YL has and will have many problems both in and out of Politics. I wonder if her big brother has always been the biggest problem in her life especially in politics????????????????????????????????? Conceivably he may be the biggest problem in her life to date, and most of the people that have come to know and love him.

If Yingluck were to go that would mean all the big posters of her around the country would have to be pulled down and replaced.

And there must be millions of them, 5 on an intersection just down the road from our place

Wonder if Yaowapa were the next PM would she get so many?

.

She would have the same number of posters, but the posters would be necessarily bigger.

.

Bad boy, bad boy. But there is truth in your statement. It's like comparing a minnow to a whale shark.

UPDATE
Yingluck confident she can defend herself in suspected asset concealment
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said Tuesday she would allow justice to run its course in regard to the ongoing probe on her alleged asset concealment.

"I have already presented my defence and submitted relevant evidence," she said.

Yingluck said it would be up to the National Anti-Corruption Commission to rule on her asset statement.

"I am confident that I have submitted correct information and that there would be no political accident," she said.

The prime minister is being targeted for probe in connection with a Bt30-million loan she gave to a company run by her husband Anusorn Amornchat.

-- The Nation 2013-03-19

The transaction happened 4 years before she even entered politics. In which western country would this even make headlines. There is a very good chance that the company entered the loan a year later to avoid taxes. The ombudsman can only make recommendations and hold no real power. The opposition is clutching at straws as YS popularity increases with time. Its only fair that the NACC investigates all cases on both sides so lets wait and see the results.

Not to be a bore here, but to answer HuaHin62 questions, just about anywhere that is a functioning democracy..

The basic tedious principal is that most electorates expect their elected officials to be held to a higher standard of ethics because, and here's the rub, these people expect to have the right to spend the electorates tax revenues.

Now many here will say that all politicians are in it for what they can get personally, but how many really can say that when discussing the performance of the democratic system in a country in Europe, or North America. Yes there are issues such as earmarks and questionable practices but the majority [maybe more by accident than design] provide real services to their electorates and in some cases the system has functioned in that way for a couple of centuries.

So ethics matter, which is why a British former MP is [along with his ex-wife] in jail for dodging speeding penalty points on his driving licence [and losing his ministerial job as well as his seat in the house].

The transaction happened 4 years before she even entered politics. In which western country would this even make headlines. There is a very good chance that the company entered the loan a year later to avoid taxes. The ombudsman can only make recommendations and hold no real power. The opposition is clutching at straws as YS popularity increases with time. Its only fair that the NACC investigates all cases on both sides so lets wait and see the results.

Yes - this, like the attacks on other politicians for electronically transfering donations instead of writing cheques etc is petty. (Unless there is more asset concealment of course).

However, the illegial issuing of a new passport to her fugitive brother by her cousin minister is not. She is aware of an illegal act and has done absolutely nothing to remedy it or punish those responsible. Thie would make the news in most countries. Her explanation will be very interesting, and the usual -"no one told me, I know nothing" just won't do. She has sat on this for several months - it doesn't seem to be going away.

If only the Assets Scrutiny judges had carried out their job with honesty & integrity in 2000, all of the shenanigans from the Shinawatra family would probably never have happened.

There are a number of examples around the world of one crook destroying a country politically. Shame it had to happen here too.

Yingluck confident she can defend herself in suspected asset concealment

BANGKOK: -- Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said Tuesday she would allow justice to run its course in regard to the ongoing probe on her alleged asset concealment.

.

How's your "confidence" going on the other "hot issue"?

Justice has run its course on that one and you're late....

.

Ombudsman spokesman Raksakecha Chaechai said yesterday that Yingluck had deferred providing an explanation about the passport for 30 days.

.

>I can't wait for the response. Criminal surrender their passports end of story. This convicted criminal had his returned - and in addition then jumped bail. And he is now given another passport? Is there no justice in this country or do they just continue to move the goal posts whilst the ball is in play? I would love to see a 'layman' receive the same treatment.

.

The Ombudsman Office ruling six months ago was that the Foreign Minister issuing a new passport to a convicted fugitive was illegal.

The Cousin Foreign Minister blew off a request for information for months so they then went to the Sister Prime Minister for an explanation of the illegal act.

The 30 day limit imposed for a response from her expired 3 days ago.

.

The transaction happened 4 years before she even entered politics. In which western country would this even make headlines. There is a very good chance that the company entered the loan a year later to avoid taxes.

.

The reason it is still an issue with her current asset declaration, as a politician, is that it is still a current account AKA the loan has not been paid off.

.

"Yingluck also stated that she had loaned Bt30 million to the firm in 2006, though there are no such loans in the company's records until 2007."

This if quite petty, no?

She got the dates of a loan wrong? Should that really be a valid cause for her deminse?

.

