Current Thai Govt Gets Lower Score For Credibility Than Thaksin Administration

[webfact]

Govt gets low score for credibility

By The Nation

This government's credibility score is a lot lower than that of Thaksin Shinawatra's administration during its heyday, results of a joint survey conducted by King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) and the National Statistical Office revealed.

In 2004, Thaksin's administration won a 92.9-per-cent credibility rating, compared with the Abhisit Vejjajiva government's score of 61.6 per cent this year, Thawilwadee Bureekul, director of the KPI's research and development department, said yesterday.

The post-coup government of General Surayud Chulanont won a confidence rating of 45.2 per cent, compared with 37.6 per cent for the administrations led by Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat.

The survey, conducted between 2003 and this year, polled about 30,000 respondents per year. The survey focused on people's confidence in different institutions and their satisfaction with state services.

Thaksin's government covered 2003 to 2006, Surayud's was in 2007, Somchai's in 2008 and Abhisit's since 2009.

In addition to the administrative branch, the legislature and the judiciary suffered a decline in credibility.

In 2005, the confidence in MPs was higher than that of senators, but in 2007 senators were considered more credible. This year, confidence in senators stood at 46.4 per cent, compared with 43.9 per cent for MPs.

Confidence in courts has also been on a decline. In 2004, they were considered most credible - 86.7 per cent for the Courts of Law, 84.9 per cent of the Constitution Court and 83.1 per cent for the Administrative Court. However, this year's survey revealed that their credibility was at its lowest - 71.3 per cent for the Courts of Law, 67.3 per cent for the Administrative Court and 65.1 per cent for the Constitution Court.

The military enjoyed the highest confidence rating of 84.8 per cent in 2004 and 2005 under Thaksin's government. However, its credibility dropped to 61.8 per cent in 2007 after the September 2006 coup, but rose to 76.3 per cent last year and then dropped again to 67.8 per cent this year after the April-May crackdown.

The police force has also suffered a decline in credibility - from its highest of 69.2 per cent in 2005 to 54.9 per cent this year. The integrity of political institutions dropped to 26.1 per cent in 2007 and stood at 36.9 per cent this year, the survey found.

The credibility of independent organisations also dropped from its highest ranking achieved in 2004 and 2005. Public confidence towards the Election Commission dropped from 69.9 per cent in 2005 to 56 per cent this year. The National Anti-Corruption Commission's credibility rating dropped from 77.2 per cent in 2004 to 52.1 per cent this year, while the confidence score in the State Audit Commission plummeted from 77.5 per cent in 2004 to 46.8 per cent this year.

The news media are also losing credibility according to the survey. Television, which is considered the most credible, suffered a drop from 84.9 per cent in 2004 to 66.4 per cent. Community radio, which is often used as a propaganda tool by rival political groups, got the lowest credibility score of 40.3 per cent.

-- The Nation 2010-12-25

[animatic]

Of course WHERE they find those 30,000 respondents.

And HOW you phrase the questions to them.

And HOW you phrase the global questions and answers from 'reading the data'

And WHEN you ask the questions.

And most of all WHO interprets the data to fit.

As the bard said " there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

Edited December 25, 2010 by animatic

[ginjag]

Of course WHERE they find those 30,000 respondents.

And HOW you phrase the questions to them.

And HOW you phrase the global questions and answers from 'reading the data'

And WHEN you ask the questions.

And most of all WHO interprets the data to fit.

As the bard said " there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

Sound a bit fishy-these statistics, I have a feeling they,re from a Thaksin fan, Who on earth get paid for releasing these figures.

[animatic]

Of course WHERE they find those 30,000 respondents.

And HOW you phrase the questions to them.

And HOW you phrase the global questions and answers from 'reading the data'

And WHEN you ask the questions.

And most of all WHO interprets the data to fit.

As the bard said " there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

Sound a bit fishy-these statistics, I have a feeling they,re from a Thaksin fan, Who on earth get paid for releasing these figures.

Oh yeah, Thaksin's handling of the War On Drugs, Bird Flue and the Tsunami Aid disbursement, and loans to Myanmar for Telecom purchases from his own companies certainly were high points for his government credibility in 2004-5

Where is that pesky Irony Icon I always look for...?

