Thai govt won't budge much on rice price

[webfact]

'Govt won't budge much on rice price'
Pranee Muenphangwaree
The Nation



Committee chaired by Kittiratt unlikely to raise pledging amount a lot, says source

BANGKOK: -- Despite increasing pressure from farmers, the National Rice Policy Committee is unlikely to budge on the new rice-pledging price of Bt12,000 per tonne, due to financial burdens, a government source has revealed.

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong will chair the committee's meeting today at which petitions by farmers will be discussed, along with the financial cost of the pledging scheme, which during the 2011/2012 harvest amounted to over Bt130 billion.

The source said the committee was not likely to give in to demands by farmers that the new price take effect in the next harvest year, as the price already covered the main crop, while only 2 million tonnes were expected from the excluded second crop.

"It remains to be seen how the committee will resolve the problem," the source said. "If the new pledging price is maintained, the committee will also draw up measures to minimise the negative impact on farmers."

Kittiratt said last week that the price could not remain at Bt15,000 given the current state of the global rice market. Thailand's white rice is now quoted below US$500 per tonne (Bt15,000), inclusive of all export costs involved.

At best, the price may be raised slightly but not to the old Bt15,000 level. The pledging sum limit of Bt500,000 for each household may be lowered in that case, as over 80 per cent of farmers under the programme have earned no more than Bt300,000 per household.

Focus on four elements

Meanwhile, the committee's secretary, Viboonluck Rumraksa, director-general of the Internal Trade Department, said that the committee would consider the government's approach for the 2013/2014-harvest year with a focus on four elements. The scheme must not destroy fiscal disciplines such as the annual loss limit at Bt70-Bt80 billion.

The price is also set accordingly to global levels, with the domestic price slightly above. In addition, the price reflects the production cost, while benefits for farmers are compared to gains from other economic crops like sugar, oil palm and rubber.

"The department will present the overall plan and estimated losses at the meeting," she said. "We will also propose a cut in the pledging sum per household limit, or a limit on household outputs, to ensure a larger number of households - as well as honour the fiscal disciplines."

She explained that the output limit on, for example, 25 tonnes per household, would discourage farmers from focusing on quantity while ignoring quality. In previous harvest years, losses were found to have stemmed from low-quality rice.

The huge loss in revenue from the rice-pledging scheme is the main reason behind the government's decision to reduce the pledging price from Bt 15,000 to Bt 12,000 per tonne, an academic said yesterday.

Nipon Poapongsakorn, a senior fellow at the Thailand Development Research Institute, said the reduction of the pledging price would also affect the price of rice on world markets. He was speaking at a seminar organised by Social Venture Network Asia (Thailand) entitled, "The Facts About Rice in Thailand: Who Will Become Rich and Who Poor?"

Nipon said he was also concerned that a reduction in the price would have a negative impact on rice prices in the local Thai market.


-- The Nation 2013-07-01

[NongKhaiKid]

No increase in the pledge will really upset the farmers, the cabinet re-shuffle has upset MPs from the North East and grass roots opinion which is the bedrock of the PTP / reds support. Oh, I nearly forgot a very upset, disaffected Chalerm.

Let the games begin !

[Hockeybik]

Damn that pesky competition thing...

[OzMick]

Oh, we're only going to waste B70-80 billion per year (of taxpayer's funds) on vote buying, so that's all right.

Of course, that doesn't include storage costs and depreciation of the rice currently in stock, or the B60 billion allowed to "cushion" the impact of the recent price drop.

[Ricardo]

"a reduction in the price would also have a negative impact on rice prices in the local Thai market."

Only an academic would view cheaper rice, for the poor Thai consumers, as being such a very bad thing.

Who is more important, the rice farmers or all the rest of the country, who buy and eat the stuff ?

[Tatsujin]

"a reduction in the price would also have a negative impact on rice prices in the local Thai market."

Only an academic would view cheaper rice, for the poor Thai consumers, as being such a very bad thing.

Who is more important, the rice farmers or all the rest of the country, who buy and eat the stuff ?

Who is more important? Simple . . . those in power. They don't give a crap about anyone or anything else.

[KED]

For the Thai government to try and control a world commodity is insane. Also, the program is so filled with corruption that the small farmer is helped very little, if at all.

[Ricardo]

If the government can't afford to pay more than B12,000, "due to financial burdens", how were they able to afford to pay 25% more than that for the past two years ?

Oh, by getting the BAAC to borrow extra money & pay the debt on the government's behalf, and then not reimbursing the bank for what they owe ... Yay for Taksinomics & Red-Finance !

Perhaps they could still pay more now, and put it all on a credit-card ?

[Bluespunk]

"the financial cost of the pledging scheme, which during the 2011/2012 harvest amounted to over Bt130 billion."

I thought the amount "lost" was twice that?

Edited July 1, 2013 by Bluespunk

[OzMick]

"the financial cost of the pledging scheme, which during the 2011/2012 harvest amounted to over Bt130 billion."

I thought the amount "lost" was twice that?

That is for one harvest only, and what they admit to as "only B130 billion" as if this is quite acceptable.

[slapout]

It appears that a little part of the pledging scam has been overlooked in the publicised cost, loss, and government investment as per the Rice export group.

