The PM recently suggested that the government be moved to a new location, outside of Bangkok.    In your opinion, do you believe this would be a good move?

 

Please feel free to leave a comment and if you think it's a good move, how do you envision it being implemented.  

 

Moving the capital out of the city would, in the near future, reduce some of the traffic congestion, crime and population of the city, and reduce the chaos caused from the political instabilities as we saw in the past (but haven't seen since the last coup).

It would also be a move that will likely have to be done at some point in the future anyways. Bangkok is not only sinking (by about 2 centimetres per year), water levels are rising. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but it is possible that in our children's lifetimes much of Bangkok could be permanently flooded.

It already has issues with flooding pretty much every rainy season and that isn't going to magically change any time soon. 

I doubt they could build enough dikes to make any difference and the city wasn't built to survive as an Eastern version of Venice. 

Most politicians are not able to see (or plan) for anything that may not happen until after the next election, let alone something that may not happen for another 30-50 years from now (I have no idea as I can't calculate how fast the seas will rise due to the climate change that will happen with or without human involvement. However, it's not hard to figure out that a massive city sinking under it's own weight, built on a river delta next to a rising sea, might soon find itself in dire straights (in more ways than one) !

Making plans now and moving in the near future (say the next 5-10 years) would not only be prudent, but would be far less expensive than waiting until it's too late and you have no choice anymore.
They could spend 10s of billions of baht (or hundreds of billions even) on "stop gap" and poorly planned measures designed to prolong the inevitable, and then have to spend even more when it's gone past the point of being a crisis. 

Sure there will be people who will profit from such a move. Some of them may even be behind the current suggestion.
And those same people (or ones just like them) will be there in the future as well, except that they will be looking at making even more money from an increasingly desperate government, regardless of who is in power at the time.

They should also be thinking about what will happen to the Grand Palace and some other historical sites. Many of them face the same fate in the not too distant future.

Move that capital to Walking Street, Pataya

Answer: It depends

 

What are their goals and what would be the plan? We need some details to answer such a significant question.

 

I have a low opinion of Thailand's ability to build highly functioning, efficient cities.

 

I also have a very low opinion of Thailand's ability to carry out anything as significant as building an entirely new city.

 

The Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Singaporeans, Taiwanese - yes, I have confidence in their abilities.

 

The Thais - no, I doubt they can coordinate and sustain such a large project.

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by Fex Bluse

If the survey had at least another option, I would have selected it

 

Yes, move it out of the city.

No, leave it in the city.

It depends (my comments below).

I don't think I have enough information for an opinion.

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by Fex Bluse

I don't think it's going to be 30 or 50 years till the combination of rising seas and sinking city produce their effects. More like 10-20 years. Which means that planning should be getting under way now, aiming for building to start somewhere north and high in say 10 years.

 

'Planning'? Oh, you mean do some things now that aren't needed for 20 years? Um, no can do.

It worked very well in Malaysia. No reason why it wouldn't work in Thailand. Of course the politicians would not be happy as they would feel removed from the money and power of Bangkok, and the massage parlours. 

When the idea was muted in the 90s being too far from the parlours on Petchaburi Rd was actually given as a reason not to move by a high ranking government officials 

Highly hypothetical question and not doable, the Pm urred a thought that is whimsical at best and will face stiff resistance should he try to put it to action...

Move it at least 100km north by northeast.

Honestly who cares. All they are doing is moving the politics out of the area. Bangkok is still the center of focus for tourists and someone gonna make a ton of baht off of the land acquisitions then on making the new Capital center and then on to the satellite cities that will surround the new capital. What will be the political incentive? Do they get free multi million baht housing to stay in or to buy dirt cheap on zero % loans?

 

Can only be profit associated in this on a big scale for many.

 

Maybe also near or next to or surrounded by a new military base that houses the new armored vehicles? So political stability by close military protection that cannot be touched? What are the real motives?

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by holy cow cm

17 minutes ago, Geordie59 said:

It worked very well in Malaysia.

Also Australia, Khazakstan, Burma and South Africa all benefit from banishing the MP's away from the good life IMHO.

    Bad idea.  If they are moving the government because the city is sinking, the city will still be sinking without the government and the problem will still need to be dealt with.  Instead of moving the government to a new city, government agencies should continue to be moved to the outer suburbs to lessen traffic congestion in the inner city and work-at-home and satellite offices should be part of the plan.  

