Is This Government Overstepping Its Fiscal Authority?: Thai Opinion

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

Is this government overstepping its fiscal authority?

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Constitution Court's upcoming ruling on the legality of two financial decrees could determine the longevity of the Yingluck administration

The Constitution Court is expected to rule in the near future whether two financial decrees that the Yingluck Shinawatra government has put forward to Parliament are constitutional.

The most controversial issue has been the decree to transfer Bt1.14 trillion in debt incurred from the 1997 financial crisis to the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), an independent unit of the Bank of Thailand. The other decree is to enable the central bank to issue soft loans to finance flood-relief efforts.

The stability of the government could be shaken if the Constitution Court does not rule in its favour. If that turns out to be the case, the government will be forced to take full responsibility, should the decrees be annulled.

In addition, if the court rules that the decrees are unconstitutional, it will expose management flaws within the Yingluck government, whose motives for hastily enacting the decrees have been questioned.

Prime Minister Yingluck's government has been widely criticised for failing to come up with thorough plans to fix certain issues that threaten the stability of the economy. Among the cases in point are the government's decision to cut fuel subsidies and when or if the minimum wage will be increased nationwide, as promised during the last election campaign.

The latest controversy surrounding the decrees has raised the question of whether the government has no other option but to hastily enact these pieces of legislation to find additional sources of revenue. More money is desperately needed to finance plans to rehabilitate the Thai economy in the wake of massive losses after last year's flood disaster.

The government plans to issue four executive decrees to make it easier to mobilise funds for rehabilitation efforts and to prevent a recurrence of the devastating floods.

Of course, financial support is an essential element in the government's plan to lay down a framework to prevent future flooding and provide compensation and assistance to those affected by the deluge. But the announcement of these decrees before any concrete plan has been made public has raised the questions of whether taxpayers' money will be spent effectively.

Opposition MPs and senators filed a complaint with the Constitution Court seeking an interpretation on whether the government actually has the power to enact these decrees. The Opposition and senators believe that the situation is not urgent enough for the government to enact the four decrees. They argue that these decrees should be drafted as bills for Parliament to deliberate upon before they are enacted, because they are laws that can affect the country's economic stability.

However, the most forceful opposition voice has not come from the government's political opponents, but from an erstwhile insider - former finance minister Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala.

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong said the public debt-to-GDP ratio now stood at 12 per cent of the national budget, but Thirachai said the ratio was only 9.3 per cent. This has raised questions over the credibility of the information that the government has given to the public. It gave the opposition a field day in grilling the government. The opposition wants to know why the government did not allow parliamentarians to deliberate upon this critical issue, which can affect fiscal and monetary discipline.

The future of the two decrees and the Yingluck government itself will become clearer after the ruling by the Constitution Court, which is expected to take a couple of months.

If the court rules that it was constitutional for the government to enact these decrees, the issue will be over. The government will then only have to send the decrees to Parliament for endorsement.

But if the court rules otherwise, the future of the government will be unpredictable. Yingluck should keep her fingers crossed that the court will rule in her government's favour.

-- The Nation 2012-02-04

[ozzieman05]

Yingluck and Australian Prime Minister Gillard must have gone to the same school

[whybother]

How is their longevity threatened? Why will the government become unstable? What difference will it make if they have to take responsibility?

This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous. Failed decrees and stupid policies are things that the public are going to have to live with until the PTP decide to call an election (or 3 years).

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[CalgaryII]

How is their longevity threatened? Why will the government become unstable? What difference will it make if they have to take responsibility?

This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous. Failed decrees and stupid policies are things that the public are going to have to live with until the PTP decide to call an election (or 3 years).

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

Correct....except that successful decrees and intelligent policies are things the public will take note of, resulting in a larger electoral mandate around three years from now, than the last one.

Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever.

Opposition sponsored polling which invariably results in opinionating supporting Opposition agenda's, are misleading and merely a form of "agenda laundering"

Those who espouse this notion of the possibility of curtailing electoral mandates are sore losers to start with, and at worst are undemocratic.

By suggesting that electoral mandates are a frivolous matter, subject to dismissal via non-electoral means, they show their true colors..

So yes I agree: This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous

Edited February 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[Buchholz]

The executive decree is supposed to deal with an immediate problem that needs addressing quickly so it is permitted to bypass normal Parliamentary debate and voting.

While the PTP can somewhat justify the flood-related expenditures, their trying to pass off a Trillion Baht from 1997 can hardly be described as an immediate problem that needs addressing quickly.

.

Edited February 4, 2012 by Buchholz

[whybother]

How is their longevity threatened? Why will the government become unstable? What difference will it make if they have to take responsibility?

This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous. Failed decrees and stupid policies are things that the public are going to have to live with until the PTP decide to call an election (or 3 years).

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

Correct....except that successful decrees and intelligent policies are things the public will take note of, resulting in a larger electoral mandate around three years from now, than the last one.

Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever.

