Mark Kent Has Been Appointed As British Ambassador To Thailand

[folium]

Not sure when you last looked but there is no Christian majority in the UK.

When I was born, I was Christened, throughout my schooling I was taught to be a good Christian, have Christian values, pray and sing hymns.

I am not a Christian, but my upbringing was, as was the upbringing of 98% of the UK population.

To set someone from an entirely different culture, with an entirely different set of values as my representative is an insult to me and my fellow countrymen.

I and my fellow countrymen may no longer care all that much about Christianity, but the fact he devoutly subscribes to a religion that instructs that all non-believers should be avoided (at best) and harmed (at worst) can't be a good thing.

IMHO.

So a non-white, non-Christian person cannot represent the UK overseas?

[ludditeman]

So a non-white, non-Christian person cannot represent the UK overseas?

Oh, you want to call me a racist, as you can't think of any other response!

I don't care about his skin colour (but your inserting that innuendo does say a lot about you).

I do care that his religious beliefs are more important to him, than the belief in freedom and personal choice that is 'supposedly' the British way.

(as demonstrated by him oppressing his staff at the official residence by denying them the right to eat pork on-site)

Edited February 16, 2012 by ludditeman

[GentlemanJim]

I think you will fin far from being pushed out early, Mr Ahmad was well ahead of the pack. My understanding is that there was a short notice, urgent requirement for someone to fill the Ambassadors slot, whilst Mr Kent.obviously scheduled in and going through all of the pre appointment language training etc. Mr Ahmad was chosen to hold the fort. By all accounts he has done a splendid job. Thanks from this brit anyway, and welcome and good luck to Mr Kent.

[bigbamboo]

I think it says more about Britian by the fact it is willing to put someone of different ethnicity in the role - and gone are the days of Etonian old-school-tie brigade in such posts. All that counts is that their loyalties are with Britain, they are of good character, speak English and do a good job - the rest is hyperbole. I wish Asif luck in his new role, wherever that may be - and welcome Mr Clarke. Let's hope he does indeed spend a bit more effort improving the lot and helping woes of citizens living here (that would make a welcome change).

I believe the banning of pork was only restricted to residence - I doubt any staff would be admonished for eating a ham sandwich in the embassy grounds or going out and having a pork lunch (I would guess most of the employees do just that - go out for lunch - anyway).

Interesting bit of trivia: One of the first "rulers" of Britain was actually black (African). He was Roman governor to Britain during Roman occupation.

'Good luck in your new job' as we used to say in Britain when there were new jobs to go to. His excellency just needs to remember the three golden rules in Thailand.... always smile, never wear lace up shoes and stay away from the jet skis.

[dick turpin]

"Consular work with UK tourists and residents will also be a priority."

Think you will find kind sir that the vast majority of Brits are obliged

to reside here on a non-resident basis, an issue you will no doubt

be anxious to rectify.

Edited February 16, 2012 by dick turpin

[pastitche]

Asif Ahmad's appointment was always intended to be a temporary posting to fill in the gap left by the early exit of the last ambassador the inimitable Quinton.

Any suggestions that he has been incompetent, malfescent or has made some mistake during his tenure is tosh.

Funny you didn't point that out when we all complained and wanted someone a bit more representative of the British Christian majority to represent us.

Maybe I missed your post to that effect? Please provide a link to your previous TV post?

Not sure when you last looked but there is no Christian majority in the UK.

Half the nation classifies itself as secular (non-religious), 44% as Christian and 6% as non-Christian religions. Of those who class themselves religious only 14% attend a service weekly. As the older generation dies off this non-religious element is growing fast with only 36% religious 18-24 year olds compared to 72% of people over 65% who are religious.

The role of any diplomatic representative is to be the best person to represent all British interests (even BNP types).

http://ir2.flife.de/...index=〈=ENG

Come on - it's ludditeman, it's his purpose in life to be controversial or as I prefer, a shit-stirrer. Welcome his contributions, they make the day more interesting.

What would Top Gear be without Jeremy Clarkson?

[GentlemanJim]

Not sure when you last looked but there is no Christian majority in the UK.

When I was born, I was Christened, throughout my schooling I was taught to be a good Christian, have Christian values, pray and sing hymns.

I am not a Christian, but my upbringing was, as was the upbringing of 98% of the UK population.

To set someone from an entirely different culture, with an entirely different set of values as my representative is an insult to me and my fellow countrymen.