Yes, because Bangkok does not have much choice but first this decision should be taken by a truly democratically elected government with capable non-corruptible persons. The real question is when will this happen in Thailand ?

Move it somewhere near Bognor Regis and take Nana Plaza and Thermaes with it. Would save a lot of people an airfare

Don't forget to fill out a TM30 form 

Another excuse to fill the overseas bank accounts of the construction lobby.

This is the fourth time they suggested moving the capital. The original capital was in Ayuthaya but it flooded. They moved the capital to Thonburi side of the river but it flooded. so they moved it to the present location. In 2010 they wanted the capital moved to Chaingrai and again now. Probably someone has bought lot of cheap land and wants to make a killing. Amsterdam has never been moved nor has the Hague which is only 1 metre above sea level. All the government needs to do is to complete the KIng Rama IX master plan (JICA), build the Rom River Dam and the super flood way to divert the extra storm flow away from the Chao Phraya River to the sea. The current super drainage tunnels (up to 6m dia) need to be diverted to the sea, not into the Chaophraya in Bangkok which just make the flooding worse by adding to the Chaophraya storm flow.

 

 

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by Estrada

Should the Capital be relocated?

 

How about Beijing? Eventually, they'll be controlling all the governmental decisions...and who better to mentor the Thai politicians on how and where to launder their money?

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by jaltsc

35 minutes ago, Estrada said:

All the government needs to do is to complete the KIng Rama IX master plan (JICA), build the Rom River Dam and the super flood way to divert the extra storm flow away from the Chao Phraya River to the sea. The current super drainage tunnels (up to 6m dia) need to be diverted to the sea, not into the Chaophraya in Bangkok which just make the flooding worse by adding to the Chaophraya storm flow.

Right. And I expect that will work extremely well as the sea rises ...

 

The point of course - for those that think this is just about the politicians - is that it's just about the WHOLE of Bangkok that is going to drown, permanently, over the next 20 or 30 years.

It would certainly remove a lot of crime and corruption from the present city! But only to a new city that would fill the pockets of the pollies.

Waste of time. Within a couple of decades China will just set up an administrative centre in Chiang Mai.

30 minutes ago, Estrada said:

This is the fourth time they suggested moving the capital. The original capital was in Ayuthaya but it flooded. They moved the capital to Thonburi side of the river but it flooded. so they moved it to the present location. In 2010 they wanted the capital moved to Chaingrai and again now. Probably someone has bought lot of cheap land and wants to make a killing. Amsterdam has never been moved nor has the Hague which is only 1 metre above sea level. All the government needs to do is to complete the KIng Rama IX master plan (JICA), build the Rom River Dam and the super flood way to divert the extra storm flow away from the Chao Phraya River to the sea. The current super drainage tunnels (up to 6m dia) need to be diverted to the sea, not into the Chaophraya in Bangkok which just make the flooding worse by adding to the Chaophraya storm flow.

 

 

 

I don’t think flooding risk is actually their main consideration, rather the over reliance, over development & congestion of Bangkok, as well the opportunity to stimulate some economic development elsewhere in the country. 

I had to google the appropriate term which is ‘primate city’, where one city in a country is disproportionately large, rich and influential. As we have all seen in recent years, this state of affairs has led to significant national divides. I support any reasonable move to ‘spread the joy’ around a little. 

Move it to Isaan province. 

The members of this government should be moved to prison, but that's probably not what he had in mind.

 

I say leave the government in Bangkok. Sink with the rest.

Khorat as a first choice , as the politicians can catch the high speed train down to BKK, should they need to go, or use the good airport that is under utilised.

this is so typically Thai.

 

When something becomes unworkable because of their inability to plan and then maintain they abandon.

 

 

 

Move the Thai government to North Korea since the top brass are trying so hard to morph the former Land of Smiles into a Kim Jong-un 'paradise'. 

Edited September 23, 20196 yr by Jimbo in Thailand

Move it to Beijing. That's where all the decisions will soon be made anyway.

1 hour ago, leeneeds said:

Khorat as a first choice , as the politicians can catch the high speed train down to BKK, should they need to go, or use the good airport that is under utilised.

That would be ironic as quite a few people lived/worked for years in BKK and tourism spots, Patts, Samui, Phuket, etc., then moved to Korat to get away from all that.  Doh!

Yes.

Pattaya would be a good choice.