Opposition sponsored polling which invariably results in opinionating supporting Opposition agenda's, are misleading and merely a form of "agenda laundering"

Those who espouse this notion of the possibility of curtailing electoral mandates are sore losers to start with, and at worst are undemocratic.

By suggesting that electoral mandates are a frivolous matter, subject to dismissal via non-electoral means, they show their true colors..

So yes I agree: This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous

"except that successful decrees and intelligent policies are things the public will take note of, resulting in a larger electoral mandate around three years from now, than the last one."

That's correct. Now all we need to wait for is a successful decree or an intelligent policy.

"Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever." - No it's not.

"Opposition sponsored polling which invariably results in opinionating supporting Opposition agenda's, are misleading and merely a form of "agenda laundering" " - Do you mean, politics? We can't have that from an opposition political party, can we?

[virtualtraveller]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

[CalgaryII]

How is their longevity threatened? Why will the government become unstable? What difference will it make if they have to take responsibility?

This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous. Failed decrees and stupid policies are things that the public are going to have to live with until the PTP decide to call an election (or 3 years).

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

Correct....except that successful decrees and intelligent policies are things the public will take note of, resulting in a larger electoral mandate around three years from now, than the last one.

Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever.

Opposition sponsored polling which invariably results in opinionating supporting Opposition agenda's, are misleading and merely a form of "agenda laundering"

Those who espouse this notion of the possibility of curtailing electoral mandates are sore losers to start with, and at worst are undemocratic.

By suggesting that electoral mandates are a frivolous matter, subject to dismissal via non-electoral means, they show their true colors..

So yes I agree: This constant talk of the government collapsing before the next election is ridiculous

"except that successful decrees and intelligent policies are things the public will take note of, resulting in a larger electoral mandate around three years from now, than the last one."

That's correct. Now all we need to wait for is a successful decree or an intelligent policy.

"Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever." - No it's not.

"Opposition sponsored polling which invariably results in opinionating supporting Opposition agenda's, are misleading and merely a form of "agenda laundering" " - Do you mean, politics? We can't have that from an opposition political party, can we?

"Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever." - No it's not

.

Yes it is.

The next election will prove me right.

[CalgaryII]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

A wee tad presumptive, all this "we all know" stuff.

Wishful thinking is how I would characterize those conclusions that are stated as common knowledge.

Yeah, I agree about the business of courts dismissing an elected Govt.

That is why I say this current constitution is an existential threat to a Govt. the people of Thailand selected massively.

[TAWP]

"Ms. Y's performance and Govt. support amongst the electoral majority who put them in place, is stronger than ever." - No it's not

.

Yes it is.

The next election will prove me right.

How is an unrelated event 3 years from now going to prove you right today?

Edit: oh, didn't see it was a returning poster new poster with 22 posts in a day stating it.

Edited February 4, 2012 by TAWP

[Moruya]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

A wee tad presumptive, all this "we all know" stuff.

Wishful thinking is how I would characterize those conclusions that are stated as common knowledge.

Yeah, I agree about the business of courts dismissing an elected Govt.

That is why I say this current constitution is an existential threat to a Govt. the people of Thailand selected massively.

Please highlight the particular section of the current constitution that so threatens the Yingluck government.

[JAG]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

1: Could I suggest the phrase "a lot of us believe" rather than "we all know"

2: Revealingly your post presumes that the courts are just waiting "for a misstep" to dismiss the government.

Doesn't that say a lot about the inherent partisan approach of elements within the judicial syatem?

Edited February 4, 2012 by JAG

[rubl]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

1: Could I suggest the phrase "a lot of us believe" rather than "we all know"

2: Revealingly your post presumes that the courts are just waiting "for a misstep" to dismiss the government.

Doesn't that say a lot about the inherent partisan approach of elements within the judicial syatem?

The courts are not waiting for a misstep, but others will watch and ask the courts to judge. Then it depends on what is supposed to be the 'misstep' and how the courts interpret both 'it' and the laws governing 'missteps'. So nothing is said about a 'partisan' approach of certain elements in the judicial system and therefore it doesn't say anything.

[CalgaryII]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

1: Could I suggest the phrase "a lot of us believe" rather than "we all know"

2: Revealingly your post presumes that the courts are just waiting "for a misstep" to dismiss the government.

Doesn't that say a lot about the inherent partisan approach of elements within the judicial syatem?

The courts are not waiting for a misstep, but others will watch and ask the courts to judge. Then it depends on what is supposed to be the 'misstep' and how the courts interpret both 'it' and the laws governing 'missteps'. So nothing is said about a 'partisan' approach of certain elements in the judicial system and therefore it doesn't say anything.

The courts are not waiting for a misstep, but others will watch and ask the courts to judge

You mean some are seeking to overthrow a democratically elected govt. via the courts.

Sounds like shades of UDD/Red Shirt accusations of a judicial coup

Surely no-one is thinking of doing this thing all over again are they?

