Limiting Land Ownership? Not A Chance; Thai Talk

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Limiting land ownership? Not a chance

By Suthichai Yoon

The Nation

It's a bold and admirable move, but a populist government won't have the audacity to put it into practice: putting a 50-rai limit on land ownership to launch the country's land reform programme.

The proposal presumably would help to bridge the rich-poor gap and would eventually reverse the dangerous trend of a handful of wealthy and influential families owning the majority of land in the country.

Will the Abhisit government adopt this unprecedented proposed "reform agenda" submitted by a committee headed by former Premeir Anand Panyarachun?

It will most likely end up as an "important long-term objective" that will never get executed.

The Cabinet did "acknowledge" the proposed idea on February 15. Premier Abhisit Vejjajiva then assigned Prime Minister's Office Minister Sathit Wongnongtoei to consult with concerned ministers and submit a set of measures to the Cabinet within two weeks.

Does this mean the government is finally serious about land reform? Not really. It simply means that the various "reform committees" set up by this government to show that it's serious about social change are doing what they are supposed to do. Now it will be up to the government to pretend to be ready to do what it is supposed to - which means that politicians will try to wriggle out of a trap of their own making.

The official papers submitted by the Anand panel offer some very specific solutions to a long-entrenched problem, both immediate and long-term in nature.

Of particular interest is the part of the proposal specifiying that the large number of poor people being charged with land transgressions should be offered fair trials - and that the government should take immediate action to enable them to have access to land for agricultural cultivation instead of falling victim to loan sharks, speculators and landlords.

Long-term proposed solutions include putting a ceiling on the size of land for agriculture per household - to prevent poor families, particularly those in the provinces, from being edged out by individuals or businesses intent upon "hoarding" farmland to pursue their own interests. At present, the law can't prevent this dangerous trend, which has already reached an advanced stage.

It is also crucial that information about land ownership be made public for open and transparent scrutiny. The committee's report calls for all data related to land ownership around the country be made available to members of the public, so that any violations can be investigated, if not by government agencies, then at least by non-government organisations.

It is also proposed that a Land Bank Fund be set up to buy land that would then be given to landless farmers. That would be a state initiative to help elevate the disadvantaged so that they can stand on their own feet. These people have for years been left to fight for their own survival against almost impossible odds. They have struggled against overwhelming state power and imposing private landowners.

Another interesting suggestion to ensure a move toward a more equitable society is to implement land taxes on a progressive scale - meaning a higher tax burden for landowners once they overstep the ceiling stipulated by law. If this idea is taken up, part of the proceeds could be directed toward the special fund to set up the Land Bank for the poor.

Even if nobody expects the government to take the plunge and seriously implement the crux of the proposed land reform scheme, a concrete move to make available all information regarding land ownership in this country - a full list of who owns how many rai of land, at what price, and allowing the public to raise questions about their acquisitions - would be considered a small step in the right direction.

But I doubt that they will have the political courage to even undertake that minor initiative. It would hit politicians and their cronies in business circles where it hurts the most.

-- The Nation 2011-03-03

[asiawatcher]

Interesting - probably grounds for thought. 50 Rai limitation would not be welcome by those with 30,000+ rai already who are not farmers. But retrospectively - impossible to reverse. The issue of individuals owning that amount can be tangible. Corporations no - they require more but that then means the Govt can convert all land plots larger into corporations thus corporate tax and accounting reporting. This is way too big for just a passing comment by the Govt but you can bet the PTP and the other parties will jump on this as their own ideals when election promises come up.

Love the comment about Govt taking up land and then giving it to landless farmers. A farmer without land is not a farmer, they are labourers in a fiefdom system in this country but all interesting and food for thought.

[mark45y]

In case anyone really cares, this is what started the American Vietnam war. Ho Chi Minh took the land from the wealthy Catholic land owners and gave it to the peasants starting the largest resettlement of people in history. All the Catholics left North Vietnam and moved to the South. The Americans moved about 310,000 people and the French 500,000 1954/55. Probably another million wanted to go but were prevented from doing so by the North Vietnamese. One thing led to another and eventually a war started. The original reason was land reform.

[whybother]

Rather than forcing people to give up their land, just tax it so that they either need to sell it or make use of it to pay taxes. That will force prices down, making it more affordable poorer people, or create more jobs in using the land.

Don't tax small land holders (eg less than 5 rai total). Tax the land whether it is used or not.

Make the land productive instead of just handing it out to those who may or may not use it.

[ericthai]

The Tax idea seems to be best. i don't see how the government could come in and tell you that you have more than 50 Rai and we are taking it. However having elevating tax rates for land ownership could work. Big corps could sell the land they now have and then lease it back or contract with the farmer to grow and then everyone wins. if they decide to hold on to and pay that tax then more money for the government and have the money ear marked for special programs for the farmers.

[vincentc]

Media censorship, price caps, military in charge, land redistribution...

What's next? Travel bans? Work camps?

the return of communism in SA asia?

[warfie]

How would this law affect 'The Kingdom's Largest Land Owner'?

[gregb]

And exactly what prevents the wealthy from setting up multiple companies and holding as much land as they want anyway? How does this law do anything other than create a bureaucracy such that the rich can own as much land as they want through juristic entities, but the poor, unsophisticated farmers are limited to 50 rai?

I guess I just don't get it. Maybe it makes sense if you are Thai....

[TPI]

In case anyone really cares, this is what started the American Vietnam war. Ho Chi Minh took the land from the wealthy Catholic land owners and gave it to the peasants starting the largest resettlement of people in history. All the Catholics left North Vietnam and moved to the South. The Americans moved about 310,000 people and the French 500,000 1954/55. Probably another million wanted to go but were prevented from doing so by the North Vietnamese. One thing led to another and eventually a war started. The original reason was land reform.

Weeell you're almost correct! My wife was moved from Ha Coi in the north to Sung Mau in the south because the Americans told everyone that the communists were going to rape all of the women and kill any man who had had anything to do with the French...basically it was all a load of dingo's kidneys! The real reason it appears was that their was to be a referendum about reunification and the Americans were terrified that the people were going to vote to join Ho Chi Minh! So they moved as many people that they could coerce to the south and then refused to take part in the plebicite. When the north saw that the US via the CIA was prepared to finance the entire southern government and army they then turned to the military option!

Of course they instituted land reform, the The French and Chinese absentee land lords had no intention of giving up land that they had stolen from the "peons" over the previous 100 years (does this ring any bells in Thailand?). It was only by the use of force that some sort of equality was created in VN. "The only people who are proud of once being poor are the rich!"