Deferral Of Debate Wins Wide Support: Thailand

[webfact]

Deferral of debate wins wide support

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- A majority of Thais agree with moves to defer House deliberation on the reconciliation bills to cool political tension and avoid the risk of confrontation, according to Abac and Dusit polls released yesterday.

Some 75 to 92 per cent of total respondents in the two polls said they had never seen details of the four reconciliation bills proposed by teams led by Niyom Worapanya, Samart Kaewmeechai, Natthawut Saikua and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin.

A total of 66 per cent could see no hope that any of the four bills would help bring about peace; while 89 per cent wanted politicians to solve economic problems and rising prices before passing a reconciliation bill.

Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts. About 52 per cent believed MPs who misbehaved during the House meeting must apologise to the public, while 40 per cent said they should resign, 7 per cent said they need not do anything, and 80 per cent believed chaos in the House reflected on the integrity of MPs and their uncivilised behaviour.

The Abac poll was conducted among 2,258 respondents from May 25 to June 2 in 17 provinces across the country.

The Dusit Poll, of 1,134 people on June 1-2 in Bangkok and nearby provinces, revealed that 53.5 per cent were fed up with and had lost faith and hope in their MPs.

The poll found 36 per cent believed the House's image was gravely tarnished and the House Speaker must exercise drastic action to keep discipline. Nearly 11 per cent believed misbehaving MPs should be punished, while 43 per cent said the rally by the People's Alliance for Democracy resulted in chaos and tarnished the country's image. Some 38 per cent wanted protesters to exercise discretion and not use force, while 18 per cent believed protesters obstructed traffic and caused inconvenience to the public.

Some 71 per cent backed House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont's move to defer the House meeting on the bills, but 28.5 per cent disapproved of it, reasoning it would delay national reconciliation.

-- The Nation 2012-06-04

[Buchholz]

Some 75 to 92 per cent of total respondents in the two polls said they had never seen details of the four reconciliation bills proposed by teams led by Niyom Worapanya, Samart Kaewmeechai, Natthawut Saikua and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin.

Of the four, I'd say that Niyom's experience of having been an MP for the past 37 years takes precedence

Official Parliament Photo

Niyom Worapanya

Pheu Thai Party-list MP

[smedly]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

[ianf]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

You could say the same about the word 'democracy'.

[kartman]

Forget what any court rules or polls Bill reading is this Friday according to article in another paper.

[OzMick]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

Yes but 100% realize and accept that this is situation normal for politics - and not just in Thailand.

Very few governments work for the interests of the country as a whole, i.e. the common people. Their job is to represent the interests of those who really put them in their boondoggle positions, and in most cases that's not the voters but the elite pulling the strings.

And that's just as true for the yellows as the reds.

Forget all the high-and-mighty talk about corruption and rule of law, no one thinks anyone with real power here cares about such unrealistic and abstract ideals. Effective education for the majority of citizens would be ambitious enough to fully occupy TPTB for twenty years, maybe start with that.

But of course the opposition doesn't want to be "populist", would rather move even further away from the current state of "democracy", and effective education for the poor would be against its interests as much as it is for the other criminal mafias running the show here.

At this point reconciliation means the yellows lie down and take it up the wazoo so the country can go back to business. They should focus their efforts on building a platform, a coherent brand/image/message that will convince the rural poor that they have their interests at heart, and use that to win the next rounds of elections until they are back in the majority.

[Sunderland]

With everyone arguing about what to do next, is it not possible to do the most sensible thing and let the real 'people', and not just those inside the walls of Parliament, read the details of the bills and vote on whether they wish for the government to proceed with them.

I suspect that very few people in Parliament haven't bought their way into their seat in some way, so let's just offer a national referendum to the public on this hot potato. If PT and the Dems have even the slightest integrity and belief in democracy, then they should have nothing to fear other than the public will confirm what they want to happen. If people were unable to respect the outcome, and this then still led to rallies, protests or civil war, then at least it would serve to confirm that the country is well and truly screwed for the foreseeable future.

Truthfully speaking, is there any real point to having a Parliament in Thailand which is filled with suspiciously selected rogues who are there for their own self interest rather than to serve the public? Surely it would be more productive to open a Facebook page and let the general public approve new laws by clicking on 'like' or 'dislike'. Tongue in cheek.

[lannarebirth]

Speaking of the public's wish to see economic concerns addresssed. Why is it that under this administration I am paying the same price for a liter of diesel fuel now when the global price for a barrel of oil is $82 as I was under the previous administration when oil reached as high as $148 per barrel?

[OzMick]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

Yes but 100% realize and accept that this is situation normal for politics - and not just in Thailand.

Very few governments work for the interests of the country as a whole, i.e. the common people. Their job is to represent the interests of those who really put them in their boondoggle positions, and in most cases that's not the voters but the elite pulling the strings.

And that's just as true for the yellows as the reds.

