Reflecting On A Year Flawed By Some Indecision At The Top

[Steve2UK]

[OPINION]

GOOD I PRAISE ... DOUBTFUL I RAISE

Reflecting on a year flawed by some indecision at the top

By Pridiyathorn Devakula

Published on December 28, 2009

TODAY IS THE LAST MONDAY of the year 2009. I, therefore, would like to highlight the government's performance this year as a guide for further improvement in the coming year.

At the time when this government came into power, the political turmoil subsided as the yellow-shirts stopped protesting. The Thai public were at ease for a while until April when there was an Asean Summit at the Royal Cliff Hotel in Pattaya and the red-shirt protestors successfully penetrated the meeting venue. When the protestors started their movement, I thought the authorities would be able to secure the hotel accesses which are not many, while the street leading to them is narrow. Finally, however, the protestors broke through and caused a loss of confidence in the security measures and practices of Thai authorities. Immediately after that incident, the government empowered the military to clear the mob gathering on the streets in Bangkok. The time the military took to do this was only two days. Normally, clearing a protesting mob is much more difficult than blocking protestors meandering down a narrow street. Why did the protestors successfully break into the meeting place?

I was informed that it was simply because the government did not dare to announce the emergency decree and empower the military to block the protestors at the meeting venue.

Only after the situation got out of hand did the prime minister announce an emergency decree empowering the military to take charge of clearing the mobs on various streets. It can be concluded that it was the reluctance of the prime minister in announcing the emergency decree in the first instance that put off effective handling of the protestors in Pattaya.

Later on, when there was another Asean Summit in Cha-am in October, the emergency decree was introduced right from the beginning and the authorities were able to effectively protect the meeting venue.

Even with the successful action at this Asean meeting, uncertainty still exists in security in general as protests against the government have been on and off and could reappear anytime. The public still fears that such protests could one fine day lead to a clash and catastrophe. The government is not supposed to be blamed for this.

However, the government has to admit that talkative ministers and some MP's of the leading party in the government and their provocative manners fuelled the conflict with the protestors and were partly the reason for more protest.

In the social area where the leading party is known to have talent, the public is not aware of what has been happening. They have not heard about the performance of the Ministry of Social and Human Resource Development and of the Ministry of Science. The only programme the public heard about in the labour issue was the Tonkla Archeep project which was not rated as effective at all.

In education, worthy of praise is the introduction of 15 year free education, starting at kindergarten level. However, nothing has been heard about the efforts to solve the quality of teachers and on the liberal choice of books, which created a major setback for education in remote areas, as well as the lack of adequate teaching equipment and materials.

The performance of the Ministry of Health started well with the efficient handling of the type-A (H1N1) flu but was later compromised by the irregularity of medical equipment purchases which is now under investigation.

As for the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, the slowness of the government in handling the issue of health impact assessments for pending projects at Map Ta Phut led finally to the unfortunate suspension of a large number of new investments which severely affected investor confidence in a unprecedented manner.

Foreign affairs seems to be the area where the government is most criticised by the opposition. Let us look at this issue without any prejudice. It can be seen that, without the mishandling of security issues in the first Asean Summit, the outcomes of various international meetings were relatively good. The handling of the Rohingya matter was quite proper and straightforward.

The weak point lay in the personality of the Minister of Foreign Affairs who uttered improper words about neighbouring countries and has not tried to correct the situation or improve his attitude. Worse was that sometimes the prime minister went along with the unfriendly approach and emphasised what the minister had said, which effectively closed the door for the possible change of our position to improve future relationships with neighbours.

In the area of economics, I used to criticise the early task of the government in introducing the first stimulus package as wasteful, since most package were made up of one time expenditure, most of which were not effective stimulants, while the investment project that created jobs was as minimal as Bt7,000 million out of the total package of Bt116,000 million. However, the second stimulus package of Bt1.34 trillion, recently introduced, contains more effective items for stimulation including various government projects that are necessary for the economy and construction projects that create jobs in all parts of the country. If due care is given to prevent corruption in the utilisation of this huge budget, the country should benefit a great deal. The weak point of this government in the economic area seems to be in its inability to put things into practice. First of all, this government engaged in a rice pledging scheme for the second crop at an unnecessary high amount of 6-million tonnes of paddy. This has reduced the amount of rice available for private exporters and led to the reduction of rice exports as compared to last year, even though the world wants to buy more. The government was not able to sell much white rice processed from the pledged rice due to internal conflict and the indecisiveness of the leader. At this moment, the total remaining white rice in state agencies' stocks is more than 6 million tonnes, the equivalent of 11-12 million tonnes of paddy, the highest ever accumulated by state agencies in history. I simply hope that the said stocks would not be kept too long and become rotten as occurred when an ex-leader of the Democrat Party was Minister of Commerce and reluctant to sell the then pledged stock with a value of Bt 7,000 million until all stock became useless and had to be destroyed.

