Will small parties fade further - or benefit from reform?: Thai editorial

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Will small parties fade further - or benefit from reform?
The Nation

Restrictions that stop factions jumping to other political sides have served big parties more than national interest

BANGKOK: -- In the past, they could effect serious political changes. Those were the days when smaller parties had some significant say in Thai politics. There were times when a few "absent votes" at the end of a no-confidence debate forced the ruling party to make Cabinet changes.

Somehow, Thai politics of late has become mostly about the Pheu Thai and Democrat parties, and despite their serious conflict that is not going to change.

A coup and party dissolutions have virtually silenced the bit players. But "bad signs" had begun before the military seized power in 2006. The likes of Snoh Thienthong back then bemoaned constitutional constraints that made it harder for political factions to leave a party. Ironically, those constraints were introduced to help the prime minister, but they turned into some kind of a "shackle" benefiting any ruthless leader.

A few days ago, politicians serving a five-year ban have become free again. We have seen many of them playing a more active role, but it's too early to say how the smaller parties will help chart the course of Thai politics. It has always been debatable whether Thailand needs a two-party system or multi-party arena. Each formula has pros and cons, and we don't expect a conclusion to the debate any time soon.

Most of the bit players have officially or unofficially allied themselves with Pheu Thai. Popular upcountry as a party "for the grassroots", Pheu Thai's record when it comes to allies are not totally decent.

There have been takeovers and claims of buy-outs. While that is do-able in any democracy, it subject Pheu Thai to criticism that it "bought its way to power".

What can the lesser players do? Snoh had been pro-Thaksin Shinawatra, then became vehemently critical of him, only to put himself under Pheu Thai wings once again.

Newin Chidchob was once a darling of Thaksin, only to announce a break-up in a dramatic moment on TV.

Unlike Snoh, half if not more of Newin's mind has been on his Buri Ram football team, which, thanks to his dedication, has become one of Thailand's best Premier League clubs.

There is no particular proposal on how to fit in the bit players. Reform talks have yet to really get serious, but signs are that discussions will revolve around the warring Pheu Thai and Democrat parties. If reform is catered toward both big parties, it will be a mistake.

The bit players need a place to make their stand, and how they will do that must be a serious challenge to everyone involved in charting Thailand's new political course.

Factional politics is what Thai politicians preferred in the past, as it raised their leverage or bargaining power.

Most of the time, factional politics was played out of vested interest. But when MPs had to toe party lines, like having to vote in a no-confidence session, arguments "for" them to be "independent" had the upper hand.

The small parties need to be recognised. Recognition works both ways, though. For the bit players to get a better role that serves national interests more, they need to realise what their "weak points" are. And "weak points" here having nothing to do with their size or number of MPs or number of votes.

To be small in size is one thing, to be "small" in what they do is another.


-- The Nation 2013-12-30

[SebD]

We keep hearing the word "Reform".

But no-one has, as yet, said what it means.

I'd like to see peace on earth and goodwill to all men (at least that has substance), but it's not likely to happen soon.

"Reform" = "change".

But change from what to what?

The next person to suggest we need "reform" should be forced to either expand upon that and explain what they mean or be banned, in my opinion.

[LuckyLew]

There will be no reform in Thailand

It will be politics and business as usual

Theft graft greed corruption power revenge

next

[EricBerg]

In my opinion small parties do benefit reform in Thailand. When the big parties are not strong enough to form a government they need to team up with smallerones. That will take negotiating and making compromises. And exactly that is what Thai politics badly need.

[englishoak]

What a pointless OP, depends on what the reforms are ..... and as we all know ...... no one has a clue because no one is proposing anything as yet....

[ChrisY1]

Unfortunately, things appear to be heading down the usual path..more talk fests......no-one has any understanding of what reform means, how to change the present level of politics, have the initiative to begin change or more importantly, what to change.

Corruption, increasing personal wealth and politics go hand in hand....and not just in Thailand.

Politicians here have almost zero concern for their respective constituencies once elected.....it's all about power.

Additionally, the electors, in my opinion, have virtually no idea what their preferred parties/candidates policies are, ....more importance is placed on the person running for the seat.........and of course, what's in it for them!

500+ MPs is also crazy!

[Mampara]

There will be no reform in Thailand

It will be politics and business as usual

Theft graft greed corruption power revenge

next

1. Create the problem.

2. Control the reaction

3 Offer the solution

[Scamper]

One either believes solutions are possible or one does not. If one believes they are possible, then this article does indeed shed some light. The light is established by a recognition of the problem - in this context the two party system, and the use of money to corrupt it and sustain it. That pretty well summarizes it. In terms of concrete solutions, we have had two main non-partisan bodies in the last week alone with significant proposals, one from the business community. The gist of these proposals is that neither Pheu Thai nor the Democratic party would have majority sway. They would each occupy only one third of the equation. The other third would be comprised of other sectors of civilian society. So each of the two main parties would need to bring this middle body on board for any issue under consideration. That of course could still make possible arrangements under the table. For that, corruption laws must really have teeth. There are corruption laws now. They simply aren't enforced. Everyone knows the problem is the lack of enforcement. But the author of this article also makes a good point in that any government in power will be less reticent to relinquish power, whether it be Pheu Thai or the Democratic party. That in itself would lend credence to the idea of initiating this process now - before another election is held. Cynics will say that will never happen, and they have history to underscore that conviction. But at some point, that is the only solution that will ensure any semblance of stability, for this country will always be divided between these two parties.

[tingtongteesood]

We keep hearing the word "Reform".

But no-one has, as yet, said what it means.

I'd like to see peace on earth and goodwill to all men (at least that has substance), but it's not likely to happen soon.

"Reform" = "change".

But change from what to what?

The next person to suggest we need "reform" should be forced to either expand upon that and explain what they mean or be banned, in my opinion.

Many people have made proposals, just that Thaksin will only accept his way which is unacceptable, so we are stuck at a deadlock. Try reading more, you might learn something...