No Dilemma Here: Pay Out Fair Compensation: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME

No dilemma here: Pay out fair compensation

Tulsathit Taptim

Our nation's increasingly jumbled conscience is probably summed up by the Facebook status update of someone who can never vote for Pheu Thai or utter Thaksin Shinawatra's name without adding obscenities.

"Keng, you moron," wrote the man on his "wall", referring to controversial government MP Karun Hosakul. "For once in your life you have done something good, but now you're denying you've done it?"

The "good deed" was the demolition of the "big bag" barrier on Vibhavadi Rangsit Road at Don Muang on Sunday. Karun allegedly led protesters living "outside" the barrier and being affected by it to bring down parts of the floodwall. It was a controversial act that even the Pheu Thai Party wanted to distance itself from, and later Karun himself denied responsibility. Our Facebook guy, as you should be able to guess, lives just outside the barrier.

For the wrong reason maybe, Karun allegedly did something right, at least in the eyes of many. The floods have not only brought out the best and worst in Thais, but also the "most grey" in us. This disaster has reminded me of a debating exercise during a legal philosophy course. You are piloting a plane with 300 on board that is about to crash into the ocean because of engine trouble. The only way you can save the passengers is to land the plane on what could pass as a runway on the only island in view. There are a dozen huts on the "runway". So what do you do?

It sounds like a tough question, but our world has breezed through dilemmas far more difficult than this. All religious wars claimed millions of innocent lives. The atomic bombs ended a world war, but who really thinks they should have been dropped, raise your hands. Is capital punishment good or bad? All of a sudden, "our dilemma" doesn't seem too bad, does it?

With proper preparations that are not beyond human capacity, nobody would get killed no matter which way the floods flow. Inner Bangkok may take a hit, disrupting lives and causing staggering business losses, or people outside the floodwalls will suffer longer in water that's getting filthier and filthier. Both cases are depressing, but we have veered off the mark by trying to decide which is the worst-case scenario.

The government is in a far better position than that of the plane captain weighing the lives of his passengers and the island villagers. The problem with politicians, even the best "populists" among them, is that the word "compensation" is associated with defeat and embarrassment. And they are also the stingiest species when it comes to paying back people affected by their decisions or action. They can pay over the budget with wild abandon for their projects, but when it's needy people, not contractors, who are the recipients, all kinds of fiscal principles and regulations come into play.

There are two groups of flood sufferers - those on the water's natural path and those affected by attempts to change the water's course, hold it back or accelerate its flow. The latter deserve more than what the Yingluck government has promised. They can be easily identified and it won't be difficult to verify their hardship. That the government has failed to differentiate them is a major reason why a legal campaign to sue the administration for damages is gaining momentum.

Of course, giving bigger compensation based on ordeals consequential of state action can lead the government down a slippery slope. It's not only about floodwalls that send a domino effect to people living outside it; this disaster may also have had something to do with a crucial Agriculture Ministry decision to delay the release of northern dam waters. How much impact that particular decision had on the enormity of the flooding will most certainly be the subject of political and scientific scrutiny after the waters completely recede. Political fears, however, must not be the reason why many flood victims will not get compensation they deserve.

A member of the Yingluck Cabinet said recently that the government was considering a "New Thailand" recovery scheme that could cost something close to Bt1 trillion over a number of years. No details were given, but it seems such a massive sum is wanted for things for the future - better water management, better protection of industrial estates and so on. If it's the right plan, it was conceived and disclosed at a wrong time. That plane's pilot wouldn't be thinking about how he could be more careful with the engine next time, or what kind of navigational upgrades to install for the next flight.

The Thai government should feel lucky that it hasn't come down to deciding who lives and who dies. And that it has what it takes to give reasonable compensation. Spend the money wisely and the government won't be helping only the worst-hit flood victims, but also the likes of Karun, his (largely reluctant) fans and detractors, all of them being torn by a moral crisis.

-- The Nation 2011-11-16

[MEL1]

Love it! - Every word of it!

Good Job!

-m. :jap:

[Thaddeus]

It's a good piece, but I would like him to state how he answered the question of where to land the plane, his answer, not the answer that he thinks most people would like.

[Pib]

Good article....doubt anyone in the current govt will read or understand it though as they are too busy covering their tracks.

[sparebox2]

Compensation should only go to the poor who earn less than 300 Baht / day.

All others should take care of themselves during a crisis, not put the burden on tax-payer anymore.

[gleeglee]

Pathetic reply

Compensation should only go to the poor who earn less than 300 Baht / day.

All others should take care of themselves during a crisis, not put the burden on tax-payer anymore.

[gregb]

Pathetic reply

Compensation should only go to the poor who earn less than 300 Baht / day.

All others should take care of themselves during a crisis, not put the burden on tax-payer anymore.

He's being a troll. Ignore the reply. When a government takes action that causes hardship to others, such as erecting a big bag barrier to save Bangkok, they incur a responsibility to properly compensate those who they have injured through their actions, such as those outside the big bag barrier. In a fair world, the government would tax those they have helped to pay for the assistance to those who they have sacrificed. If those receiving the assistance don't think the tax is worth it, then the government should not be creating the problem in the first place.

It is a simple issue, but greed always seems to overwhelm some people's morality.