Ex-pm Chuan: Impossible To Be Premier Again

[george]

Ex-PM Chuan: Impossible to be premier again

BANGKOK: -- Opposition Democrat Party chief advisor Chuna Leekpai said Friday that he believed it is impossible for him to return asThailand's prime minister for a third time, saying the present situation was totally different from the past regarding the possiblity of new parties regrouping to form a government.

Mr. Chuan, who was prime minister from September 1992 to May 1995, and November 1997 to February 2001, said he did not believe the Democrats could have an opportunity to form the next coalition because most coalition parties agreed to support the Puea Thai Party, the new party set up recently to absorb People Power MPs, as core party to form a new government.

He added that Thailand's uses a political party system which required the party leader to become the prime minister.

Mr. Chuan also said the political situation at the moment was different from that in 1997 when the Democrats at that time had two MPs less than the New Aspiration Party and could at that time easily invite other parties to form the government.

At the moment the number of Democrat MPs is far behind that of the People Power Party (PPP) Despite having friends in PPP who might want to rearrange the party in a coalition government, it is only a group and not a majority, he said.

Mr. Chuan was responding to a proposal that the Democrats lead a coalition government with himself as prime minister.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said he agreed with the cabinet decision to cancel the plan to ask Parliament to convene extra-ordinary session on Monday and Tuesday (December 8-9) to give the members of parliament more time to review their decision about the future political life of the country.

He said he thought the better time for Parliament to choose a new prime minister should be in mid-December.

Mr. Chuan believed all politicians would listen to the voters and tried their best to avoid renewed political turmoil.

Meanwhile, Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban said he believed there would be a clearer picture of the new government in the next several days and he hinted without elaboration that the people would be satisfied with the future government.

-- TNA 2008-12-05

[samgrowth]

No offence. I think he is too old.

[Theyreallrubbish]

He's the least corrupt of the major party leaders.

He's a technocrat who is not anti-farang and not a demagogue who whips up the masses.

I was delighted when I heard he was in the running to be PM.

[plachon]

He's the least corrupt of the major party leaders.

He's a technocrat who is not anti-farang and not a demagogue who whips up the masses.

I was delighted when I heard he was in the running to be PM.

Except he's not a party leader. He's also got less going for him than Abhisit in terms of vision and potential ability to steer Thailand out of troubled waters, if only the public up-country could give Abhisit a chance to prove himself. However, at this stage Abhisit still seems hesitant about stepping up to the plate, which may be a wise move or it may be his undoing. Only time will tell, but Chuan is definitely not in any serious contention for the job - just wishful thinking on someone's part.

[Bengt]

He's the least corrupt of the major party leaders.

He's a technocrat who is not anti-farang and not a demagogue who whips up the masses.

I was delighted when I heard he was in the running to be PM.

Except he's not a party leader. He's also got less going for him than Abhisit in terms of vision and potential ability to steer Thailand out of troubled waters, if only the public up-country could give Abhisit a chance to prove himself. However, at this stage Abhisit still seems hesitant about stepping up to the plate, which may be a wise move or it may be his undoing. Only time will tell, but Chuan is definitely not in any serious contention for the job - just wishful thinking on someone's part.

At least, he is one of a good leader that Thailand has today. Other political parties especially from last coalition government have no one who can be a good leader because all are corrupt and concern about their interest rather than people interest.

[hammered]

At this point in time nobody can be ruled out as next PM. If it could actually help the country and the PPP or part thereof wanted Chuan as PM rather than Abhisit it would be disingeneous of the Dems to not change their litle internal rules to allow the country to move forward.

I persoanlly doubt Chuan can get it. His strengths considering it from a divided parliament kinda way are that he is old and so no threat to anyone. He is known to be fair. He gave evidence in the land deal case that actually was very favourable for Thaksin. He has done it before and so isnt on an ego trip. He knows all the players and their families.

Now you have Snoh and Chetta lining up rival small party bids now that Banharn is neutered. Chalerm is dreaming into his whisky glass. Chai Chidchob actually looks a reasonably sane choice. When you start looking at it like that you can see why Chuan would be mooted by some outside his own party. Unliekly to happen although oddly enough it may actually be a good choice.

