golf is not entertainment, it's mental torture.... So yes, you crack on and whack those tiny balls of yours :)

 

A great way to spoil a nice relaxing stroll in the country.

 

Invented by Calvinists.

 

Because you have to work at leisure.

 

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Enoon

[robblok]

IMHO its not what most people think it is

 

In the past it has always been this way that they can't hire singers and other famous persons to campaign for them. So no large music festivals sponsored by political parties to boost their popularity. This is how it has been for a long time. The junta then wanted to change this and this has not been accepted.

 

IMHO I think its a good thing that this has not been accepted, because then you get things like whoever books the most famous singer gets the most votes ect ect.

 

This is NOT about the banning of normal entertainment during elections so does not influence golf.. though I wonder who in their right mind would think it would have included golf. It won't influence the bars either.

 

This is at least what i gather from the previous news releases about this in the Bangkok post. Its about using singers and such to draw people to political gatherings.

 

Do a search and find more info yourself I can't link the bangkok post here. 

 

Entertainment should be banned at political events: EC    (use that search term)

Edited February 20, 2018 by robblok

[madmitch]

Neither article defines what constitutes entertainment and to whom it refers.

 

I would guess, and hope, that it refers to parties hosted by the politicians.

 

Thailand, hub of vague press releases.

 

 

[Golden Triangle]

The only time the bars will be inconvenienced is the weekend that the polling stations actually open, I think that's quite a way off in the distance to be honest.

[DM07]

Oh, what the actual f....

 

They will make it up, as they go along!

Prayuts party holds a rally with "traditional" dances and music: go along and be merry!

UDD holds a rally with look toong music: sorry...no can do! 

Bars will have to close, if the PM sayeth so...

 

Because we see it all over the civilized world: election day is always riot day in Germany, Denmark, USA, UK...oh...wait...yeah, I see..."civilized" was the word!

[transam]

More daft stuff...

[robblok]

2 hours ago, madmitch said:

Neither article defines what constitutes entertainment and to whom it refers.

 

I would guess, and hope, that it refers to parties hosted by the politicians.

 

Thailand, hub of vague press releases.

 

 

as i said in my post.. there is a much better article in the BKK post. Its about using singers and such to attract people to political rallies like giving a free concert followed by a political rally. That is what this is all about. That was banned in the past and is banned again. 

[transam]

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

as i said in my post.. there is a much better article in the BKK post. Its about using singers and such to attract people to political rallies like giving a free concert followed by a political rally. That is what this is all about. That was banned in the past and is banned again. 

Which to me sounds like banning freedom of speech..Folk are either free or they are not..

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

IMHO its not what most people think it is

It's justification to suppress voter interest. That favors a new and/or medium to small political party.

Reread the 2nd article.

 

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) "previously had overturned the original draft written by the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) and allowed entertainment in campaigning, on the grounds that amusement could encourage political participation." 

What's wrong about encouraging voter participation in the electoral process? Is that now the new threat against Thai sovereignty?

 

But "the CDC viewed the provision as increasing the odds of vote buying."

So how many twerks does it take to buy a vote? How many songs? How many expressions of opinions does it take to "buy" a vote? This is the rational being presented for banning entertainment. In fact it's irrational.

Except from the viewpoint of restricting political messages to only those messages expressed by a minority body or political party who has unrestricted access to government resources to broadcast their own messages to the public.