Referendum On Changing The Thai Charter Too Costly: Somsak

[webfact]

CONSTITUTION REVIEW

Referendum on changing the charter too costly: Somsak

THE NATION

PARLIAMENT PRESIDENT Somsak Kiatsuranont, right, talks to Deputy Senate Speaker Nikom Wairatpanich during an event held by Parliament in Muang Thong Thani. Discussed at the event were preparedness for the construction of a new Parliament House

BANGKOK: -- House Speaker Somsak Kiartsuranont yesterday advised the government not to hold a public referendum on whether a new constitution should be written, saying such a vote would cost over Bt2 billion.

He suggested that MPs and senators propose new bills for changes to certain articles of the charter instead.

"In order to avoid spending so much money, the constitutional amendment should be done by article, and the original amendment bill should be dropped," said Somsak, who is the Parliament president ex-officio and also an MP from the ruling Pheu Thai Party.

"I am for the way that goes with the country's interest. I don't want Thais to kill each other. But it depends on the parliamentarians if they will agree with me," he said, adding that members of parliament would vote whether to drop the amendment bill or approve it in a final reading.

MPs were about to vote on the government-proposed amendment bill in a final reading in early June when the Constitution Court agreed to conduct a judicial review of the bill. It received petitions that accused the government of trying to overthrow the country's democratic regime with the King as head of state by proposing changes that would allow writing of a new constitution.

The court rejected the petitions last Friday, saying there was insufficient proof to support such claims. But it also said that writing a new constitution could not be done without first consulting the people, as the current post-coup Constitution was approved by a majority of the population in a referendum.

Deputy House Speaker Charoen Jankomol yesterday also voiced opposition to holding a popular vote on constitutional amendment, saying that it would cost billions of baht in taxpayers' money. He said that while he believed MPs and Senators could go ahead with a vote in the final reading, it would be better for Parliament to try to settle differences first in order to avoid more problems in the future.

"I believe people will petition the Constitution Court again" if Parliament goes ahead with a vote in the final reading of the amendment bill, he said.

Meanwhile, the opposition Democrat Party's spokesman, Chavanond Intarakomalyasut, challenged Pheu Thai yesterday to hold a referendum if they are confident of having popular support.

He said a decision by the public would help end disagreement over the matter. The Constitution Court's verdict had helped ease conflict in Thai society, he said, and Pheu Thai could help things more by following the court's suggestion to hold a referendum.

"If Pheu Thai is confident it has support from 15 million voters and if they are sure those people want this post-coup Constitution replaced, they have nothing to fear," the spokesman said.

Chavanond said the opposition would campaign against writing a new constitution. "Let the people decide. The party will accept the public's decision," he said.

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said yesterday the government would wait for advice about the verdict from the Council of State, the state legal advisory agency. She expected to hear that at the Cabinet meeting today.

-- The Nation 2012-07-17

[KireB]

PT will do whatever they can to avoid a referendum and find tonnes of excuses to do so.

[Moruya]

Somsak: "I don't want Thais to kill each other."

But he's happy for PTP to stomp the democrats.

He should be sacked

[Yunla]

Paying our criminal members' bail with public funds is not too costly.

Having a democratic referendum is too costly.

Criminal one-party dictatorship saves money in the long run.

Why waste time and money having more than one Party.

All the debates and referendums cost money and waste time.

It is so much simpler when there is only one Party and it decides what is best for the people.

The Leader knows what you want. Stop struggling. It is for your own good.

Edited July 17, 2012 by Yunla

[smedly]

It would be my understanding that even if amendments are proposed that these would still need to be put to the people for a vote

[Moruya]

Paying our criminal member's bail with public funds is not too costly.

Having a democratic referendum is too costly.

Translation. Criminal one-party dictatorship saves money in the long run.

Why waste time and money having more than one Party.

All the debates and referendums cost money and waste time.

It is so much simpler when there is only one Party and it decides what is best for the people.

The Leader knows what you want. Stop struggling. It is for your own good.

Sell some rice, that might help.

[maeab]

A new referendum will postpone thaksins return and cost him another small fortune.