I get the distinct impression that there is more to her asset concealment case than an "honest mistake" of putting the wrong year down.

If truly that is all there is to her misdeed, I'd agree it's not a valid reason to remove her... but something tells me it is not.

As for her other "hot issue" of illegally issuing a passport to her convicted fugitive brother... it is a much more blatant and clear-cut violation. She's not responding to an illegal act that was committed over a year ago and that was pointed out to her that it was illegal six months ago.

.

She has already addressed and submitted re the wrong date. Have to wait and see the outcome.

As far as the Passport goes, It's only a hot issue to assist the Democrats, it gives them something to bitch about. Of course the Nation proper gander beef it up as well, a storm in a teacup. I am sure the Government and the country have more to worry about than a Passport, especially as he has a few of them issued by other country's.

The country shouldn't worry about k. Thaksin and the passport which was illegally issued to him by mistake. He has no problems as he has more passports.

"Yingluck also stated that she had loaned Bt30 million to the firm in 2006, though there are no such loans in the company's records until 2007."

This if quite petty, no?

She got the dates of a loan wrong? Should that really be a valid cause for her deminse?

.

I get the distinct impression that there is more to her asset concealment case than an "honest mistake" of putting the wrong year down.

If truly that is all there is to her misdeed, I'd agree it's not a valid reason to remove her... but something tells me it is not.

As for her other "hot issue" of illegally issuing a passport to her convicted fugitive brother... it is a much more blatant and clear-cut violation. She's not responding to an illegal act that was committed over a year ago and that was pointed out to her that it was illegal six months ago.

.

She has already addressed and submitted re the wrong date. Have to wait and see the outcome.

As far as the Passport goes, It's only a hot issue to assist the Democrats, it gives them something to bitch about. Of course the Nation proper gander beef it up as well, a storm in a teacup. I am sure the Government and the country have more to worry about than a Passport, especially as he has a few of them issued by other country's.

.

As said, with the loan issue there seems to something more to it than just the incorrect date of the loan, but agreeably, lets hear more details about the specificity of what the infraction was from the NCCC (as well as hear more about the specificity of her explanation other than "I have already presented my defence and submitted relevant evidence.")

On the passport issue, it's the Ombudsman Office that has a bigger issue with it rather than the Democrats, and justifiably so. Of course, if she doesn't want any one bitch about it, she could start by complying with answering questions about it and do what is legally required, revoke it.

Pretending to ignore it will not make the issue go away, no matter how much she evidently believes that it will.

Her not dealing with it is a big part of making it more than a storm in a teacup.

Were her earlier claims about her government's transparency and everything will be above board just more of her empty, hollow proclamations that have fallen by the wayside with her government?

As far as the government having more to worry about, it seems they are most worried and concerned about exonerating criminals (including her brother) with over half a dozen amnesty calls.

.

Edited March 19, 201313 yr by Buchholz

Yingluck Shinawatra net worth: Thai businesswoman and politician, Yingluck Shinawatra, has an estimated net worth of $17 million (541 million Baht) as of September 2011, according to Thai independent National Counter Corruption Commission. Yingluck’s nine-year-old son, Supasek, has 4.4 million baht while her common law husband declared 76.8 million baht in assets, along with debt of 369.7 million baht

http://www.therichest.org/celebnetworth/politician/minister/yingluck-shinawatra-net-worth/

Now in addition wasnt some of Thaksin's confiscated assets claimed to be a loan from Yingluck?

Yingluck Shinawatra net worth:

Thai businesswoman and politician, Yingluck Shinawatra, has an estimated net worth of $17 million (541 million Baht) as of September 2011, according to Thai independent National Counter Corruption Commission. Yingluck’s nine-year-old son, Supasek, has 4.4 million baht while her common law husband declared 76.8 million baht in assets, along with debt of 369.7 million baht.

http://www.therichest.org/celebnetworth/politician/minister/yingluck-shinawatra-net-worth/

Now in addition wasn't some of Thaksin's confiscated assets claimed to be a loan from Yingluck?

.

Personally, I find it tragically sad that her net worth somehow plummeted to such a tremendous degree just a few years after having cleared nearly One Billion Baht alone in but just a single stock transaction.

.

She stepped down from AIS in 2006 shortly after Thaksin's family sold its stake in holding company Shin Corp. to Singapore's Temasek Holdings Pte for 73 billion baht, a deal that netted Yingluck 985 million baht for her 20 million shares.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-05-16/fugitive-thaksin-s-sister-picked-to-lead-thailand-opposition.html

,

Edited March 19, 201313 yr by Buchholz

The transaction happened 4 years before she even entered politics. In which western country would this even make headlines. There is a very good chance that the company entered the loan a year later to avoid taxes. The ombudsman can only make recommendations and hold no real power. The opposition is clutching at straws as YS popularity increases with time. Its only fair that the NACC investigates all cases on both sides so lets wait and see the results.

