Dems want foreign deals scrutinised by parliament

[webfact]

Dems want foreign deals scrutinised by parliament
KHANITTHA THEPPHAJORN,
KORNCHANOK RAKSASERI
THE NATION

SAY PEOPLE WANT A PROPER CHECK ON TALKS, AGREEMENTS ON ENERGY AND |NATURAL RESOURCES

BANGKOK: -- THE DEMOCRATS called yesterday for the modification of a charter amendment to allow the legislature to vet international agreements on natural resources and environment.

The call was made during debate for the second reading of a bill to amend Article 190 of the Constitution, which prescribes the framework for international agreements.

Democrat MP Apichat Sakdiset said the proposed change should cover negotiations related to natural resources and the environment in addition to territorial integrity. He said many saw issues related to energy and resources as sensitive, so the government should give parliament the ability to scrutinise such deals.

He voiced concern that in future the government may push to remove the Constitution Court's ability to rule on disputes linked to Article 190. He suspected a move was in progress to form a tribunal to usurp the jurisdiction of the charter court. The tribunal, if formed, would be made up of pro-government members such as the Parliament president and Senate speaker, he said.

Democrat MP Kiat Sittheeamorn reminded the government to keep its pledge to hold a public hearing on any agreements that impact on peoples' livelihoods. Chief opposition whip Jurin Laksanawisit said the opposition would vote against the move because the government had ulterior motives. The amended version of Article 190 would allow the government to strike a deal on oil and gas exploration without having to seek consent from the parliament, he said.

And the government could take advantage of non-treaty talks on territorial integrity in order to avoid legislative checks, he said.

Under the government-sponsored amendment, the coalition seeks to do away with the legislative vetting for two issues - one with severe impact on economic and social affairs, and the other with significant implications on trade, investment and budget. But the draft requires any free-trade agreement to be vetted first by parliament.

Midway through the debate, House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont adjourned the session for 10 minutes to allow all sides to cool down late in the afternoon. Tempers had soared after Democrat MP Sansern Samalapa showed a news clip of an interview former PM Thaksin Shinawatra did with Voice TV on his business and investments.

Sansern used the clip to show his suspicion that Thaksin might be one of pro-government figure to benefit from the amendment.

Pheu Thai MPs lodged protests on grounds that a third party had been attacked and had no right of rebuttal. Some coalition lawmakers called for an end to the debate in order to cast votes.

As the coalition and opposition lawmakers traded sharp words, Somsak intervened to ban Sansern from using the clip. But this failed to appease the opposing sides, and prompted the temporary break.

Democrat MP Rachada Dhnadirek, a member of the House panel on foreign affairs, said Article 190 did not block or hinder the government from making agreements with foreign countries - the problem was how parliament was managed. "The problem is the Parliament President did not call for a meeting. If he wants to push for any agenda, he always called a meeting and the parliamentarians came. The recent case of an agreement with China was an example," she said.


-- The Nation 2013-10-16

[ratcatcher]

At least the kindergarten is still functioning as opposed to that in Obamaland.

[Local Drunk]

It's the "Press" that should be doing the scrutiny and asking the questions.

[NongKhaiKid]

So the Dems want the government to be open and transparent ?

They should know better by now and if in doubt have a word with the Ombudsman.

[jaidam]

So the Dems want the government to be open and transparent ?

They should know better by now and if in doubt have a word with the Ombudsman.

The ombudsman's office is null and void, stripped of it's power by the fugitive. How long have they been demanding the clarification of the Thaksin passport saga, only to be ignored, and totally unable to force the passage of rule of law. Disgusting situation indeed is this slide into dictatorship.

[h90]

So the Dems want the government to be open and transparent ?

They should know better by now and if in doubt have a word with the Ombudsman.

I can't recall that the Dems wanted to be open and transparent when they were in power.

[NongKhaiKid]

So the Dems want the government to be open and transparent ?

They should know better by now and if in doubt have a word with the Ombudsman.

The ombudsman's office is null and void, stripped of it's power by the fugitive. How long have they been demanding the clarification of the Thaksin passport saga, only to be ignored, and totally unable to force the passage of rule of law. Disgusting situation indeed is this slide into dictatorship.