Edited December 25, 2010 by animatic

[prefabs]

Of course WHERE they find those 30,000 respondents.

And HOW you phrase the questions to them.

And HOW you phrase the global questions and answers from 'reading the data'

And WHEN you ask the questions.

And most of all WHO interprets the data to fit.

As the bard said " there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

Sound a bit fishy-these statistics, I have a feeling they,re from a Thaksin fan, Who on earth get paid for releasing these figures.

Jingthing could start a poll on this. He hasn't had a poll for a while now. He is the ThaiVisa resident poll expert

[RedNIvar]

It seems many are questioning the low scores that both Samak and Somchai's administration received. Appalling!

[slapout]

Just for sake of argument. Maybe the figures are indicating a progressively more informed population over the past 7 years or so. Is it possible that the media is bringing more wrong doing to the attention of the general public? How many of today's government officials were/are influenced by the Thaksin cohorts/partners in crime? How much are this latter group pulling down the present government ratings?

Surveys in Thailand seem to have about as much credence as some of the official statements, made by various officials. This probably should not be surprising as those officials are for the most part a product of thes institutions who make the surveys.

[Emptyset]

Just for sake of argument. Maybe the figures are indicating a progressively more informed population over the past 7 years or so. Is it possible that the media is bringing more wrong doing to the attention of the general public? How many of today's government officials were/are influenced by the Thaksin cohorts/partners in crime? How much are this latter group pulling down the present government ratings?

Surveys in Thailand seem to have about as much credence as some of the official statements, made by various officials. This probably should not be surprising as those officials are for the most part a product of thes institutions who make the surveys.

Or maybe your perceptions are coloured. My partner hates Thaksin and the red shirts now, but thought highly of him when he was in power, especially around the 2005 point. It started to go downhill in 2006 in terms of most people's perceptions of him, which is reflected in this poll. Don't forget many Thais, even "educated" middle class types don't even follow politics as closely as some of the people here do. The way they perceive things might be different to what you'd expect. It also depends which media you read. The Nation was one of the first papers to become totally anti-Thaksin, so perhaps people reading it were wise to his tricks earlier, although sometimes he might've been maligned unfairly too (I'm not saying this is true, just an example). Obviously news pieces should try to be unbiased but there's always a slant to what they report and how they report it.

I'm not sure what Animatic is talking about, Thaksin's war on drugs & handling of the Tsunami are praised today even by people that hate him now. I think a poll showed 97% of Thais supported the war on drugs at the time? Of course, they were completely wrong. I'd guess it's partly down to different values and partly down to the fact that they were misled by propaganda from the government & their media mouthpieces like Sondhi.

[jayjay0]

Just a matter of perspective.

At that time the truth was not known about Thaksin. After it was revealed his creditability sank. Witness the creditability of his next two appointees.

Abhist has done a remarkable job bringing creditability back to the government. Stop and consider he has done it with active opposition from the Pheu Thai and there militant arm dressed in red shirts.

He still has a long ways to go but all told he is on the right path.

Before any one says what about this or what about that there is a good chance you are rite. Think about it how low the previous administrations must have been.

[Joel Barlow]

If not fear, exactly, might it not be a question of "kraing-jai"?

People felt Taksin made his own money and way in the world (an opinion I'm not seconding), and respected that. But they fear Apisit is somewhat just a spoiled kid (I would hardly know, but am not seconding that either). And they still don't know how many deaths really occured in the War on Drugs (way over 2800 - at least one in every tribal village!).

One should always consider how free people will feel to answer polls honestly.

[Ricardo]

This government's credibility score is a lot lower than that of Thaksin Shinawatra's administration during its heyday

I would suggest that the key phrase is "during its heyday", ie before the public began to hear about all the scams and corrupt schemes, for which that administration was responsible.

I'd also regard it as a small step in the right direction, if people were generally more-cynical and less-trusting of any government nowadays, since it would reflect a more realism & less acceptance of propaganda-spin or the 'right' of any given set of politicians to steal the country blind.