I and my fellow countrymen may no longer care all that much about Christianity, but the fact he devoutly subscribes to a religion that instructs that all non-believers should be avoided (at best) and harmed (at worst) can't be a good thing.

IMHO.

You are a bigot, and your opinion is far from humble (IMHO!). I doubt you ever read the bible, nor have you read the quoran. If you had you would see they are almost exactly the same book, funny that eh! All the key players are in the quoran, Abraham, Caine, Sarah, even jesus himself! The commandments are all the same (is there a pattern here?), so based with that how can the 'values' be different. Cultiure may have initially been different, but no more a culture divide than a Geordie and an East Ender. I wouldn't even play to your ego by calling you a racist, your comments a sad and display a knowledge and intellect that is wanting! Then again your moniker may explain the shortfall.

Being Christened, was not really a choice was it, and no doubt your parents probably did it because everyone does, not because they were Church goers (a bit like Church marraiges really, its a bit skanky isn't it to marry in a Church with all that God stuff when the truth is you don't really give a sh*t). The UK schooling system would not have brought you up as a good Christian, they would have given you some RE lessons, prayed at assembly each morning maybe with a hymn thrown in and had a nativity play for the under 6's every year. How on earth can you want a representative who is from the British Christian Majority? he wouldn't be representing you then would he? You need to get over yourself, it is ludicrous to complain of someones religion, and demand someone of another religion, when you don't even follow one yourself. Oh, and since when has this been true?

freedom and personal choice that is 'supposedly' the British way.

Is this in a book I have missed? Viz maybe.

The mind boggles.

Edited February 16, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[endure]

Threads like this are quite useful. They demonstrate who it's necessary to cross the street to avoid.

[ludditeman]

I doubt you ever read the bible, nor have you read the quoran. If you had you would see they are almost exactly the same book, funny that eh! All the key players are in the quoran, Abraham, Caine, Sarah, even jesus himself! The commandments are all the same (is there a pattern here?), so based with that how can the 'values' be different. Cultiure may have initially been different, but no more a culture divide than a Geordie and an East Ender. I wouldn't even play to your ego by calling you a racist, your comments a sad and display a knowledge and intellect that is wanting! Then again your moniker may explain the shortfall.

I don't believe that witches should be killed.

I don't believe that eating shellfish is an abomination or pork is unclean.

I don't believe in stoning or whipping women to death for adultery.

This is a selection of extremist views from various sections of the books you mentioned.

I do believe that anyone who subscribes to any of these beliefs while living in a multi-cultural society, is unfit to represent the people who live in that society. You don't seem to understand the difference, but you do believe I am the bigot in this situation.

Is it really my intellect that is in question here?

Edited February 16, 2012 by ludditeman

[Orac]

Asif Ahmad's appointment was always intended to be a temporary posting to fill in the gap left by the early exit of the last ambassador the inimitable Quinton.

Any suggestions that he has been incompetent, malfescent or has made some mistake during his tenure is tosh.

Funny you didn't point that out when we all complained and wanted someone a bit more representative of the British Christian majority to represent us.

Maybe I missed your post to that effect? Please provide a link to your previous TV post?

All complained????

You are entitled to your opinion but please do not try and make out you are speaking for others.

[Roj]

I hope the new ambassador reads this thread!

What I want him to pay attention to:

1. The present and new ambassador both stressed that their job is to promote business and that they will not intervene in Thai politics or legal matters here. This basically all but abandons the average British Mr Smith that may have family here. Issues relating to being able to have permanent residence here (I am not talking about that 200,000 baht rubbish PR scheme), work permits for Brits, spouse and parent rights for Brits with Thai spouses and dependents. These issues mean a lot to the average Brit living working or retired in Thailand.

2. The Brits abroad are citizens of the UK and also VOTERS and there is a significant number of us here to warrant ACTION based on our needs and wants. We have/are still paying UK tax and this also adds weight to our voice.

3. The immigration system regarding bringing the Thai spouse and dependents of Brits to the UK (on a permanant basis) is not reasonable, not convenient and does put unfair barriers and burdens on British families. What is he going to do to fight for us? Such immigration policies remind me of echoes of BNP chants. I hope he will ensure that we do not feel such in the future.

4. Healthcare and pension rights and services for those who are of that age (I am not, but I am sure many are).

5. Swift, effective and powerful intervention in matters where crimes have been commited against Brits in Thailand. An impotent approach does not get my respect.

