Thai water-management scheme - Public hearings necessary: judge

[webfact]

WATER-MANAGEMENT SCHEME
Public hearings necessary: judge
JUTARAT TIPNUMPA,
KESINEE TAENGKHIAO
THE NATION



BANGKOK: -- A judge at the Supreme Administrative Court recommended yesterday that the court should order complete public hearings for all of the project modules under the Bt350-billion water-management master plan.

But Judge-Rapporteur Panuphan Chairatit added that it should refrain from scrapping the scheme, or ordering a public referendum to decide on the outcome.

"Scrapping the master plan, or ordering a public referendum, would be beyond the jurisdiction of an administrative court," said Panuphan who is in charge of preparing the details of the case involving the water-management master plan. Panuphan has also made a number of recommendations, but they have no legal binding on the case, which will be ruled on by the Supreme Administrative Court's panel of judges.

This case involves the government's scheme to overhaul the country's water management and flood prevention. The government has approved a massive budget of Bt350 billion in the wake of the 2011 flood crisis. However, critics are worried that the water-management plan has been rushed, with several parties - including the Stop Global Warming Association (SGWA) - claiming that the project may cause more harm than good. The SGWA and its supporters have demanded that the Supreme Administrative Court order the scrapping of the master plan and hold a public referendum on the scheme. Their petition goes as far as accusing caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, the Strategic Committee for Water Resources Management (SCWRM), the National Water and Flood Management Policy Commission, and the Water and Flood Management Commission (WFMC) of abusing their authority.

The petition criticises the scheme's preparation, including the fact that just five days after it was unveiled in early 2012, the Cabinet issued a royal decree authorising the Finance Ministry to seek Bt350 billion in loans for the project's implementation. The speed with which the authorisation was made has raised questions about the plan's legitimacy, the petition says.

The Central Administrative Court said last year that the project modules would be put on hold until their preparation complied fully with the law, and legally stipulated public participation and environmental protection.

In response to that ruling, the government held a number of public forums in those provinces where project modules are planned. However, it has not yet signed any of the contracts with the successful bidders who will implement the nine water-management modules.

Panuphan said yesterday the public hearing process had still not covered all areas, which was "against the spirit of the Constitution".


-- The Nation 2014-01-10

[seajae]

lets see if the people actually get to sit in on these "meetings' this time instead of only those invited by the ptp so it was all approved. This needs to be fully scrutinized before it goes anywhere, like all the other ptp plans this one is frought with fraud and inconsistencies

[Ulic]

Damed if you do damed if you don't. After the flooding a few years back there was a cry for help and action.

From a government point of view things moved quickly and the financial part of the plan was arranged.

However from the environmental side things have ground to a halt. As it understandably is, NIMBY combined

with environmental concerns stall all types of projects around the world. When you have big projects where

people will be hugely affected things become difficult. When the next big flood comes again there will be the

cry for help and action. It's all about the compensation. If you want the project to go through be prepared to

pay through the nose.

[DLock]

Oh my...

Yingluck can't catch a break this week...

[rickirs]

This dilemna is now a kind of a self-correcting one. The Government can afford now to take slow deliberation on full public reviews having made a quick response to save lives and property from future flooding by approving the current flood control plans. If the public and/or parties with legal standing bring lawsuits drag out the hearing process into years, they will only have themselves to blame for any intervening loss of life and property. The Government's role now is simply to try to moderate, resolve plan opposition, and move the timetable forward. In a democratic process sometimes Government administrative action must be slow and deliberate.

[Scamper]

The parliamentary system - as practised by the Yingluck administration - was little more than a rubber stamp institution, with no oversight. Hence, all the oversight for these ludicrously oversized projects with ambiguously directed funds is happening now through the court system. Indeed, the goal of the Yingluck administration was always to unveil things at the very last minute - like the amnesty bill - and then ram them through. The process worked - for a time - but there was always going to be a comeuppance. It just happens to be now.

[khunken]

It has been very seriously mismanaged from the start. The number one problem has been the appointment of the incompetent acolyte Plodprasop as the head of the scheme. He has stated more than once that no opposition will be tolerated and that the hearings will have no bearing on the outcome.

Paying party supporters to attend some of the hearings went badly awry with far more locals who opposed the scheme turning up. If there was an attitude of persuasion from Mr Plod, it could have succeeded but the top-down we know best & sod you ignorant locals approach just has failed.