Forget all the high-and-mighty talk about corruption and rule of law, no one thinks anyone with real power here cares about such unrealistic and abstract ideals. Effective education for the majority of citizens would be ambitious enough to fully occupy TPTB for twenty years, maybe start with that.

But of course the opposition doesn't want to be "populist", would rather move even further away from the current state of "democracy", and effective education for the poor would be against its interests as much as it is for the other criminal mafias running the show here.

At this point reconciliation means the yellows lie down and take it up the wazoo so the country can go back to business. They should focus their efforts on building a platform, a coherent brand/image/message that will convince the rural poor that they have their interests at heart, and use that to win the next rounds of elections until they are back in the majority.

While your views on how the Democrats should return to government are interesting, they have very little to do with the topic at hand.

My view is that the Thai people are being shafted, and they recognise that it is happening. At least some are expressing their concern, even outrage; that they will continue to do so; and that many less well-informed will learn of what is happening and may also express some resentment.

This is tempered by the fact that the concern is coming from the "wrong" side of politics for many, but given the startlingly non-stellar performance of the government they elected, and the lack of empathy for their concerns from its real leader, they may even see through the BS despite the rose glasses.

Sent from my Cray XT5-HE laptop computer

Edited June 4, 2012 by OzMick

[gand]

Reconciliation would be to put on trial of all those guilty of criminal actions, finding them guilty and handing out the appropriate punishment.

[Thaddeus]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

NB to some .... that is what 'a majority' looks like.

[lannarebirth]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

NB to some .... that is what 'a majority' looks like.

NB? Nota Bene?

[Thaddeus]

"Some 80 per cent believed that politicians - and not the people - would benefit from the bills, while 62 per cent believed political polarisation would deepen because of the reconciliation drafts."

Understand this clearly. Some 80% perceive conflict of interest.

3/4 of that 80% see that continuing despite conflict of interest as corruption - that the bills will benefit some at the expense of the country.

NB to some .... that is what 'a majority' looks like.

NB? Nota Bene?

Yep.

Is it possible that some need to be told what it means?

[Skywalker69]

Some 75 to 92 per cent of total respondents in the two polls said they had never seen details of the four reconciliation bills proposed by teams led by Niyom Worapanya, Samart Kaewmeechai, Natthawut Saikua and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin.

Of the four, I'd say that Niyom's experience of having been an MP for the past 37 years takes precedence

Official Parliament Photo

Niyom Worapanya

Pheu Thai Party-list MP

I would never buy a used car from this guy.

[Skywalker69]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

You could say the same about the word 'democracy'.

I think Thaksin is behind the idea of using the word "reconciliation" and also behind "true democracy"

[gand]

Some 75 to 92 per cent of total respondents in the two polls said they had never seen details of the four reconciliation bills proposed by teams led by Niyom Worapanya, Samart Kaewmeechai, Natthawut Saikua and General Sonthi Boonyaratglin.

Of the four, I'd say that Niyom's experience of having been an MP for the past 37 years takes precedence

Official Parliament Photo

Niyom Worapanya

Pheu Thai Party-list MP

I would never buy a used car from this guy.

Or anything else either.

[apetley]

Speaking of the public's wish to see economic concerns addresssed. Why is it that under this administration I am paying the same price for a liter of diesel fuel now when the global price for a barrel of oil is $82 as I was under the previous administration when oil reached as high as $148 per barrel?

When oil peaked diesel was over 40 bht a litre. Much cheaper now.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

[waza]

Really what is wrong with the constitution? Why does it need rewritting? Is it all about Thaksin? The Thai people are waking up to this egocentric convicted criminal and his self-centered agenda. The recocilliation bill is for the Thai public to reconcile to the fact Thaksin wants absolution and recompence. The sooner he is out of the picture the sooner the wound of disunity can heal and Thai society can unite.

Edited June 4, 2012 by waza

[lannarebirth]

Speaking of the public's wish to see economic concerns addresssed. Why is it that under this administration I am paying the same price for a liter of diesel fuel now when the global price for a barrel of oil is $82 as I was under the previous administration when oil reached as high as $148 per barrel?

When oil peaked diesel was over 40 bht a litre. Much cheaper now.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

When oil was at $148/bbl I was paying ฿30.74/ ltr. under the previous administration. True diesel costs rose to ฿40/ltr under this administration (though global oil prices never approached the prior $148/bbl). My question is why when oil is currently trading under $82/bbl am I still paying the price I paid during the last administration when oil was trading at $148/bbl?

[ramrod711]

The Dusit Poll, of 1,134 people on June 1-2 in Bangkok and nearby provinces, revealed that 53.5 per cent were fed up with and had lost faith and hope in their MPs.

WHAT? only 53.5% have lost faith in their MPs, I think the fix is in. More people than that have to be disgusted.

[ramrod711]

Speaking of the public's wish to see economic concerns addresssed. Why is it that under this administration I am paying the same price for a liter of diesel fuel now when the global price for a barrel of oil is $82 as I was under the previous administration when oil reached as high as $148 per barrel?

