Picture: Screenshot

 

Democratic Party-list MP Phisit Li-atham has requested the auditor-general to review and provide advice on the government's planned digital wallet scheme.

 

The scheme which intends to distribute 10,000 baht in digital currency to nearly 50 million eligible Thai nationals is being questioned due to its potential profound impact on the national economy and financial status. Li-atham, also an ex-finance deputy minister, seeks guidance to ensure the scheme is worth the expenditure. 

 

Meanwhile, National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) Secretary-General Niwatchai Kasemmongkol announced that the commission will need time to analyze the details of the controversial plan.

 

A subcommittee may be instated if more detailed examination is required. Niwatchai affirmed that NACC's role is to scrutinize the integrity of such plans and to launch an investigation if inconsistencies are detected.

 

The Bank of Thailand had advised the government to scale down the proposed 500 billion baht funding to around 150 billion baht.

 

They suggested restricting the beneficiaries to financially disadvantaged individuals, estimating a reduction to about 15 million people. Nevertheless, the government disapproved of this advice, arguing that the cabinet already approved the scheme.

 

-- 2024-04-29

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

How about the government doesn't do that at all. No headache, no corruption (for this one), life just goes on.

 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Democratic Party-list MP Phisit Li-atham has requested the auditor-general to review and provide advice on the government's planned digital wallet scheme

A year later, still talks.

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

A year later, still talks.

I believe that gov't is looking for a way to funnel all funds to CP. If folks are not near a CP outlet, the local loan shark will offer 2,000 or 3,000 cash  for the bribe. Best just dropped. Why no vote buying charges filed?

I don't think anyone wants to be seen to be "legally" approving this scheme because they all know that it is a bad idea, and in the future people will be prosecuted for malfeasance.

 

 

The call for lengthy reviews, and the formation of more committees to "study" this proposal, allows those with authority to slow it down and hopefully it dies a quiet simpering death.

 

 

The "funding" for this proposal seems to change often, and having the BAAC (under the stewardship of Capt. Thamanat) fund a significant portion seems unwise.

 

 

1 hour ago, bamnutsak said:

I don't think anyone wants to be seen to be "legally" approving this scheme because they all know that it is a bad idea, and in the future people will be prosecuted for malfeasance.

 

 

The call for lengthy reviews, and the formation of more committees to "study" this proposal, allows those with authority to slow it down and hopefully it dies a quiet simpering death.

 

 

The "funding" for this proposal seems to change often, and having the BAAC (under the stewardship of Capt. Thamanat) fund a significant portion seems unwise.

 

 

No-one wants to fund what later could be seen as a vote buying scam