I was being facetious but the Ombudsman situation highlights what's happening to the fullest where the government flatly refuses to answer a legitimate question from an properly appointed and so called ' independent ' official who in turn flatly refuses to use the power and authority of his office. We can only guess why and I'm sure the guesses would be more than accurate.

h90 correctly says he can't remember the Dems being any more open and transparent when in office and both sides simply play the same political game but PTP do have a really dictatorial way of operation.

[h90]

So the Dems want the government to be open and transparent ?

They should know better by now and if in doubt have a word with the Ombudsman.

The ombudsman's office is null and void, stripped of it's power by the fugitive. How long have they been demanding the clarification of the Thaksin passport saga, only to be ignored, and totally unable to force the passage of rule of law. Disgusting situation indeed is this slide into dictatorship.

I was being facetious but the Ombudsman situation highlights what's happening to the fullest where the government flatly refuses to answer a legitimate question from an properly appointed and so called ' independent ' official who in turn flatly refuses to use the power and authority of his office. We can only guess why and I'm sure the guesses would be more than accurate.

h90 correctly says he can't remember the Dems being any more open and transparent when in office and both sides simply play the same political game but PTP do have a really dictatorial way of operation.

I didn't say that the Dems have not being more open and transparent.

In fact they were much more open and transparent than the PTP, but still very far away from what it should be.

So the Dems aren't the same....they are a water down version. I strongly prefer the Dems over the PTP.

But still it isn't what it should be, you vote for a car and receive a bicycle....

[Baerboxer]

If you were Thai, would you want deals the affect the long term wealth of your country, being conducted and concluded in secret, with no accountability, by a clan headed by a convicted fugitive criminal fraudster who had previously manipulated deals to benefit his clan's business empires? The same clan who refuse to answer questions, give real figures out and admit to telling lies.

One thing is for sure. If all this gets past, and PTP somehow keep in power and get a second term, then Shin Corp's profits will grow massively, as will Thailand's debt burden. Conflict of interests ?

[bigbamboo]

Any deals regarding a nation's land and it's natural resources should be scrutinized every which way...... by politicians the media and the public. Government officials everywhere simply cannot be trusted to be either honest or competent (as we saw with Noppadom Patama's handling of Preah Vihear for example).

[butterlimbo]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

[tragickingdom]

What a joke. The democrats have together with the rest of the opposition less than 30% of the votes. So the mean with parliament the courts. They (the ruling elite) calls the shots in the courts.

[khunken]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Rubbish.

The opposition have expressed nothing against free trade agreements. Read the Op - they are opposed to agreements made on the nod and not debated in parliament.

It's part of that foreign idea called democracy.

[butterlimbo]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Rubbish.

The opposition have expressed nothing against free trade agreements. Read the Op - they are opposed to agreements made on the nod and not debated in parliament.

It's part of that foreign idea called democracy.

Not rubbish.

You know the Democrats position on Free Trade agreements?

In the end they fancy a rather isolated Thailand than one that is full integrated in a globalized world. Capitalism is bad, they will tell you.

[rubl]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Rubbish.

The opposition have expressed nothing against free trade agreements. Read the Op - they are opposed to agreements made on the nod and not debated in parliament.

It's part of that foreign idea called democracy.

Not rubbish.

You know the Democrats position on Free Trade agreements?

In the end they fancy a rather isolated Thailand than one that is full integrated in a globalized world. Capitalism is bad, they will tell you.

The topic is not (Thaksin's) capitalism, it's about the ability of the parliament (and the senate) to scrutinize government deals with foreign agencies or governments. Terribly sorry and all that, but pure company-to-company deals bridging countries tend to ignore and/or subverse both local and international laws. find a good solution for that before you grant more power to big business.

[Bluespunk]

"Dems want foreign deals scrutinised by parliament"

Considering the PM's statement today on the rice deal it might be a good idea, but there doesn't appear to be much detail to be scrutinised.

[rametindallas]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Maybe you don't understand the ramifications of changing Article 190 of the Thai Constitution. I will explain. Under the current Constitution, Article 190 states: "A treaty which provides for a change in the Thai territories or the Thai external territories that Thailand has sovereign right or jurisdiction over such territories under any treaty or an international law or requires the enactment of an Act for its implementation or affects immensely to economic or social security of the country or results in the binding of trade, investment budget of the country significantly must be approved by the National Assembly. In such case, the National Assembly must complete its consideration within sixty days as from the date of receipt of such matter. (emphasis mine) http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/1.html

The current government wants to change the Thai Constitution to allow all of this on the approval of the Cabinet without going to the People through the National Assembly.