Spurning the electoral choice of the people via non-electoral means.

Not again...surely.

Edited February 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[TAWP]

Acting against illegal actions by a government of crooks isn't a judicial coup. It is 'defending democracy'.

[phiphidon]

Acting against illegal actions by a government of crooks isn't a judicial coup. It is 'defending democracy'.

Which "illegal actions" have been taken by this government? And I don't mean what Sondhi or Abhisit or the Army perceive as being illegal, but actual illegal acts proven by law?

[whybother]

Acting against illegal actions by a government of crooks isn't a judicial coup. It is 'defending democracy'.

Which "illegal actions" have been taken by this government? And I don't mean what Sondhi or Abhisit or the Army perceive as being illegal, but actual illegal acts proven by law?

Isn't that what the Democrats want the judiciary to decide?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[phiphidon]

Acting against illegal actions by a government of crooks isn't a judicial coup. It is 'defending democracy'.

Which "illegal actions" have been taken by this government? And I don't mean what Sondhi or Abhisit or the Army perceive as being illegal, but actual illegal acts proven by law?

Isn't that what the Democrats want the judiciary to decide?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

No, they are speculating. If this doesn't work they'll try something else. So far we 've had attempts at impeachment, no confidence debates, they've even got the Stop Global Warming lot stirring the proverbial. Why can't the democrats just take some time out and work out why they are unelectable and stop this stooping to judicial coups. If the democrats are so good and gracious like people say they are why can they not get elected through the ballot box? Be honest, there must be something they've done wrong that several thousands of voters cannot forgive? I don't need to give you a clue do I?

Edited February 4, 2012 by phiphidon

[rubl]

All that will happen is the middle class in Bangkok who foot the bill will say, I told you so, while the great uneducated masses will say 'it's all a conspiracy to stop them spending money on us'. We all know Yingluck lacks competence in political management, we all know this govt is spending way too much, so it can win even bigger at the next election, we all know that at the rate this administration is going they're not going to make it through a full term since they will invariable misstep somewhere allowing the courts to dismiss them. We all know that come what may (and indeed this govt will in due course be exposed in much the same way as the UDD managed to discredit Abhisit) the rural masses will keep on voting for a Shinawatra.

1: Could I suggest the phrase "a lot of us believe" rather than "we all know"

2: Revealingly your post presumes that the courts are just waiting "for a misstep" to dismiss the government.

Doesn't that say a lot about the inherent partisan approach of elements within the judicial syatem?

The courts are not waiting for a misstep, but others will watch and ask the courts to judge. Then it depends on what is supposed to be the 'misstep' and how the courts interpret both 'it' and the laws governing 'missteps'. So nothing is said about a 'partisan' approach of certain elements in the judicial system and therefore it doesn't say anything.

The courts are not waiting for a misstep, but others will watch and ask the courts to judge

You mean some are seeking to overthrow a democratically elected govt. via the courts.

Sounds like shades of UDD/Red Shirt accusations of a judicial coup

Surely no-one is thinking of doing this thing all over again are they?

Spurning the electoral choice of the people via non-electoral means.

Not again...surely.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Surely you mean that if one of the opposition parties asked the court to investigate the legallity of certain government actions, if the court judges 'against' (the actions) it's an overthrow of govenment and if they judge 'for' they've been meddled with or been pressured.

Now tell me, what if on the particular day a court makes its judgement known and it happened to be snowing up in the Thai mountains, will that decision be against the constitution and if (not) so which version ? Furthermore would protests be labelled 'protests', 'criminal association' or simply 'terrorism' ?

Signing off for now, trying not to let fools, idiots and trolls spoil my Saturday night.

Edited February 4, 2012 by rubl

[rubl]

Acting against illegal actions by a government of crooks isn't a judicial coup. It is 'defending democracy'.

Which "illegal actions" have been taken by this government? And I don't mean what Sondhi or Abhisit or the Army perceive as being illegal, but actual illegal acts proven by law?

Isn't that what the Democrats want the judiciary to decide?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

No, they are speculating. If this doesn't work they'll try something else. So far we 've had attempts at impeachment, no confidence debates, they've even got the Stop Global Warming lot stirring the proverbial. Why can't the democrats just take some time out and work out why they are unelectable and stop this stooping to judicial coups. If the democrats are so good and gracious like people say they are why can they not get elected through the ballot box? Be honest, there must be something they've done wrong that several thousands of voters cannot forgive? I don't need to give you a clue do I?

The (largest) opposition party asks a court to check if the proceedings coming to these two emergency decrees and their acceptance is valid according to the constitution or not. That's proper especially since the debat was ended in a vote put forward BEFORE all MP's could voice their opinion.

BTW all those Dem's MP's got elected, same like the PTP MP's and those of other parties. You might have meant 'why can't they get a majority' which is a totally different question and not related to the OP. Just like UDD support for the Pheu Thai is not part of the topic :-)

Edited February 4, 2012 by rubl