6. As far as I can remember, besides Spain, Thailand has the most number of Brits abroad - it is time our voice was heard and acted upon. Not the simple diplomatic BS of thank you for the comments and forget about us!

I could go on.

Your comments are very relevant but, unfortunately, we`re like the Forgotten Army here. If HM Government can avoid their responsibilities to us in order to save a few quid they will. If the UK secedes from the EU or the EU implodes it will be interesting to see whether reciprocal finanancial arrangements with former EU countries are kept in place.

[folium]

I doubt you ever read the bible, nor have you read the quoran. If you had you would see they are almost exactly the same book, funny that eh! All the key players are in the quoran, Abraham, Caine, Sarah, even jesus himself! The commandments are all the same (is there a pattern here?), so based with that how can the 'values' be different. Cultiure may have initially been different, but no more a culture divide than a Geordie and an East Ender. I wouldn't even play to your ego by calling you a racist, your comments a sad and display a knowledge and intellect that is wanting! Then again your moniker may explain the shortfall.

Is it really my intellect that is in question here?

No

You have given us all a perfect illustration of your intellect.

[AngryParent]

Your comments are very relevant but, unfortunately, we`re like the Forgotten Army here. If HM Government can avoid their responsibilities to us in order to save a few quid they will. If the UK secedes from the EU or the EU implodes it will be interesting to see whether reciprocal finanancial arrangements with former EU countries are kept in place.

I agree

Well, if we are forgotten, maybe it is time we remind them!

[Roj]

Threads like this are quite useful. They demonstrate who it's necessary to cross the street to avoid.

The line between fascist and anti-fascist is non existent as both are intolerant and exhibit a form of bigotry and the rest of us are caught in their petty crossfire. Just my view anyway.

[baboon]

After a few weeks of reading us on here, Mr. Kent will most likely apply for a transfer to Smolensk or Pyongyang....

[cdnvic]

Enough about race, religion, etc. It's seriously off topic.

[Mobi]

Well I'm no fan and never have been of the British embassy, their ambassadors and staff, having observed on many occasions the supercilious attitudes and actions by staff members, from the Ambassador on down, over the years in different parts of the world.

The British Consulate section in Bangkok has been slated for years over their attitude to Brits who go there seeking help and in particular to those wishing to take their Thai girlfriends and spouses to the UK. There have been letters to the Times on this and even questions in Parliament for literally decades; long before the brief tenure of Mr Asif and , while I have no personal knowledge of whether he did anything to improve or worsen those relations, I doubt whether anyone else out there in internet land has either, and you can hardly blame him for a problem that has been there for as long as anyone can remember.

The Consulate is headed up by a Vice Consul and it is to him we should look to complain if his staff’s attitude towards to British citizens and others who go there seeking assistance or to apply for visas is anything but what should be reasonably expected.

Although clearly the Ambassador is the overall boss, in practical terms I doubt frankly whether he has much to do with the day to day running of the consulate. His main tasks lie in other areas of Anglo/Thai relations.

It was quite a revelation to me when I watched his extensive interview with the Nation. The man is a polished, highly intelligent diplomat and he had a wealth of knowledge and information at his fingertips.

He was no fool and he explained the British government’s stand on many issues very lucidly and why the embassy acts as it does, how the so-called extortionate fees are calculated, and so on. You may not accept what he has to say, but at the very least you have to concede that it is all out of his hands- he simply follows orders – rules and regulations set down by the foreign office in London.

So many of the complaints made by expats in Thailand have absolutely nothing to do with the embassy – the big one being the British government’s stand on pensions. The Ambassador very politely acknowledged it was a big issue and he said he had passed on the community’s concerns to his masters in London– but that is all he can do. He doesn’t make the laws.

Then there were the nutters who were urging the ambassador to make representations to the Thai government on anything from Thai corruption to Thaksin’s criminal activities. Do you really think it is the ambassador’s place to become involved in such matters? It is absolute garbage.

How would you feel if the Thai ambassador in London complained to Cameron about Tony Blair’s criminal activities? Diplomats simply do not get involved in the domestic politics of other nations and if you don t understand that then I give up.

I have no idea why Mr Asif is leaving Thailand after such a short tenure and neither does anyone else. Maybe it was always planned this way or maybe he really did ‘blot his copy book’. I doubt we will ever know, but as for this racist nonsense about his wife banning pork or supposedly setting up a Mosque in the embassy grounds as a reason for his removal; it is - in my humble opinion – a load of old hogwash….