[NanLaew]

if only the public up-country could give Abhisit a chance to prove himself. However, at this stage Abhisit still seems hesitant about stepping up to the plate,

Exactly, a vacillation-in-waiting. Maybe the dumb isaan masses can see the correlation between weak-willed political indecision and graft easier than you or I?

[jayjayjayjay]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

It might surprise a few like Hammered and H90 that I take this view, but I have no problem with a government that consists of a majority or acceptable minority of MP's as long as the parliment can function for the benefit of the voters. It may be a weak government, I believe there would be far more dirty deals done under this type of arrangement than with an existing majority led PPP.

None of the posters here are closely linked with the polical process, so much of what is said is heresay. I look at the reality. If the people have chosen PPP, then they have a right to rule. If they chose to allow a Democrate gov to lead with a mix of coalition and can make it work, then that is best for all, BUT expect some surprises, Pojamarn's return last night being the first of many to come. All politicians are ulitmately alike, you think Suthep Thuangsuban is a skweeky clean Mr Chuan type, forget it, he's dirtier than most of the existing PPP MP's!

Edited December 6, 2008 by jayjayjayjay

[h90]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

What is exactly wrong with that constitution?

(Actually there are several points I don't like in this constitution but would like to know which points you don't like).

[jayjayjayjay]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

What is exactly wrong with that constitution?

(Actually there are several points I don't like in this constitution but would like to know which points you don't like).

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation, that is a military constitution, starts and finishes there.

[Plus]

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation

Every constitution is drafted by selected persons, this one is no differen, and the NLA pushed for quite a few revisions, and this consitution was the first one to go through public referendum.

What exactly has to be changed, JJJ? The process or the constitution itself?

[h90]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

What is exactly wrong with that constitution?

(Actually there are several points I don't like in this constitution but would like to know which points you don't like).

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation, that is a military constitution, starts and finishes there.

So the constitution (for which the majority of the population voted YES) is OK, just the writer was the wrong person???

[jayjayjayjay]

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation

Every constitution is drafted by selected persons, this one is no differen, and the NLA pushed for quite a few revisions, and this consitution was the first one to go through public referendum.

What exactly has to be changed, JJJ? The process or the constitution itself?

Tell me in which democratic country, an article in the constitution retroactively absolves a military from any wrong-doing or initiating a coup of a former consitution. This is to say the people have no chance ever to pass judgement on whether the military coup was justified or not. There for, for the next billion years, a military can step in and take over the country, write up a new constitution and say we did it for your benefit, end of story. Sorry but no accountability, isn't this your main bone with the Taksin days of rule!

Both the process of selection and the constitution needs to be changed before a true democratic election can take place. Without this Thailand is not moveing towards democracy. It will remain a state "effectively" absolute monachy. This is where we are at now, 2007 was the first strong move toward true democracy as a constitutional monarchy. Where to next????

Edited December 6, 2008 by jayjayjayjay

[Plus]

I still don't understand - you want to change the process of selection of constitution drafters or you want to change the constitution?

I do understand you point about the coup makers being excused. If you want to bring them to justice, you need to amend the consitution itself, not just the process.

But what are you going to achieve by trying to bring coup makers to justice? It has absolutely nothing to do with how the country moves forward from now, it doesn't make the current system any more or less democratic. Vast majority of people do not care about the coup anymore and they feel that there are a lot more pressing problems facing the country at the moment than satisfying someone's desire for revenge.

The legality of that move is going to be very questionable and complicated - mainly because the power you want to exercise to amend the constitution comes from the constitution itself - if you declare it void and illegal, you relinquish your own power, too. You can't amend a few selected articles to go after coup makers either - if what they did was legal at that time, you can't retroactively declare it illegal, no courts would accept that.

[jdinasia]

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation

Every constitution is drafted by selected persons, this one is no differen, and the NLA pushed for quite a few revisions, and this consitution was the first one to go through public referendum.

What exactly has to be changed, JJJ? The process or the constitution itself?

Apparently the people's vote is not good enough for jjj

[h90]

The consitution was drafted from selected persons, without public consultation

Every constitution is drafted by selected persons, this one is no differen, and the NLA pushed for quite a few revisions, and this consitution was the first one to go through public referendum.

What exactly has to be changed, JJJ? The process or the constitution itself?