[AZBill]

It's the whole democracy-coupe thing that creates a problem here. Thailand purports to be a democracy, which is purely a joke. Anyone brought up in a western democracy just gets a good laugh from this claim. But that aside is it any wonder that even in a sham democracy like Thailand that an illegitimate government put into power by the military and through most likely trumped up charges by opposition hacks who are also as corrupt as you get on this planet gets low marks? Why doesn't Thailand just say what it really is - a military dictatorship fronted by it's political puppets who are charged with carrying out its agenda or face the consequences. Heck the Thai people don't care enough about their own government to curb the blatant corruption to do anything about it, nor do they have any comprehension of what a democracy really is to understand the difference, so why not be honest? Oh I forgot, no such concept in The Land of Shams!

[jayjay0]

It's the whole democracy-coupe thing that creates a problem here. Thailand purports to be a democracy, which is purely a joke. Anyone brought up in a western democracy just gets a good laugh from this claim. But that aside is it any wonder that even in a sham democracy like Thailand that an illegitimate government put into power by the military and through most likely trumped up charges by opposition hacks who are also as corrupt as you get on this planet gets low marks? Why doesn't Thailand just say what it really is - a military dictatorship fronted by it's political puppets who are charged with carrying out its agenda or face the consequences. Heck the Thai people don't care enough about their own government to curb the blatant corruption to do anything about it, nor do they have any comprehension of what a democracy really is to understand the difference, so why not be honest? Oh I forgot, no such concept in The Land of Shams!

I take it you are new here and was handed a lot of reading matter by the red shirts.

Not to go into a lot of talk I will just give you the facts as they happened.

You are correct the army did throw out a Government. they ruled for a year or two not sure and it dosen't matter they did. They then stepped down and allowed for a democratic election. The result was a new Prime Minister. through one reason or another he had to step down and another was elected to replace him. Mind you this is all done on the English system for electing P.M. For one reason or another he had to step down and they then elected third one.

What your mentors are neglecting to tell you is that The first two were in the same party as them and they could gain more corruption money from them. It was only when there supply of your money was cut off by a different party that they started to cry undemocratic . Thre Prime Minister's two from one party one from another party same rules how can any one get two Democratic and one un democratic from that.

I hope this clears things up for you. Perhaps you will take a second look at your new mentors. Remember that the system is the same as used in many nations in the world. England, Canada, Germany and the list gets longer. But being new to Thailand you understandably did not know Thailand uses pretty much the same system as many other countries in the world.

Also if they talk about lack of freedom of the press ask them how they managed to print the lies they have given you.

I did not say if it was right or wrong to have the PM's step down. It was done evenhandedly within a democratic system.

Enjoy your stay in Thailand don't let those low life's make you think it is a bad countrie. It is really a nice country with friendly people and a different culture coupled with a rich history Who knows you might like it enough to settle here..

[truethailand]

Just a matter of perspective.

At that time the truth was not known about Thaksin. After it was revealed his creditability sank. Witness the creditability of his next two appointees.

Abhist has done a remarkable job bringing creditability back to the government. Stop and consider he has done it with active opposition from the Pheu Thai and there militant arm dressed in red shirts.

He still has a long ways to go but all told he is on the right path.

Before any one says what about this or what about that there is a good chance you are rite. Think about it how low the previous administrations must have been.

No You half baked, Thaksin was couped because he was the most popular man in Thai history and the army could not have that. Like it or hate Thailands most popular politician was Thaksin. If you understand that nearly all politicians are corrupt then Thaksin should come back to lead this country. Not long now...hes coming. Abhisit is a puppett but that may read muppett.

[truethailand]

It's the whole democracy-coupe thing that creates a problem here. Thailand purports to be a democracy, which is purely a joke. Anyone brought up in a western democracy just gets a good laugh from this claim. But that aside is it any wonder that even in a sham democracy like Thailand that an illegitimate government put into power by the military and through most likely trumped up charges by opposition hacks who are also as corrupt as you get on this planet gets low marks? Why doesn't Thailand just say what it really is - a military dictatorship fronted by it's political puppets who are charged with carrying out its agenda or face the consequences. Heck the Thai people don't care enough about their own government to curb the blatant corruption to do anything about it, nor do they have any comprehension of what a democracy really is to understand the difference, so why not be honest? Oh I forgot, no such concept in The Land of Shams!