[richard_smith237]

I've never had issue with anything the British Embassy do or have done. Their main role is to support the UK from overseas by maintaining and developing business relationships.

It appears many members are sorely mistaken with their illusion that the British Embassy is there to help us.

The British Embassy gives me everything I need, i.e. Passports, visa's for my wife etc.... It seems to me the only people who are complaining about the British Embassy are the ones who disagree with their rules...

Picked up your wife in a bar and the British Embassy refused her Visa ?

Want a second passport?, sorry you can only do that in your home country....

Want proof of residence but don't want to pay B2000?...

It's time we learn. The Embassy is not here for us, its here for Britain. We are on our own as we would be in our own countries.... we would not receive special or additional assistance in the UK and I don't see why we should just because we have CHOSEN to live outside of the UK.

Edited February 16, 2012 by richard_smith237

[jayboy]

I have no idea why Mr Asif is leaving Thailand after such a short tenure and neither does anyone else. Maybe it was always planned this way or maybe he really did ‘blot his copy book’. I doubt we will ever know, but as for this racist nonsense about his wife banning pork or supposedly setting up a Mosque in the embassy grounds as a reason for his removal; it is - in my humble opinion – a load of old hogwash….

The latter part of your quote is of course correct.However as to Mr Asif's departure I can assure you that the departure was not premature and that there is no blot on his copybook (indeed he has done a first class job as will be demonstrated when the news of his next assignment in the FCO is released.)The background is apparent for all with some intelligence to see starting with his CV and one particular period on it.

[jayboy]

Picked up your wife in a bar and the British Embassy refused her Visa ?

Get real.There are thousands of Thai wives (dare I say the majority?) with that background who have successfully obtained UK visas.Having worked in a bar is not an impediment at all if other criteria are met.In fact it is irrelevant.

[linglop]

Perhaps Mr Kent might like to consider the outrageous cost of renewing a British Passport if resident in Thailand. Cost is around GBP 180 for a 48 page passport. [Cost of renewing if resident in UK is GBP 90]. This figure includes GBP 20 for two DHL envelopes, one from Hong Kong and the other from the UK.

The Hong Kong envelope contains one credit card receipt and one sheet of A5 paper. Clearly the Brits in Hong Kong could have used the cheaper registered airmail.

Secondly just why does it take so many weeks to renew a passport?

[Mobi]

Perhaps Mr Kent might like to consider the outrageous cost of renewing a British Passport if resident in Thailand. Cost is around GBP 180 for a 48 page passport. [Cost of renewing if resident in UK is GBP 90]. This figure includes GBP 20 for two DHL envelopes, one from Hong Kong and the other from the UK.

The Hong Kong envelope contains one credit card receipt and one sheet of A5 paper. Clearly the Brits in Hong Kong could have used the cheaper registered airmail.

Secondly just why does it take so many weeks to renew a passport?

The rate of passport fees and the time taken to renew them have absolutely nothing to do with Mr Kent or anyone at the British embassy in Bangkok or any other embassy throughout the world.

However, in his interview with the Nation (which you would all do well to watch) Mr Asif did attempt to explain the reasoning behind the fees and why it takes so long to get a renewal.

The basis of the fees is not a matter for the embassy, it is a matter for their masters in London, so if you feel that the fees are too high, then I suggest you lobby your MP rather than castigate local diplomats.

Its a bit like complaining to the ambassador that the income tax rate is too high.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Mobi

[blackthorn2005]

I think the Thai Police would describe it as a move to an Inactive Post for the previous incumbent. Mr Kent, we love the bit that says you will concentrate on amongst other things we Expats living here. When can we have a breakfast meeting to discuss pensions!

Breakfast? Now they can put pork back on the menu at the Embassy canteen. Wonder if his predecessor will get a good draft? As if!

[astral]

This topic is to welcome the new British Ambassador,

not to discuss religion.

Several posts on religion have been deleted as off-topic

Along with several others way off the topic!

[AngryParent]

How would you feel if the Thai ambassador in London complained to Cameron about Tony Blair’s criminal activities? Diplomats simply do not get involved in the domestic politics of other nations and if you don t understand that then I give up.

If I was Thai and felt that systems in the UK were affecting my life in the UK I would expect the Thai ambassador to work towards resolving them - instead of being an impotent front for the country.

As far as other matters that do not directly affect me (or are so far removed from me) I would not expect any action or silence e.g. the politician's own criminal activities. However, I must draw your attention to the fact that everyday we hear our politicians and diplomats making such comments about bad nations - Iraq, Zimbabwe and many many more! So, your argument is flawed.