Tell me in which democratic country, an article in the constitution retroactively absolves a military from any wrong-doing or initiating a coup of a former consitution. This is to say the people have no chance ever to pass judgement on whether the military coup was justified or not. There for, for the next billion years, a military can step in and take over the country, write up a new constitution and say we did it for your benefit, end of story. Sorry but no accountability, isn't this your main bone with the Taksin days of rule!

Both the process of selection and the constitution needs to be changed before a true democratic election can take place. Without this Thailand is not moveing towards democracy. It will remain a state "effectively" absolute monachy. This is where we are at now, 2007 was the first strong move toward true democracy as a constitutional monarchy. Where to next????

The point that the military wrote themself in the constitution has nothing to do with the elections, if you change that you can sue the army for the coup but nothing more, so that's a zero argument. And of course if you change that or not the military can make a coup in future. Just if they know that get problems later they won't give the power back to the people like Surajud did. They'll stick to it.

That the majority voted in favour of this constitution is ignored by you? That fact simply makes it democratic as the majority agreed to the constitution.

So again what's wrong with the constitution beside that you can't sue the military for the last coup?

[TAWP]

Both the process of selection and the constitution needs to be changed before a true democratic election can take place. Without this Thailand is not moveing towards democracy. It will remain a state "effectively" absolute monachy. This is where we are at now, 2007 was the first strong move toward true democracy as a constitutional monarchy. Where to next????

Are you saying that a monarchy cannot be a true democracy? And then you say that [the election of 2007?] was the first strong move towards...well, cannot the constitution be thanked for some of it? Or do you base this only on the fact that someone you liked came back into power?

A notice: If I could write the constitution for this sunny nation it would be much different, but alas, I cannot.

[hammered]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

It might surprise a few like Hammered and H90 that I take this view, but I have no problem with a government that consists of a majority or acceptable minority of MP's as long as the parliment can function for the benefit of the voters. It may be a weak government, I believe there would be far more dirty deals done under this type of arrangement than with an existing majority led PPP.

None of the posters here are closely linked with the polical process, so much of what is said is heresay. I look at the reality. If the people have chosen PPP, then they have a right to rule. If they chose to allow a Democrate gov to lead with a mix of coalition and can make it work, then that is best for all, BUT expect some surprises, Pojamarn's return last night being the first of many to come. All politicians are ulitmately alike, you think Suthep Thuangsuban is a skweeky clean Mr Chuan type, forget it, he's dirtier than most of the existing PPP MP's!

I personally wouldnt disagree with most of that. As long as things are broadly done in the interests of the country/people and not overly self serving we should see progress. It doesnt matter who exactly ends up in government as long as the parliament OKs it. I doubt anyone disagrees with changing the consitution it is just a matter of how. lets also not forget that the first person to consider an amnesty was gen Sonthi the day after TRT was banned and the 111 created. Since then even the PPP hasnt suggested anything as radical as that. It is strange that sometimes seemingly opponents can actually go further and get things done easier than allies. I do wonder if the Dems (and it must remain a big if) get to power if that part of the deal will involve them doing what PPP could never easily get away with

[Gravelrash]

I see no problem with a Democrate led government, but what it should do is immedieately clear the way for a NON-military constitution be constructed. It is disgusting this country is operating under a constitution of selected military writers. How could anyone believe that Thailand is progressing towards a better democracy under the 2007 constitution. The people that should be kept furtherest away from this are PAD and their hord of terrorists.

What is exactly wrong with that constitution?

(Actually there are several points I don't like in this constitution but would like to know which points you don't like).

I think it is a lovely constitution, wish the army back home would draw one up for us too.

[Gravelrash]

Both the process of selection and the constitution needs to be changed before a true democratic election can take place. Without this Thailand is not moveing towards democracy. It will remain a state "effectively" absolute monachy. This is where we are at now, 2007 was the first strong move toward true democracy as a constitutional monarchy. Where to next????

Are you saying that a monarchy cannot be a true democracy? And then you say that [the election of 2007?] was the first strong move towards...well, cannot the constitution be thanked for some of it? Or do you base this only on the fact that someone you liked came back into power?

A notice: If I could write the constitution for this sunny nation it would be much different, but alas, I cannot.