I take it you are new here and was handed a lot of reading matter by the red shirts.

Not to go into a lot of talk I will just give you the facts as they happened.

You are correct the army did throw out a Government. they ruled for a year or two not sure and it dosen't matter they did. They then stepped down and allowed for a democratic election. The result was a new Prime Minister. through one reason or another he had to step down and another was elected to replace him. Mind you this is all done on the English system for electing P.M. For one reason or another he had to step down and they then elected third one.

What your mentors are neglecting to tell you is that The first two were in the same party as them and they could gain more corruption money from them. It was only when there supply of your money was cut off by a different party that they started to cry undemocratic . Thre Prime Minister's two from one party one from another party same rules how can any one get two Democratic and one un democratic from that.

I hope this clears things up for you. Perhaps you will take a second look at your new mentors. Remember that the system is the same as used in many nations in the world. England, Canada, Germany and the list gets longer. But being new to Thailand you understandably did not know Thailand uses pretty much the same system as many other countries in the world.

Also if they talk about lack of freedom of the press ask them how they managed to print the lies they have given you.

I did not say if it was right or wrong to have the PM's step down. It was done evenhandedly within a democratic system.

Enjoy your stay in Thailand don't let those low life's make you think it is a bad countrie. It is really a nice country with friendly people and a different culture coupled with a rich history Who knows you might like it enough to settle here..

Jog on Jay jay. I dont have a mentor I live amongst them and the army is what people in the North East are scared off. How does an army run a country for so long without coming out. The question is..whos fronting the army

[truethailand]

It's the whole democracy-coupe thing that creates a problem here. Thailand purports to be a democracy, which is purely a joke. Anyone brought up in a western democracy just gets a good laugh from this claim. But that aside is it any wonder that even in a sham democracy like Thailand that an illegitimate government put into power by the military and through most likely trumped up charges by opposition hacks who are also as corrupt as you get on this planet gets low marks? Why doesn't Thailand just say what it really is - a military dictatorship fronted by it's political puppets who are charged with carrying out its agenda or face the consequences. Heck the Thai people don't care enough about their own government to curb the blatant corruption to do anything about it, nor do they have any comprehension of what a democracy really is to understand the difference, so why not be honest? Oh I forgot, no such concept in The Land of Shams!

I take it you are new here and was handed a lot of reading matter by the red shirts.

Not to go into a lot of talk I will just give you the facts as they happened.

You are correct the army did throw out a Government. they ruled for a year or two not sure and it dosen't matter they did. They then stepped down and allowed for a democratic election. The result was a new Prime Minister. through one reason or another he had to step down and another was elected to replace him. Mind you this is all done on the English system for electing P.M. For one reason or another he had to step down and they then elected third one.

What your mentors are neglecting to tell you is that The first two were in the same party as them and they could gain more corruption money from them. It was only when there supply of your money was cut off by a different party that they started to cry undemocratic . Thre Prime Minister's two from one party one from another party same rules how can any one get two Democratic and one un democratic from that.

I hope this clears things up for you. Perhaps you will take a second look at your new mentors. Remember that the system is the same as used in many nations in the world. England, Canada, Germany and the list gets longer. But being new to Thailand you understandably did not know Thailand uses pretty much the same system as many other countries in the world.

Also if they talk about lack of freedom of the press ask them how they managed to print the lies they have given you.

I did not say if it was right or wrong to have the PM's step down. It was done evenhandedly within a democratic system.

Enjoy your stay in Thailand don't let those low life's make you think it is a bad countrie. It is really a nice country with friendly people and a different culture coupled with a rich history Who knows you might like it enough to settle here..

I dont think you are a foreigner, you post like Thai, bought and paid for by whom..not realy sure. But we are onto you.. You cannot influence most farangs with your rantings, we learn to question everything. This used to be the best forum for true information but it looks like its sold its soul. The Nation rag and all.. I understand you dont comply.. we block your site

Edited December 25, 2010 by truethailand

[Emptyset]

It's the whole democracy-coupe thing that creates a problem here. Thailand purports to be a democracy, which is purely a joke. Anyone brought up in a western democracy just gets a good laugh from this claim. But that aside is it any wonder that even in a sham democracy like Thailand that an illegitimate government put into power by the military and through most likely trumped up charges by opposition hacks who are also as corrupt as you get on this planet gets low marks? Why doesn't Thailand just say what it really is - a military dictatorship fronted by it's political puppets who are charged with carrying out its agenda or face the consequences. Heck the Thai people don't care enough about their own government to curb the blatant corruption to do anything about it, nor do they have any comprehension of what a democracy really is to understand the difference, so why not be honest? Oh I forgot, no such concept in The Land of Shams!

