I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

So, it goes from possible sexual liaison, to maybe a conflict of interest real esteate development?

or both?

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by z12

Nice publicity for the hotel, eat here and meet the famous. Only the most rabid Dem supporter would take this accusation seriously, I see we have a couple here

Not the wisest of moves of any Prime Minister to ensconce oneself in a private meeting in a hotel with an as yet unconfirmed individual

However when one hears Chalerm waffling on about the matter it indeed becomes in my view and many others too, a somewhat suspicious meeting.

''Lie down with the dogs and you will get their fleas.''

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by siampolee

The Yellows are Green today, probably from lying. It seems the last three members of the yellow shirts have very little to do at home. Maybe they should go to China and do nothing over there for a while. It becomes a bit pathetic to see the democrat party and the last few silly yellows trying to grab power through everything except through the ballot box

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Nice publicity for the hotel, eat here and meet the famous. Only the most rabid Dem supporter would take this accusation seriously, I see we have a couple here

There were a lot of denials about things, but the only accusation was that she had a meeting with someone. It's clear that accusation is true. No good explanations of why the PM is having a "personal" business meeting, though.

Nice publicity for the hotel, eat here and meet the famous. Only the most rabid Dem supporter would take this accusation seriously, I see we have a couple here

There were a lot of denials about things, but the only accusation was that she had a meeting with someone. It's clear that accusation is true. No good explanations of why the PM is having a "personal" business meeting, though.

Why should she have to explain? She is not your wife! I think you and your Dem friends are trying to build a house on sand.

Why should she have to explain? She is not your wife! I think you and your Dem friends are trying to build a house on sand.

She should have to explain because she shouldn't be conducting personal business. The government are making lots of decisions about land use, and Yingluck has a business meeting with a real estate developer????

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

It may be silly to the 'converted' but it just is a reflection of the non-transparency of this government. How many secret meetings have they held? Far too many. Ms Yingluck never tells the truth, just like her brother.

If she is having a private business lunch with a major land speculator at this time it is quite inappropriate.

Emphasis....Business Lunch.

Private.....meaning no media

Nothing inappropriate, other than agenized suggestive impropriety.

Not complicated.

What is she doing conducting business while she is PM?

The Nation's business is often business.

That is what Prime Ministers do.

It would help if the businessman accusing her didn't talk in riddles.

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by bigbamboo

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

By asking this question you are implying that she was making business deals and should not do so. Would you care to explain why you believe that politicians who have business interests should not pursue those interests if there is no conflict with their official duties unless there is a legal requirement not to do so?

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

By asking this question you are implying that she was making business deals and should not do so. Would you care to explain why you believe that politicians who have business interests should not pursue those interests if there is no conflict with their official duties unless there is a legal requirement not to do so?

I don't believe that politicians should have business interests where they can influence government policy related to that. The PM has extensive business interests in real estate. She was meeting with a real estate developer. She can influence government policy relating to land use and development. That seems like a conflict of interest to me. Do you support that?

I'm not a fan of hers but most PM's don't have "set" office hours and work way longer hours than most.

Seems to be just another attempt to keep the story in the news. As you say, there is no reason that the PM shouldn't be allowed some personal time to the point where, according to another article in the same paper, the press were told before hand which is why they weren't present at the time. The second 'charge' is just contradictary in that, if it was personal time, why does she have a constitutional duty to provide any explanation to the public.

private time, all for it, but during a parliamentary meeting? its kinda like getting caught at the marriot buffet after begging off work due to a dodgy shrimp.

I wonder who paid the TAB, and did they leave a TIP?

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by z12

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

By asking this question you are implying that she was making business deals and should not do so. Would you care to explain why you believe that politicians who have business interests should not pursue those interests if there is no conflict with their official duties unless there is a legal requirement not to do so?

I don't believe that politicians should have business interests where they can influence government policy related to that. The PM has extensive business interests in real estate. She was meeting with a real estate developer. She can influence government policy relating to land use and development. That seems like a conflict of interest to me. Do you support that?

Surely a Thai politician can be trusted?

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

who says anything about business deals.

stop dredging.

Why is she making business deals while she's PM?

By asking this question you are implying that she was making business deals and should not do so. Would you care to explain why you believe that politicians who have business interests should not pursue those interests if there is no conflict with their official duties unless there is a legal requirement not to do so?

