Corruption In Thailand Worsening

[george]

Most Asian countries less corrupt than year ago:survey

HONG KONG: -- Corruption in most Asian countries is not as bad as a year ago, with the notable exception of Thailand, a survey showed on Monday. “Thailand’s case is special.

Accusations of high-level corruption have been intensifying in recent months — to the point where they could affect political stability,” said Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC), a Hong Kong-based think tank, which conducted the annual survey. It cited controversies involving Thai Prime Minister Thaksin, including the sale last month of his family’s controlling stake in Shin Corp to Singapore state investment firm Temasek Holdings.

Indonesia still has the worst problem of corruption among the 13 places surveyed.

However, the Indonesian government was credited with making headway in fighting the problem, the survey showed.

The survey asked 1,200 expatriate executives across the region whether corruption was better or worse than a year ago.

Singapore was ranked the least corrupt place to do business in Asia, as it was last year, but was graded worse than in the 2005 survey. Hong Kong’s score was the best in a decade, PERC said.

Corruption in China was also reported to be lower, although it remained a problem. Japan was ranked the second-least corrupt place after Singapore.

“Japan is likely to take another step forward in its anti-corruption fight this year when a revised anti-monopoly law is to come into force that will increase fines for companies found to have participated in bid-rigging,” PERC said. “Still, the close relationship structure between business and olitics is intact.”

Following are results from PERC’s survey, based on a 0-10 scale in which zero is best and 10 worst: 2006 2005 Indonesia 8.16 9.10, Vietnam 7.91 8.65, The Philippines 7.80 8.80, Thailand 7.64 7.20, China 7.58 7.68, India 6.76 8.63, Malaysia 6.13 6.80, Taiwan 5.91 6.15, South Korea 5.44 6.50, Macau 4.78 n/a Hong Kong 3.13 3.50, Japan 3.01 3.46, and Singapore 1.30 0.65.

—Reuters 2006-03-01

[chownah]

Laos? Cambodia? Myanmar? Nepal? Bhutan? Where are they?

Edit: I mean why aren't they in the poll....I know where they are on the map!!!

Edited March 1, 2006 by chownah

[britmaveric]

Laos? Cambodia? Myanmar? Nepal? Bhutan? Where are they?

Edit: I mean why aren't they in the poll....I know where they are on the map!!!

If Myanmar/Laos/Cambodia make the list then Thailand doesnt look so bad.

[TAWP]

Chownah>> How would their status affect the conclusion that the corruption is increasing?

Edited March 1, 2006 by TAWP

[chownah]

Chownah>> How would their status affect the conclusion that the corruption is increasing?

Well, you know it is hard to determine if some bias has entered into making a survey and in interpreteing a survey.....so what I always do is to look at them very critically to see if there are any subtle factors that could intentionally or accidentally cause a bias. To begin with any reported survey results which do not explain the way the survey was conducted and what the basis was for determining the points awarded etc. is immediately very suspect in my book. So right from the start I'm suspicious of this report....and I would be suspicious whether it supported Toxin or Genghis Kahn...or not........my reaction to these sorts of reports are to be cautious. Of course here on TV it seems that most posters see some scrap of news reported and they immediately interpret it in a way that supports the views that they already have...finding any further facts might make it more difficult for them to interpret it as supporting them and heaven forbid that the facts would contradict them.

Anyway....since I don't really know how they determined that corruption is increasing in Thailand it is hard for me to comment on how leaving some of the (probably) most corrupt regimes out of the poll might effect its conclusions....but...it certainly does portray Thailand's present gov't in a more negative light by leaving these countries out of the poll so there is already an indication that MAYBE there is some bias going on here....maybe not.

I might add that I'm relatively sure that if the survey reported that corruption had dropped in the last few years that you would be irately berating the survey and its results....that's how I view you from your past posts....maybe I'm wrong.

[Rinrada]

Laos? Cambodia? Myanmar? Nepal? Bhutan? Where are they?

Edit: I mean why aren't they in the poll....I know where they are on the map!!!

If Myanmar/Laos/Cambodia make the list then Thailand doesnt look so bad.

The survey asked 1,200 expatriate executives across the region to comment on the levels of corruption so can only assume that there were no Ex pat Executives in any of the above countries.

Either that or there is no corru........wot am I saying...?

[TAWP]

maybe I'm wrong.

Yes, as usuall you are. I was hoping there would be decrease in corruption ('that biz-men encounters') in the region.

Don't let your hate cloud your judgement.

[zzap]

The survey asked 1,200 expatriate executives across the region to comment on the levels of corruption so can only assume that there were no Ex pat Executives in any of the above countries.

Well, there are.

But the point is, that these nations aren't on a par with the others surveyed, i.e. we know already they are at the bottom of thescale, whereas Thailand, or rather Mr. Thaksin, has conducted anti-corruption campaigns with much publicity. The effect- merely eliminating the competition...

[Heng]

I can't recall Chownah making even one hateful post on this forum, and he's been here for awhile. There is a lot of hate going around on this forum though but fortunately it's likely just all words and no action.