My point is how many expats are there in Zimbabwe or were there in Iraq etc??? Yet, they do exert political pressure and extreme measures for many countries.Now considering the huge numbers of Brits in Thailand that seem to have fairly common problems (as I mentioned in my earlier post), I would expect the representative of that country and its government to actively be working for the benefit of TENS (if not hundreds) of THOUSANDS of its citizens in that country. Instead, they seem to be content with the laisez fair flawed system and are happy to abandon them.

As I mentioned, these ambassodors claim to be "fighting" for British business. If they can do this, why not do it for real people too?

Edited February 16, 2012 by AngryParent

[peergin]

Having been through the British Embassy during Mr Ahmad's tenure I would say that a change is a good thing. First job for Mr Kent (could you get a more "British" name?) is to mention the concept of "the door". The staff at the embassy are helpless to the extreme or just, as I put it when they lied to my face about my daughter's birth registration document/the date/passport application (apologised for by a VC), plain pathetic. Luckily the VC demonstrated how right the embassy could get a standard procedure, let's just hope that is the conversation that Mr Kent has with his staff. It would be a shame to find the same rude, dismissive and culturally disrespectful service at the embassy in the future.

It has been like that for as long as I can remember (early 1966). Nothing new! Wonder whether Mr Kent will be able to change it.

[kimamey]

True.

Still, looks like this thread has been semi-hijacked by the BNP Thailand branch who relish at writing the cr@p about the outgoing ambassador that we have seen on this thread.

Mods?

Well put.I glanced at this thread and the appalling level of racism and stupidity was off putting in the extreme.As it happens I know something about the background to Asif Ahmed's appointment and departure, but all I will say is that he is destined for further promotion.The clues are all there in his past CV if the neanderthal element bothered to do their homework.

Mark Kent did an excellent job in Vietnam so I'm sure will also shine here - but not a typical FCO type. (Thank goodness I hear some say!)

Agreed. I'm ashamed by some of the short sighted comments regarding Asif Ahmed and his skin colour, name and religion. I've never had the need or opportunity to see if he was any good at his job. If they really want someone representative of christian values in the UK they need someone who is a commited christian but only for christenings, weddings and funerals when there's alcohol available. There's something you often hear in the UK when the question of religion is asked. "Just put me down as Cof E". It usually means I can't be bothered to think about it.

When he had his Q & A session recently I was surprised how little some people understood of his duties and authority. Some seemed unaware that he wasn't a dictator rulling Britain who could instantly change the legislation of the country.

Good luck to him and Mark Kent.

[2unique]

...but as for this racist nonsense about his wife banning pork or supposedly setting up a Mosque in the embassy grounds as a reason for his removal; it is - in my humble opinion – a load of old hogwash….

not sure I understand how saying a thousand sausage and bacon lovers screamed in rage is racist however if it was construed that way then apologies. It was meant as a light hearted comment on the state of affairs that led to a signed petition being constructed asking for his removal where the main complaint seemed to be him not looking like the Jesus from Jesus Christ Superstar.

I have had hundreds of Thai people (and folk from other countries) asking for my British opinion (without any sense of irony of asking a Black Brit) whether a non white should be the ambassador and as such one could presume sausages for breakfast could have saved his bacon - ahem

I've booked Mr. Asif for a couple of speaking appointments when football partnerships have been signed between Thailand companies and the EPL and found him to be a charming person and thoroughly capable.

I have little to no dealings with the embassy here but surely the rule is to enforce Thai/British policy from the top down, I doubt highly that either ambassador could effect change merely petition for it into the bureacratic regime back in the UK?

some of my best friends are black!

Edited February 17, 2012 by 2unique

[Mobi]

I’m still frankly amazed at the unrealistic expectations of what the embassy should be doing on behalf of British residents in Thailand.

The embassy’s primary function is to act as a diplomatic conduit between the Thai and British governments, foster Anglo/Thai political, trade and cultural relations, promote British diplomatic policies and initiatives in the region, assist with the development and growth of British trade with Thailand and provide support and advice to British businesses in Thailand

The second purposes is to provide consular services to Brits in Thailand which would include replacement of lost and stolen passports, renewal of expired passports, issuing visas to foreign nationals wishing to enter the UK, providing emergency assistance for Brits in trouble with the law, or in accidents or seriously ill, provide support services and advice for Brits in jail and so on and so forth.