Now hang on, how can any monarchy be a true democracy? They are completely different forms of government. A constitutional monarchy as in Britain is a different matter of course.

Listening to your comments of late perhaps just as well that you don't get to draw up a constitution.

[Old Man River]

For those interested, Tulsie is blogging about ongoing meetings (or, actually, meetings that are not yet ongoing).

http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/12/06/hea...es_30090182.php

[Old Man River]

They are starting to line up now. Some of Newin's faction are at the Dem's meeting at the Sukhothai saying that Newin's 37 are backing the Dem's, while the Pracharj and Puea Pandin parties are at the Puea Thai's meeting saying they are staying with the PPP's new party.

[Old Man River]

Chart Thai just turned up at the Dem's meeting. By the end of the day we should have a good idea of whether the Dem's will have enough to put together a coalition. If they do, expect the Puea Thai to dissolve parliament soon thereafter.

[marshbags]

Chart Thai just turned up at the Dem's meeting. By the end of the day we should have a good idea of whether the Dem's will have enough to put together a coalition. If they do, expect the Puea Thai to dissolve parliament soon thereafter.

Go to thr ref url for the latest breaking news for several updates relating to support for the Democrats

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/

For anyone who has a wife or someone who can translate Thai for those who like me cannot it,s on the Thai news channel 20 ( on my cable network ) live re the meeting.

marshbags

P.S. At 18.59

They have just announced that 5 parties are wanting to join the democrats in a new coalition alternative.

If it comes to pass then it,s got to be good news for Thailand, IMHO

At the very least it has to be given a chance surely ???????

Edited December 6, 2008 by marshbags

[h90]

Chart Thai just turned up at the Dem's meeting. By the end of the day we should have a good idea of whether the Dem's will have enough to put together a coalition. If they do, expect the Puea Thai to dissolve parliament soon thereafter.

Thanks for pointing that out.....

I didn't think for that.

[TAWP]

Both the process of selection and the constitution needs to be changed before a true democratic election can take place. Without this Thailand is not moveing towards democracy. It will remain a state "effectively" absolute monachy. This is where we are at now, 2007 was the first strong move toward true democracy as a constitutional monarchy. Where to next????

Are you saying that a monarchy cannot be a true democracy? And then you say that [the election of 2007?] was the first strong move towards...well, cannot the constitution be thanked for some of it? Or do you base this only on the fact that someone you liked came back into power?

A notice: If I could write the constitution for this sunny nation it would be much different, but alas, I cannot.

Now hang on, how can any monarchy be a true democracy? They are completely different forms of government. A constitutional monarchy as in Britain is a different matter of course.

Listening to your comments of late perhaps just as well that you don't get to draw up a constitution.

Nice try.

But you answer your own question in the post. Go back and read it and you might not have to flame others.

[marshbags]

ref. url http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=135192

B.post BREAKING NEWS >> Saturday December 06, 2008 19:06

Democrats, former coalition parties to form govt

(BangkokPost.com) - The Friends of Newin Chidchob faction together with the court-dissolved Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya parties changed their political polarity by joining hands with the Democrat party to set up a new government

Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thuagsuban together with core members of the Friends of Newin faction and Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya parties held a press conference on Saturday evening.

Go to the above url for the breif announcement.

JDI has opened a new thread on this and i,ve posted this on there also for reference in case of duplicity of this important news development

Democrats To Attempt To Form New Coalition Government, on Thai news now

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Democrats-At...29#entry2388529

marshbags

Edited December 6, 2008 by marshbags

[Danton]

ref. url http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=135192

B.post BREAKING NEWS >> Saturday December 06, 2008 19:06

Democrats, former coalition parties to form govt

(BangkokPost.com) - The Friends of Newin Chidchob faction together with the court-dissolved Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya parties changed their political polarity by joining hands with the Democrat party to set up a new government

Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thuagsuban together with core members of the Friends of Newin faction and Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya parties held a press conference on Saturday evening.

Go to the above url for the breif announcement.

JDI has opened a new thread on this and i,ve posted this on there also for reference in case of duplicity of this important news development

Democrats To Attempt To Form New Coalition Government, on Thai news now

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Democrats-At...29#entry2388529

marshbags

Ain't never gonna happen.