[Joeb]

It would be my understanding that even if amendments are proposed that these would still need to be put to the people for a vote

Nope. The Constitution says that Parliament can change individual sections of the Constitution with a simple majority vote. That's why this whole thing has been a bit crazy. PTP could have changed all but the first two sections at any time by simply proposing a change and voting on it. I don't agree that it should be that easy but that is what Section 291 says.

[OzMick]

Somsak should understand that expenditure of government funds is a minor concern to members of the Shinawatra clan, if it achieves their desired goals. B400 billion annually to buy votes via a rice subsidy is not a problem, but B2 billion (claimed) to achieve a democratic result that is not all assured to be that desired is another matter.

The concept that every voter in PTP's non-majority was in favour of charter change is too ridiculous for even an egomaniac to believe.

[Crushdepth]

So the 'democracy loving' government would amend a charter endorsed by "The People", with one that isn't. Can't imagine why

[phiphidon]

It would be my understanding that even if amendments are proposed that these would still need to be put to the people for a vote

No, they wouldn't. If amendments are made which are less than the rewriting of the constitution, they can be carried out within parliament and simply voted on by the MP's. Abhisit changed 2 Sections of the constitution arguing that no referendum was needed

Posted 2010-11-07 21:28:24

PM says no need for plebiscite in constitution amendment

BANGKOK (NNT) -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has disclosed that an amendment of the two much-talked-about articles on the charter will be proposed to the cabinet on November 16, adding that a public referendum is not necessary in this case.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva noted the cabinet had agreed that the amendment, one concerning Section 190, the other relative to Sections 93-98, needed to be approved by the House. The draft of these amendments will be given to all political parties to scrutinize, prior to being considered by the cabinet.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/414668-thailand-live-monday-8-nov-2010/

In the "world" inhabited by the CC here would have to be 2 Referendums should the result of the first one be a positive affirmation of the need to write a new constitution. The second referendum would be needed to let the people decide whether they agree with the changes made.

I wonder if the CC in their wondrous decision making actually asked themselves if the Military Junta should have held a referendum before they tore up the 1997 Constitution? It may not have had a referendum but it was voted on in parliament by the MP's aka the Thai peoples representatives..................

[h90]

Elections are also expensive....I think they aren't necessary as anyhow everyone knows that the peoples wish is to have Thaksin and his beautiful sister as leaders

[Yunla]

Elections are also expensive....I think they aren't necessary as anyhow everyone knows that the peoples wish is to have Thaksin and his beautiful sister as leaders

I'm looking forward to living under the rule of Thaksin's son. I think it will be a great era of democracy and equality.

[Moruya]

It would be my understanding that even if amendments are proposed that these would still need to be put to the people for a vote

No, they wouldn't. If amendments are made which are less than the rewriting of the constitution, they can be carried out within parliament and simply voted on by the MP's. Abhisit changed 2 Sections of the constitution arguing that no referendum was needed

Posted 2010-11-07 21:28:24

PM says no need for plebiscite in constitution amendment

BANGKOK (NNT) -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has disclosed that an amendment of the two much-talked-about articles on the charter will be proposed to the cabinet on November 16, adding that a public referendum is not necessary in this case.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva noted the cabinet had agreed that the amendment, one concerning Section 190, the other relative to Sections 93-98, needed to be approved by the House. The draft of these amendments will be given to all political parties to scrutinize, prior to being considered by the cabinet.

http://www.thaivisa....day-8-nov-2010/

In the "world" inhabited by the CC here would have to be 2 Referendums should the result of the first one be a positive affirmation of the need to write a new constitution. The second referendum would be needed to let the people decide whether they agree with the changes made.

I wonder if the CC in their wondrous decision making actually asked themselves if the Military Junta should have held a referendum before they tore up the 1997 Constitution? It may not have had a referendum but it was voted on in parliament by the MP's aka the Thai peoples representatives..................

It's a good thing for you that I was not the CC Judge and Jury here.

I'd have locked the constitution in a big safe and would let it out until a sensible government was in place. One devoid of Charletans formed by honest men and women.

[Skywalker69]

Now the Government and the Red Shirt "leaders start showing their ugly "undemocratic" face.