Trade deals done by the Cabinet are very much less transparent than trade deals approved by Parliament.

[butterlimbo]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Maybe you don't understand the ramifications of changing Article 190 of the Thai Constitution. I will explain. Under the current Constitution, Article 190 states: "A treaty which provides for a change in the Thai territories or the Thai external territories that Thailand has sovereign right or jurisdiction over such territories under any treaty or an international law or requires the enactment of an Act for its implementation or affects immensely to economic or social security of the country or results in the binding of trade, investment budget of the country significantly must be approved by the National Assembly. In such case, the National Assembly must complete its consideration within sixty days as from the date of receipt of such matter. (emphasis mine) http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/1.html

The current government wants to change the Thai Constitution to allow all of this on the approval of the Cabinet without going to the People through the National Assembly.

Trade deals done by the Cabinet are very much less transparent than trade deals approved by Parliament.

fair enough, but it is also about the Democrats anti-globalisation paranoia.

Maybe you will realize that the next time they stink against a deal with the US.

[rametindallas]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Maybe you don't understand the ramifications of changing Article 190 of the Thai Constitution. I will explain. Under the current Constitution, Article 190 states: "A treaty which provides for a change in the Thai territories or the Thai external territories that Thailand has sovereign right or jurisdiction over such territories under any treaty or an international law or requires the enactment of an Act for its implementation or affects immensely to economic or social security of the country or results in the binding of trade, investment budget of the country significantly must be approved by the National Assembly. In such case, the National Assembly must complete its consideration within sixty days as from the date of receipt of such matter. (emphasis mine) http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/1.html

The current government wants to change the Thai Constitution to allow all of this on the approval of the Cabinet without going to the People through the National Assembly.

Trade deals done by the Cabinet are very much less transparent than trade deals approved by Parliament.

fair enough, but it is also about the Democrats anti-globalisation paranoia.

Maybe you will realize that the next time they stink against a deal with the US.

I completely agree with you that the Democrats want to control and confine all trade to Thailand and are 'anti-global'. That is a completely different issue than transparency and who gets to know what about the governments' dealings. I wouldn't want any political party to have that exclusive power. The Democrats have traditionally been the most corrupt political organization in Thailand.. until Dr. Thaksin stepped into power and showed how it's really done. Just because I am against the power grab that is the changing of Article 190 should not mean I am for the Democrats or any of the other opposition to this government.

[Thai at Heart]

Pheu Thai MPs lodged protests on grounds that a third party had been attacked and had no right of rebuttal.

A convicted corrupt politician wants the right of rebuttal whilst he is on the run. My God do these people understand what parliament is for?

[Bluespunk]

Pheu Thai MPs lodged protests on grounds that a third party had been attacked and had no right of rebuttal.

A convicted corrupt politician wants the right of rebuttal whilst he is on the run. My God do these people understand what parliament is for?

Yes. Making as much money as possible for themselves and watching porn on their devices.

Edited October 16, 2013 by Bluespunk

[Baerboxer]

the Dems should realize it is a globalized world and should stop their paranoia regarding free trade agreements and foreign investments. their nationalistic isolationism doesn't help anyone.

Maybe you don't understand the ramifications of changing Article 190 of the Thai Constitution. I will explain. Under the current Constitution, Article 190 states: "A treaty which provides for a change in the Thai territories or the Thai external territories that Thailand has sovereign right or jurisdiction over such territories under any treaty or an international law or requires the enactment of an Act for its implementation or affects immensely to economic or social security of the country or results in the binding of trade, investment budget of the country significantly must be approved by the National Assembly. In such case, the National Assembly must complete its consideration within sixty days as from the date of receipt of such matter. (emphasis mine) http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/1.html

The current government wants to change the Thai Constitution to allow all of this on the approval of the Cabinet without going to the People through the National Assembly.

Trade deals done by the Cabinet are very much less transparent than trade deals approved by Parliament.

I'm sure any trade deals done by the cabinet would be as transparent and detailed as those rice deals revealed by the PM/DM earlier this week. "We've done a deal - its mega, good for the country and we're clever to pull it off". What more do you want to know?