When oil peaked diesel was over 40 bht a litre. Much cheaper now.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

When oil was at $148/bbl I was paying ฿30.74/ ltr. under the previous administration. True diesel costs rose to ฿40/ltr under this administration (though global oil prices never approached the prior $148/bbl). My question is why when oil is currently trading under $82/bbl am I still paying the price I paid during the last administration when oil was trading at $148/bbl?

You are not doing your part to promote reconciliation by asking these embarrassing questions. Try to get on board and support the government, no matter what idiotic policy they come up with.

[thaiedward]

With everyone arguing about what to do next, is it not possible to do the most sensible thing and let the real 'people', and not just those inside the walls of Parliament, read the details of the bills and vote on whether they wish for the government to proceed with them.

I suspect that very few people in Parliament haven't bought their way into their seat in some way, so let's just offer a national referendum to the public on this hot potato. If PT and the Dems have even the slightest integrity and belief in democracy, then they should have nothing to fear other than the public will confirm what they want to happen. If people were unable to respect the outcome, and this then still led to rallies, protests or civil war, then at least it would serve to confirm that the country is well and truly screwed for the foreseeable future.

Truthfully speaking, is there any real point to having a Parliament in Thailand which is filled with suspiciously selected rogues who are there for their own self interest rather than to serve the public? Surely it would be more productive to open a Facebook page and let the general public approve new laws by clicking on 'like' or 'dislike'. Tongue in cheek.

"We are the leaders we have been looking-for." (M. Gandhi)

[Skywalker69]

Really what is wrong with the constitution? Why does it need rewritting? Is it all about Thaksin? The Thai people are waking up to this egocentric convicted criminal and his self-centered agenda. The recocilliation bill is for the Thai public to reconcile to the fact Thaksin wants absolution and recompence. The sooner he is out of the picture the sooner the wound of disunity can heal and Thai society can unite.

Yes it´s all about Thaksin. He controls the PTP and the PM. If he says jump, they sure as hell jump.

[ratcatcher]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

You could say the same about the word 'democracy'.

"Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right. I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin Bangkok and when I speak in Bayreuth Isaan I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall Parliament. That is a matter of practice, not of theory. We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses. Propaganda should be popular, not intellectually pleasing. It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths."

(J.Goebbels)

Close enough?

[MikeOboe57]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

You could say the same about the word 'democracy'.

I think Thaksin is behind the idea of using the word "reconciliation" and also behind "true democracy"

It's "recosylaishaw" and "too demockassy"

[Skywalker69]

Why do they keep using the word reconciliation, nothing this government has or is doing is remotely related to reconciliation - who is it that keeps pumping this word, it seems that someone thinks if they keep saying it over and over people will start to believe it even though what is actually happening is the exact opposite

You could say the same about the word 'democracy'.

I think Thaksin is behind the idea of using the word "reconciliation" and also behind "true democracy"

It's "recosylaishaw" and "too demockassy"

Yes it is.

[visionchaser45]

"...43 per cent said the rally by the People's Alliance for Democracy resulted in chaos and tarnished the country's image. Some 38 per cent wanted protesters to exercise discretion and not use force, while 18 per cent believed protesters obstructed traffic and caused inconvenience to the public."

It seems like I'm not the only one who is fed up with the PAD's shenanigans. Instead of working on reconciliation, the sitting government should label these people as 'terrorists' and round them up for prosecution. It seems that retaliation is prefered over reconciliation by the yellows anyway.

[OzMick]

"...43 per cent said the rally by the People's Alliance for Democracy resulted in chaos and tarnished the country's image. Some 38 per cent wanted protesters to exercise discretion and not use force, while 18 per cent believed protesters obstructed traffic and caused inconvenience to the public."

It seems like I'm not the only one who is fed up with the PAD's shenanigans. Instead of working on reconciliation, the sitting government should label these people as 'terrorists' and round them up for prosecution. It seems that retaliation is prefered over reconciliation by the yellows anyway.

Well yes, but much higher percentages realise the whole thing was triggered by a pack of self-serving bastards who couldn't care less about the country if they can line their own pockets.

What causes a countries image the most damage, having a blatantly corrupt government or having a few people who care enough about that to protest?

Sent from my Cray XT5-HE laptop computer

Edited June 4, 2012 by OzMick

[lannarebirth]

"...43 per cent said the rally by the People's Alliance for Democracy resulted in chaos and tarnished the country's image. Some 38 per cent wanted protesters to exercise discretion and not use force, while 18 per cent believed protesters obstructed traffic and caused inconvenience to the public."

It seems like I'm not the only one who is fed up with the PAD's shenanigans. Instead of working on reconciliation, the sitting government should label these people as 'terrorists' and round them up for prosecution. It seems that retaliation is prefered over reconciliation by the yellows anyway.

I haven't followed the news lately. What'd they do? Kill some people? Burn some buildings? Fire off some grenades? Threaten bodily injury? What?

Edited June 4, 2012 by lannarebirth