[opothai]

just look to the leader of the country and his/ her counterparts and i'm sure it will act as a good barometer for the said country.

oohps that said england and the usa can not fair to well in the corruption stakes [ blunkett, mandleson, and the minister for culture you know the one the dizzy cow ] etc

[the gent]

Corruption can be uncovered in many ways but seldom if both parties involved in the transaction are content and the organs of state, including the fourth estate, are totally controlled by vested interests.

In which case, how would we know Singapore is not truly corrupt free?

Edited March 1, 2006 by the gent

[Ricardo]

Do you think anybody was paid-off - to rig the results of this survey ?

[chownah]

maybe I'm wrong.

Yes, as usuall you are. I was hoping there would be decrease in corruption ('that biz-men encounters') in the region.

Don't let your hate cloud your judgement.

Hate? Don't think so.

Edited March 2, 2006 by chownah

[Jai Dee]

Here's an editorial opinion from The Nation today that is related to this topic:

What part of integrity don't we understand?

Those who are concerned only about short-term economic welfare should make a greater effort to understand the meanings of words and phrases such as conflict of interest, integrity, professional ethics, level playing field, participatory democracy and checks and balances.

Otherwise, it will be difficult for them to ever make sense of the current political conflict.

Worse, no long term or sustained economic welfare will be achieved if these words and their meanings don't receive the attention they deserve.

Over the past few days, some business leaders and economists have expressed concern over the possibility of economic disruption due to the current tumultuous state of Thailand's politics.

In particular, they said they were worried the government's mega-project plan would be disrupted and postponed. In general, they fear they will lose the economic opportunities that would have been theirs under a stable Thaksin government.

Prior to Friday's dissolution of parliament, Anant Asavabhokin, president of property giant Land and House Plc, urged Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to stay in power. He said the government should not worry about the demands of the street protestors for official probity.

Shortly after Parliament was dissolved, Virabongsa Ramangkura, a noted economist, cheered the controversial move, saying it was the right solution and added that those who demanded a high moral standard in government should be aware of the level of the country's development.

These comments can be construed to mean that economic opportunity should be given priority over moral issues. But they overlook the link between economic health and good governance and the possibility that perhaps the foreign currency that would come into the country as a result of the mega projects might not necessarily be an unmitigated force of good.

Last month, the Constitution Court rejected a 28-senator petition calling for Thaksin to be put on trial for conflicts of interest. As the same time, the public has raised questions about the stock-market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission, with regard to its investigation into the sale of Shin Corp to Singapore's Temasek Holdings.

Taking the two men's point of view, we might conclude that they are not very serious about political reform and perhaps think more about economic gains than how fairly the fruits of growth are distributed. They have apparently dismissed the issue of conflicts of interest and justified Thaksin's acts by citing his economic success.

But now, with the opposition parties vowing to boycott the election and the protestors demanding that Thaksin resign by Sunday, should we place a higher priority on the quality of our politics or the economic system.

"Conflicts of interest is a new phrase that Thais did not understand," one financier said, asking not to be identified.

That phrase has been cited repeatedly by critics since Thaksin, founder of Shin Corp, first became prime minister five years ago and allegedly began running policy for the benefit of his telecomempire. But the words did not have any real meaning for the general public until the controversial sale of Shin Corp to Singapore's Temasek Holdings.

As for "political ethics", Thaksin and his associates insisted they did everything according to the law but the prime minister's critics claim Thaksin and his friends simply bent the law and regulations to serve their interests.

The issue of "level of playing field" was raised on several occasions, including when Thai AirAsia, part of the Shinawatra family business empire, was given privileges from the Airport Authority of Thailand, when the government converted the concession fee of telecoms firms to an excise tax, when the Export-Import Bank of Thailand offered soft loans to Burma to buy supplies from Shin Satellite and when the Revenue Department decided on several occasions that the Shinawatras need not pay tax on a host of controversial transactions involving Shin Corp's shares.

Thaksin often cites the 19 million votes given to him during the previous general election to justify his failure to invite public participation in the decision-making process, even when it involves crucial issues.

Meanwhile, independent agencies that were supposed to serve as checks and balances have struggled to convince the public that they have adhered to the spirit of the law and acted with integrity in probing allegations involving the prime minister.

In fact, it appears a large part of society has indeed started to comprehend what conflict of interest and the other phrases mentioned above really mean, thus the widespread anti-Thaksin campaign.

Those who do not understand the meaning of these key words would also no doubt not understand why a large number of people have taken politics into the street. And those who simply ignore these words, will never know how to resolve the political crisis peacefully, nor would they be able to see how reconciliation could be achieved, let alone economic stability.

[astral]

said Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC), a Hong Kong-based think tank, which conducted the annual survey.

Who are these people to pass judgement on others????????

Now, don't get me wrong, there is corruption in Thailand and most other countries

around the world, but to try an rank them and say one has got "worse"...............

Sounds to me like a good way to get paid for not really doing anything profitable,

except swimming round and round in the "think tank".

The Uk used to have these QANGO's. Jobs for the boys, generally.

Edited March 2, 2006 by astral