Mr Asif stated that there are 52,000 Brits living in Thailand – that is an awful lot of people for a handful of consular staff to provide consular services to, which why that have had to outsource the visa services.

But just what you expect the embassy to do in matters such as Thai regulations on visas, other than provide Letters on Proof of income etc., I cannot imagine. The fact remains that it is far easier for the average Brit to stay in Thailand than it is for the average Thai to stay in the UK, and even if they tried to make representations to the Thai government they would be laughed out of court.

It is no business of the British Embassy what restrictions or requirements the Thai government place on foreigners who wish to live in their country. They weren’t forced to come and live here – they made their choice freely, fully understanding the rules, the lifestyle and the advantages as well as the disadvantages.

It is simply not within the remit of the Ambassador to make comments or representations on Thai regulations which may or may not affect foreigners living here, unless of course such regulations were extremely draconian; e.g. that Brits were being locked up without due process or were somehow being prevented from leaving the country for no good reason.

Thaksin once said the ‘the UN is not my Father’ and while that was a bit of an extreme statement for a country’s PM, , it does nevertheless illustrate a state of mind amongst most Thais whereby they resent interference in the domestic affairs by foreigners – particularly former colonial powers who once lorded it over them.

Representations on perceived unfair laws would more likely to have a negative effect than a positive one as Thais are very proud people and they do not want foreigners telling them how to run their country.

Although, thinking about it, I suppose we could always introduce trade sanctions if they don’t reduce the minimum age for retirement visas from 50 to 30…

.

But when Thailand have laws that do create major problems for British businesses, such as the FBA, (Foreign Business Act), the embassy, along with many other diplomatic missions, do indeed make representations to the Thai government, although these have had little, if any, effect on Thai policy, and may even be detrimental, for the reasons stated above.

But these representations are in respect of British businesses, not on behalf of the thousands of foreigners who have bought a house in a company and are now concerned that they may have broken the law and may even lose their houses. The law is the law and if they were advised badly by shady property agents or lawyers there is nothing the British government can do about it. Caveat emptor; let the ‘buyer beware.’

You might just as well get the embassy to force a dodgy Bangkok car dealer to pay you back the money you spent on a car which turned out to be a lemon.

And as for frozen pensions, or the fact that Brits no longer qualify for health care when they go to the UK – well I ask you? Do you really think the ambassador can do anything at all about this? Sure he can pass on your concerns, and has done so – but he has no role in making the law of the land in the UK.

Oh sorry, I was forgetting – all Mr Kent has to do is call up his public school mate Dave in No. 10 and tell him that all these Brits in Pattaya are up in arms as their pensions haven’t gone up at the same rate as the price as a bottle of Chang has and - horror upon horror - it won’t be long before they will only be able to afford to buy one case of beer a day instead of two.

Then Dave will probably react by saying something like, ’Oh, my poor little working class erks…I didn’t realise that they were suffering so much’, and immediately rush over to parliament and get a bill passed to reintroduce pension increases for the beer swilling Brits in Pattaya.

And as for reintroducing free NHI services for Brits abroad, he will probably agree to lay on a weekly air ambulance out of Sattahip to transport all the comatose Brits suffering from wet brain disease back to Britain so that they can while away their remaining years in a 24/7 luxury care home at the state’s expense.

[AngryParent]

I’m still frankly amazed at the unrealistic expectations of what the embassy should be doing on behalf of British residents in Thailand.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree; rather than write long replies on a "dead" thread.

I believe that government and all its bodies and staff are here to work for the people; hence the term public servants. And if there are 56,000 Brits and they want what I have said - then the UK's representatives should bloody well do everything they can to work towards those needs and wants. Whether they succeed or not is another matter - but I want to SEE the UK doing all it can for these Brits in Thailand.

You obviously subscribe to the belief that government is a laisez faire body that works for the private sector's benefit. You also probably believe that government is a private company that is not accountable nor should it work for the benefit of a huge body of individuals. You also seem to believe that the UK has no political and economic might and thus should shut its mouth and let Brits in Thailand be abused - often to the extent where some are innocently abandoned and chained up in Thai prisons (for no crime of their own), criminally taken advantage of due to oppresive Thai laws, have little or no rights in Thailand (even if they have Thai family members) etc.

Such an attituted as yours is why nothing is ever achieved and why the UK embassy in Thailand is a pathetic and impotent mess. We need strong leaders, not weak followers and those who write extensively justifying impotence.

Edited February 17, 2012 by AngryParent