Another matter resulting from the reluctance in decision-making is the 3-G telecommunication system which is still pending, even though we are now far behind our neighbours.

The problem which had the worst effect on the economy and resulted from the slowness and indecisiveness of the leader was the issue of a health impact assessment for big industries in Map Ta Phut. I wrote in this column many times proposing necessary action for the government but, unfortunately, no such action was taken.

In November, when the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment proposed the health impact assessment criteria and procedure for Cabinet's endorsement before announcing implementation of the required assessment, the prime minister froze the issue and in turn appointed a new committee to draft another regulation on health impact assessments.

In the world of democracy, people and parliament have entrusted and empowered the prime minister to run the country and to solve its problems. It was surprising to see the PM not daring to exercise such power and in turn delegate it to another group.

It seems to me that he does not want to tackle the situation, which confirms many beliefs that he is indecisive. This indecisiveness has caused a delay in many important issues explained above.

Last time when the Democrat Party was a leading party in the government, they were remembered as Chor Chor Chor government. I very much hope that, this time, they do not end up as Or Or Or government.

Until next Monday.

-- The Nation December 28, 2009

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2009/12/28...on_30119314.php

[Steve2UK]

Some thoughts about this piece - which is IMO about as fair/balanced as any single article can be (and each of us will presumably feel that something significant was left out or over/underplayed).....

Interesting to see the comment about reluctance/delay in issuing an "emergency decree" at the Pattaya ASEAN summit (maybe failure to have the necessary approvals in place?). From pictures at the time, there seemed to be no shortage of readied troops on the scene (not to mention the "Blues") - but they did appear to cave in without much that much effort from the protesters. Not the right troops? No clear orders about how much resistance/force they could employ?

Particularly now that we're looking at a year of this government, the question of "what they have achieved" naturally comes to the fore. Those who say "nothing except survive 8 months longer than predicted" are missing the point - there have been good things done..... but I suspect we English-speaking "guests" are not alone in thinking that they have been largely submerged by all the attention paid to conflict issues.

The criticism relating to foreign affairs (i.e. aimed squarely at Kasit - but noting "that sometimes the prime minister went along with the unfriendly approach and emphasised what the minister had said") seems apposite. It being a hobby-horse of mine, I still find it hard to agree with the writer's IMO sweeping comment that "The handling of the Rohingya matter was quite proper and straightforward". Hands up anyone who thinks that ISOC's mistreatment of the Rohingya (which happened largely pre-Abhisit tenure and following a policy initiated under Samak) was anything like properly investigated and followed up to hold those responsible to account. Credit to Abhisit for putting a stop to it - but, in terms of investigating, acknowledging and responding to what had been going on, "whitewash" seems closer to the mark.

[animatic]

Khun Devakula is one of the better Thai minds for sure,

and a good reason to NOT stop reading The Nation.

I don't always like his conclusions,

but I like how he formulates his arguments and presents them.

Yes, a even handed and well considered article looking back.

And I suspect one thought about by many in the coming few months.

[absolutelyBangkok]

Khun Devakula is one of the better Thai minds for sure,

and a good reason to NOT stop reading The Nation.

I don't always like his conclusions,

but I like how he formulates his arguments and presents them.

Yes, a even handed and well considered article looking back.

And I suspect one thought about by many in the coming few months.

Just wanted to say the opposite. Seeing the authors name I'm scared to continue reading.

He was one of the most vocal voices praising the arrest of the internet rumor mongers, remember.

Whereas his son Khun Pluem is not without merit.

Nah, not the dad.

[absolutelyBangkok]

Oh, and the author's take on the Rohingya:

"The handling of the Rohingya matter was quite proper and straightforward."

Thanks to Dan Rivers' CNN report the world knew what really happened out there at sea.

I don't know, but such ultra-rightist people like the author praised above don't move the nation forward, on the contrary.

[Samuian]

Khun Devakula is one of the better Thai minds for sure,

and a good reason to NOT stop reading The Nation.

I don't always like his conclusions,

but I like how he formulates his arguments and presents them.

Yes, a even handed and well considered article looking back.

And I suspect one thought about by many in the coming few months.

Just wanted to say the opposite. Seeing the authors name I'm scared to continue reading.

Whereas his son Khun Pluem is not without merit.

Nah, not the dad.

Excerpt from above post:

"He was one of the most vocal voices praising the arrest of the internet rumor mongers, remember.

"

Agreed!

Rather deep roots ...

From 1971 to 1990 he worked for the Thai Farmers Bank, becoming Senior Executive Vice President. In 1990 he became official spokesman for Prime Minister Chatichai Choonhavan.

In the governments of Anand Panyarachun and Suchinda Kraprayoon (1991-92) he was Deputy Minister of Commerce.