I take it you are new here and was handed a lot of reading matter by the red shirts.

Not to go into a lot of talk I will just give you the facts as they happened.

You are correct the army did throw out a Government. they ruled for a year or two not sure and it dosen't matter they did. They then stepped down and allowed for a democratic election. The result was a new Prime Minister. through one reason or another he had to step down and another was elected to replace him. Mind you this is all done on the English system for electing P.M. For one reason or another he had to step down and they then elected third one.

What your mentors are neglecting to tell you is that The first two were in the same party as them and they could gain more corruption money from them. It was only when there supply of your money was cut off by a different party that they started to cry undemocratic . Thre Prime Minister's two from one party one from another party same rules how can any one get two Democratic and one un democratic from that.

I hope this clears things up for you. Perhaps you will take a second look at your new mentors. Remember that the system is the same as used in many nations in the world. England, Canada, Germany and the list gets longer. But being new to Thailand you understandably did not know Thailand uses pretty much the same system as many other countries in the world.

Also if they talk about lack of freedom of the press ask them how they managed to print the lies they have given you.

I did not say if it was right or wrong to have the PM's step down. It was done evenhandedly within a democratic system.

Enjoy your stay in Thailand don't let those low life's make you think it is a bad countrie. It is really a nice country with friendly people and a different culture coupled with a rich history Who knows you might like it enough to settle here..

Thanks for the history lesson, Jay. I'm sure we won't be falling prey to any of that red shirt propaganda after reading this masterly synopsis of recent Thai history.

"You are correct the army did throw out a Government. they ruled for a year or two not sure and it dosen't matter they did." If you're 'not sure' about even basic facts, why not make certain you're sure before you presume to give others history lessons? Check wikipedia or something, not like you have to go to a library or do anything particularly arduous to learn about the basics of what happened.

[Emptyset]

[quote name='truethailand'

No You half baked, Thaksin was couped because he was the most popular man in Thai history and the army could not have that. Like it or hate Thailands most popular politician was Thaksin. If you understand that nearly all politicians are corrupt then Thaksin should come back to lead this country. Not long now...hes coming. Abhisit is a puppett but that may read muppett.

Yeah, but Sarit was also popular, along with a bunch of other corrupt authoritarians. I don't blame people for voting Thaksin and can see why many still support him, but I think it's time to move on now. Still, looks like Yingluck is going to be the new PT leader, let's hope she recognizes and learns from Thaksin's mistakes. That would be a start.

Edited December 25, 2010 by Emptyset

[Bagwan]

Of course Thaksin was popular. Most were dazzled by the PR front he operated behind or were too scared to say otherwise.

[asiawatcher]

Of course WHERE they find those 30,000 respondents.

And HOW you phrase the questions to them.

And HOW you phrase the global questions and answers from 'reading the data'

And WHEN you ask the questions.

And most of all WHO interprets the data to fit.

As the bard said " there are lies, damned lies, and statistics".

And this Government has not had 12 continuous months without interruption or hostile activities to contend with, since it came to power, and with that issue, the interference, how can its ability be as high or able to show results? Horses for courses. What a stupid poll. At least this government is making headway and not (apparently) stealing from the voters.

Edited December 26, 2010 by asiawatcher

[Tatsujin]

<yawns>

[hyperdimension]

In 2004, Thaksin's administration won a 92.9-per-cent credibility rating

So the first step was establishing everyone's trust. Higher levels of trust then allows for easier and greater degrees of exploitation afterward. Edited December 26, 2010 by hyperdimension

[Buchholz]

No You half baked

[Buchholz]

I dont think you are a foreigner, you post like Thai, bought and paid for by whom..not realy sure. But we are onto you.. You cannot influence most farangs with your rantings