I don't believe that politicians should have business interests where they can influence government policy related to that. The PM has extensive business interests in real estate. She was meeting with a real estate developer. She can influence government policy relating to land use and development. That seems like a conflict of interest to me. Do you support that?

no

I am by no means a fan of the PM, but this story seems like a lot to do about nothing. The PM's job, as well as all PMs, presidents, etc. often involve some sort of social venue (e.g., dinners, lunches, receptions, etc.), so why should she have to justify having lunch during her "work" day?

Do PMs usually have "personal business" meetings during their "work" day?

Would have thought so.

Why not ??

The whole issue is silly.

It may be silly to the 'converted' but it just is a reflection of the non-transparency of this government. How many secret meetings have they held? Far too many. Ms Yingluck never tells the truth, just like her brother.

How do you know that they have held "....far too many secret meetings ......." ????

Are you in on the secret ?

who says anything about business deals.

stop dredging.

She was meeting someone involved in real estate for "personal business". She certainly hasn't given a good explanation as to why she was meeting this person, except for saying it was "personal business". What else would you suggest was happening besides something to do with real estate development?

who says anything about business deals.

stop dredging.

She was meeting someone involved in real estate for "personal business". She certainly hasn't given a good explanation as to why she was meeting this person, except for saying it was "personal business". What else would you suggest was happening besides something to do with real estate development?

Any evidence to support your allegation ??

It's all hear say, is it not ?

She was meeting someone involved in real estate for "personal business". She certainly hasn't given a good explanation as to why she was meeting this person, except for saying it was "personal business". What else would you suggest was happening besides something to do with real estate development?

Any evidence to support your allegation ??

It's all hear say, is it not ?

The PM met a real estate developer for a personal business meeting. Is that enough evidence?

Has she explained why they met? Has anyone come up with a feasible explanation as to why they were meeting?

who says anything about business deals.

stop dredging.

She was meeting someone involved in real estate for "personal business". She certainly hasn't given a good explanation as to why she was meeting this person, except for saying it was "personal business". What else would you suggest was happening besides something to do with real estate development?

Any evidence to support your allegation ??

It's all hear say, is it not ?

The PM has said she was there to "obtain suggestions". It has been alleged that it was a real estate businessman, but that is still an allegation for the moment.

While there is certainly a possibility for a conflict of interest, how does that differ from any other day?

As for this article, The Nation and the PAD team up to stir the pot - unfortunately, without any more information than contained in the last article on this topic. Journalism at its best.

The PM has said she was there to "obtain suggestions". It has been alleged that it was a real estate businessman, but that is still an allegation for the moment.

While there is certainly a possibility for a conflict of interest, how does that differ from any other day?

As for this article, The Nation and the PAD team up to stir the pot - unfortunately, without any more information than contained in the last article on this topic. Journalism at its best.

I thought she said it was for "personal business"?

edit: unless it was to "obtain suggestions" on how to make money in her "personal business" ... while she's PM.

Edited February 14, 201214 yr by whybother

How I wish I could partake of some indecent conduct with the delicious, lickable PM

She was meeting someone involved in real estate for "personal business". She certainly hasn't given a good explanation as to why she was meeting this person, except for saying it was "personal business". What else would you suggest was happening besides something to do with real estate development?

Any evidence to support your allegation ??

It's all hear say, is it not ?

The PM met a real estate developer for a personal business meeting. Is that enough evidence?

Has she explained why they met? Has anyone come up with a feasible explanation as to why they were meeting?

why should they have to ??

dredge, dredge.......the pits

to justify to you ?

why should they have to ??

dredge, dredge.......the pits

to justify to you ?

Clearly there is potential for conflict of interest. If it's for valid government reasons they should have no reason not to. If it's for personal business reasons, then she shouldn't be meeting him.

why should they have to ??

dredge, dredge.......the pits

to justify to you ?

Clearly there is potential for conflict of interest. If it's for valid government reasons they should have no reason not to. If it's for personal business reasons, then she shouldn't be meeting him.

why should they have to ??

dredge, dredge.......the pits

to justify to you ?

Clearly there is potential for conflict of interest. If it's for valid government reasons they should have no reason not to. If it's for personal business reasons, then she shouldn't be meeting him.

I agree about a potential conflict of interest. GWB & Cheney had many meetings with oil buddies and refused to disclose the names of the people they met. It was a lack of transparency which Americans were not used to.

In Thailand, we don't seem to be so far yet.

On the other hand, the sex-related comments here are rather disturbing and in poor taste, IMO.