So, if you loan Bt30 million to a company in 2007 and they haven't paid you back, and in 2011 you have to declare your assets to become PM, do you declare the money owed as an asset or, since it was to a company your husband is heavily investing in, do you 'forget' you loaned the money? Answer: you have accountants who track every satang and money owed to you IS an asset and must be declared. If not, you could loan millions to companies you have vested interests in and declare very little and no one would know what companies you were secretely funding. The Shinawatra clan has lots of experience shifting money around, agreed?

The transaction happened 4 years before she even entered politics. In which western country would this even make headlines. There is a very good chance that the company entered the loan a year later to avoid taxes. The ombudsman can only make recommendations and hold no real power. The opposition is clutching at straws as YS popularity increases with time. Its only fair that the NACC investigates all cases on both sides so lets wait and see the results.

A loan would affect neither the profit nor the balance sheet positively - it would be subject to interest payments which would reduce the tax bill

I get the distinct impression that there is more to her asset concealment case than an "honest mistake" of putting the wrong year down.

If truly that is all there is to her misdeed, I'd agree it's not a valid reason to remove her... but something tells me it is not.

.

As said, with the loan issue there seems to something more to it than just the incorrect date of the loan, but agreeably, lets hear more details about the specificity of what the infraction was from the NCCC (as well as hear more about the specificity of her explanation other than "I have already presented my defence and submitted relevant evidence.")

.

Came across this bit that might shed some light on the situation as it seems to imply that it wasn't a matter of her reporting the wrong year, but that she hadn't reported the 30 Million Baht loan at all in her asset declaration.

-------------------------------------------------------------

BANGKOK, 19 March 2013 (NNT) - Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has confirmed that she submitted a proper list of her assets and liabilities to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), believing the commission will give her justice.

Following the NACC’s finding that she did not disclose her husband’s 30-million-baht loan in the assets and liabilities list, Ms Yingluck has called on the NACC and relevant units to consider the matter with fairness and asked for a chance to continue her work as Prime Minister.

http://61.19.244.31/centerweb/newsen/NewsDetail?NT01_NewsID=WNPOL5603190010011

.

Edited March 20, 201313 yr by Buchholz

I get the distinct impression that there is more to her asset concealment case than an "honest mistake" of putting the wrong year down.

If truly that is all there is to her misdeed, I'd agree it's not a valid reason to remove her... but something tells me it is not.

.

>As said, with the loan issue there seems to something more to it than just the incorrect date of the loan, but agreeably, lets hear more details about the specificity of what the infraction was from the NCCC (as well as hear more about the specificity of her explanation other than "I have already presented my defence and submitted relevant evidence.")

.

Came across this bit that might shed some light on the situation as it seems to imply that it wasn't a matter of her reporting the wrong year, but that she hadn't reported the 30 Million Baht loan at all in her asset declaration.

-------------------------------------------------------------

BANGKOK, 19 March 2013 (NNT) - Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has confirmed that she submitted a proper list of her assets and liabilities to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), believing the commission will give her justice.

Following the NACC’s finding that she did not disclose her husband’s 30-million-baht loan in the assets and liabilities list, Ms Yingluck has called on the NACC and relevant units to consider the matter with fairness and asked for a chance to continue her work as Prime Minister.

http://61.19.244.31/centerweb/newsen/NewsDetail?NT01_NewsID=WNPOL5603190010011

.

From the article.

Ms Yingluck also denied the rumors that there was already a PM candidate to succeed her in case she was unseated because of the loan case.

Another PTP denial = confirmation.

Posted 2013-03-19

The second hot issue is her government's decision to issue a new passport for Thaksin.

Ombudsman spokesman Raksakecha Chaechai said yesterday that Yingluck had deferred providing an explanation about the passport for 30 days.

The Office of Parliament Ombudsman had earlier recommended that the Foreign Ministry review its decision to grant Thaksin a new passport on grounds of legitimacy. However, the ministry rejected the recommendation. The office then stepped up pressure on the PM to clarify why the ministry was not heeding its call.

Yingluck was meant to provide clarification on March 13, but the PM's Office told the Ombudsman that Yingluck would explain 30 days later.

Ombudsman spokesman Raksakecha Chaechai updated yesterday in the Bangkok Post that the Ombudsman office has yet to hear back from the Prime Minister after the 30 day extension granted in March lapsed in April.

Over 60 days after a 30 day extension was given and still no explanation. The Ombudsman Office is meeting May 28 to determine its next course of action.

Edited May 24, 201313 yr by creekside

How soon does Pheu Thai start offering another of its lopsided amnesty bills?

We'll skip the Bangkok Governor-elect investigation in exchange for skipping the Prime Minister investigation.

Yay! My favorite poster-with-the-facts is back.