The pledge price of 15,000 now 12,000 and 20,000 baht per ton is for paddy. this will result in a 30%+ loss in grain, plus other fees for handling transport, etc, thus the intial outlay for regular rice is estimated to be 33,000+_per ton. This is more than double the price on prices quoted by the worlds leading rice exporters. My estimate of a 800 billion baht loss for the program, to date,may be somewhat low when the magicians finish throwing numbers around and present real figures for a final accounting.

[Neilly]

He was speaking at a seminar organised by Social Venture Network Asia (Thailand) entitled, "The Facts About Rice in Thailand: Who Will Become Rich and Who Poor?"

My money is on the farmers getting shafted as per usual and Windy Miller and his mates getting fancy new cars

[rubl]

So, till now on 2011/2012 a loss of 137 billion on 352 spent. No indication any details will be provided soon, just spent - sold - still have = loss. With sales minimal the 156 left in 2011/2012 rice will have changed in value since last month I assume especially as the mountain was slightly less high than expected. A non-positive value adjustment?

Now a 'try for 70 - 80 billion loss yearly' only. Still no indication at all on where we're losing this money. Only a " we need to cut farmers for who this scheme was meant" as we loose a lot somewhere.

BTW with the recent fourth reshuffle is there anyone left who can be made responsable for the triffling loss, or must we go to the "the buck stops here" front of the queue?

Edited July 1, 2013 by rubl

[Thai at Heart]

"the financial cost of the pledging scheme, which during the 2011/2012 harvest amounted to over Bt130 billion."

I thought the amount "lost" was twice that?

The front page of the other paper has a member of the rice exporters association putting the loss at closer to 700 bn.

Ouch

[Lite Beer]

Price of rice scheme being deliberated today

BANGKOK, 1 July 2013 (NNT)-The National Rice Policy Committee is expected to determine the buying price for a ton of rice today before the next round of the pledging scheme kicks off.

Director General of the Department of Internal Trade (DIT) Wiboonlak Ruamrak said the reason the government has not been able to sell rice it has bought from farmers is that the grains are of low quality.

She said farmers had concentrated on raising the amount of grains produced in their attempt to make as much money as possible from the scheme without maintaining the rice quality.

Ms. Wiboonrak said the new pledging price will be determined on 4 criteria. They include the financial and fiscal disciplines in which loss is not allowed to exceed 70-80 billion baht per year, compliance with global rice prices, the cost of production, and lastly, the profit margin when compared to prices of other types of crops.

The Director-General further stated that the decision to limit the amount of rice allowed to be pledged will encourage farmers to focus on the quality of their produce rather than the quantity.

-- NNT 2013-07-01

[rubl]

In the topic on "new Thai government sworn in" I found this:

"New Commerce minister Niwatthamrong Boonsongpaisal and Deputy Minister Yanyong Puangrat and current Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong chair the meeting of The National Rice Policy Committee, which is set to consider the new rice pledging price."

Not sure if this means that our oh so busy PM Yingluck is no longer the chairwoman for the NRPC

[belg]

in previous posts it was made clear

that the miller earned 5000 baht per tonne

and the farmer merly 3000

and renting a rai instantly went up 1500 baht more also

so why not just under some scheme give the farmers some land in their name

and quit sponsering them each year with tax payers money

now there would be something that the poor farmer could better his life and his family's life

but as said: if it is not worth anymore for the farmer to grow rice, why does he not go work in a factory like "anybody" else ????

if my business is losing money (i don't have a company, just example), can i count on some tax payer's money?

or any other thai business ?

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Rice in shops, 140bht for 5Kg

200 x 140bht = 28,000bht/tonne

Farmers sell at 12,000bht/tonne

Shops sell at 28,000bht/tonne

Someone makes a 'tonne' of money from the rice farmers!

Edited July 1, 2013 by AnotherOneAmerican

[Thai at Heart]

Rice in shops, 140bht for 5Kg

200 x 140bht = 28,000bht/tonne

Farmers sell at 12,000bht/tonne

Shops sell at 28,000bht/tonne

Someone makes a 'tonne' of money from the rice farmers!

Yield from processing paddy to finished rice is only 65%.

[rubl]

Rice in shops, 140bht for 5Kg

200 x 140bht = 28,000bht/tonne

Farmers sell at 12,000bht/tonne

Shops sell at 28,000bht/tonne

Someone makes a 'tonne' of money from the rice farmers!

Yield from processing paddy to finished rice is only 65%.

That may be true, but someone is still making a 'tonne' of money with 40% loss on 2011/2012 THB 352 billion expenditure.

[whatsupdoc]

The other paper (website) reports that the 15000 baht per tonne will be extended until September 15

Edited July 1, 2013 by whatsupdoc

[slapout]

Another experienced/knowledgable bureaucrat has the problem figured out, " the farmer supplying pooe quality grain is why the government cannot sell rice"?????

The National rice policy committee has already shown their incompentance via lies, cover up of product/monies condition and amount of grain, so a new voice is heard condeming rice quality, which has been judged as safe to eat, free of chemicals, etc, from warehouse to the retail outlets by other government entities. All of this has taken place in a 5 day span which also included a cabinet reshuffle and a weedend.

We have a PM who seems to have given up on any simblence of fullfilling that job discription. Now she wants to learn about the military mindset, continue her parade of travels and fashion photo shoots and shopping for same as well as make peace in the south.

I have seen 2 year olds with a longer attention span, than exhibited by this group of failures and have seen no evidence to recommend the education they all profess/required to have nor the institutions which issued said document.