He was appointed member of the Thai Senate from 1992 to 1993. In 1993 he became president of the Export-Import Bank of Thailand, and in May 2001 he was appointed Governor of the Bank of Thailand, the nation's central bank.

He is also a Director of the Civil Service Commission and of the Thammasat University Council.

........................

Two days after the coup which deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, the Bangkok newspaper The Nation reported:

"Business leaders have called for the Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy to pick Bank of Thailand (BOT) Governor MR Pridiyathorn Devakula to serve as interim prime minister. Pridiyathorn has emerged as the front runner for the premiership,

.........................................

"Bangkok Bank chairman Chatri Sophonpanich said yesterday he supported Pridiyathorn becoming the new premier. He said the new prime minister would be well received by Thais and foreigners alike if he or she had a background in economics, and that Pridiyathorn fit the criteria."[4]

Surayud Chulanont was eventually named prime minister, but he in turn named Pridiyathorn to his Cabinet as Minister of Finance, a move that business leaders saw as positive.

.............................................................

Pridiyathorn's policies as Minister of Finance included,

* Fiscal deficits. A budget deficit of 147 billion Baht for fiscal year 2007. This was the first budget deficit since 2003.[7] Fiscal deficits were also expected for 2008.[8]

...................

He introduced Capital controls. Pridiyathorn instituted capital controls to attempt to reverse a strengthening of the baht, but reversed the measure after the Thai stock market crashed, destroying US$20 billion of market value in one day.

..................

He came under harsh criticism. Bratin Sanyal, head of Asian equity investments at ING in Hong Kong noted, "The one thing worse than an incompetent central bank is an incompetent central bank that flip-flops." Catherine Tan, head of Asia Emerging Markets at Forecast in Singapore, noted, "They are proving themselves to be very unprofessional. Their actions are very irresponsible. They have totally lost credibility... I don't see foreigners returning to Thailand any time in the near future. Markets now have no confidence in the government."[11] The Export-Import Bank of Thailand also criticized the capital controls.

........

Limiting foreign companies investing in List I and II businesses (including media, telecoms, and aviation) from holding more than 50% of shares. List III businesses (including retailers and hotels) were exempted from the new restrictions. Investors holding more than 50% would be forced to lower their stakes within a year. Investors holding more than 50% of voting rights would be forced to lower their voting stakes within a year....

.....Finance Minister Pridiyathorn noted, "If they (foreign investors) had seen the details (of the foreign investment law), I am sure that they would be happy."[13][14] He later backtracked, and said that telecommunications firms would be exempt from the new regulations. He claimed that he had misspoken when he earlier included the telecommunications business into the categories to be affected by the law amendments.[15]

..........................

Corruption investigations into Thaksin Shinawatra. Pridiyathorn sparked controversity in his dealings with Jaruvan Maintaka of the junta-appointed Assets Examination Committee. Jaruvan accused Thaksin's wife of inappropriately buying a plot of land from the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF) while Pridiyathorn was FIDF Chairman. Pridiyathorn guaranteed that the purchase was legal and refused to file charges, claiming that the FIDF was not a damaged party. Jaruvan then claimed that Pridiyathorn violated the law by sitting on the boards of more than three state enterprises.

he opposed Thakisn's wish to establish the Suvannbhum Province....

Pridyathorn has been Governor of the BOT 2001 - 2006

and not to forget:

everyone has a reason on taking a stance .... and so certainly him!

Who were the players behind the Pattaya incident?

Why did Abhisit then insist on Pratheep against massive resistance, as the new national police chief?

Any clues anyone?

wasn't the whole "political-machine" fine tuned to serve someone's dreams, doesn't this has to be all broken up and reshuffled?

Is it all about business, imagine Ben S. Bernake or Alan G. become President of the USA!?

Certainly not without some blemish this gentleman...

and.... as usal:

Wealth

Despite working in the civil service for over 25 years, Pridiyathorn is tremendously wealthy. Disclosures to the National Counter Corruption Commission revealed that 30 days after leaving his Cabinet position in March 2007, Pridiyathorn had 730 million baht in assets.......

TiT!

Thaksin was Mr.Glitter compared to Mr.Chuan who was Nicknamed by his opponents Mr.Ditherer, but then, maybe slow but safe and sure then flying in a private jet into the neighboring country to stir up some incredible cheap soap opera to rattle this countries and it's governments foundations to it's core - all this country and it's government needs is some strong support and creative criticism - not stuff like this from people who have some skeletons in their very own attic!

but then again.... TiT!

All quotes about Mr.Pridiathorn Devakul from: Wikipedia

[jayboy]

Khun Devakula is one of the better Thai minds for sure,

In the sense that Pee Wee Herman is one of the better American minds (for sure). I see what you mean.