Decentralised Thai administration discussed at PDRC forum

[HonestQuietBob]

"Though no more than 300 people were present at the forum held in the Lumpini Park's Youth Centre, the PDRC is also eliciting views online and says it will later hold consultations with people across the Kingdom."

Of course they will, sounds democratic to me .

After reading many of your posts, and having a very good idea of the existing form of democracy you personally support, which is basically no democracy at all. You are not really the person to comment on what is or isn't democratically sounding.

If you had any idea of the true principles of democracy rather than the red, communist, dictatorial and corrupted version... People may accept your posts in a broader sense and not just being supported by the insane red camp on here.

And just who is the person to comment on what is or isn't democracy?

"You know what is kind of funny. The PDRC argue that sovereign power belongs to the people, but when the people elect representatives and those representative want to change to a fully elected Senate they are not allowed to. However, the argument by the PDRC is that they represent the people and hence they can choose the government. The People’s Assembly idea is just delusional".

Bangkokpundit

Quoting the Bangkok Pundit does little to forward your argument - indeed just the opposite! The PDRC was nothing to do with the Senate Bill - it started out as the Anti-Amnesty Protests - and morphed (when Suthep jumped aboard) into the anti-Shin (and now PDRC) protests. The Senate Bill was already set top go through parliament until the Government tacked on the amendment to allow siblings of elected officials to stand for Senatorial Seats - a clear intention to allow nepotism and control of the second house - it was that which caused the bill to fail (and the legal irregularities of trying to pass it!) and not the elected/appointed argument.

His argument as quoted by you, is that the concept of a People's Assembly is delusional [sic] because the CC ruled against the legality of a bill that had been amended to make a sensible bill into one that was dangerous, short-sighted and against all previous agreement - how does one thing point to the other, they are totally unrelated.

By the way - who is the Bangkok Pundit to comment on democracy either? just some overtly biased blogger or nil repute!

What the Bangkokpundit is doing in the quote is exposing the hypocrisy of the PDRC when it comes to democracy.

The PDRC are but one faction of a united anti government movement.

The ones that are actually elected representatives of the people (PTP MP's) are deemed illegitimate in their actions but the faction who are merely self appointed (deluded) representatives of the people are somehow considered legitimate in their actions.

How can any discussions that the PDRC hold on the subject of Government and Democracy be taken seriously when they don't even accept that they have to operate under the same rules and regulations as everyone else?

As for the Bangkokpundit - he is a well resourced, informative source of information for anyone interested in the current state of affairs in Thailand. His opinion is as valid as yours, mine or Fab4's.

[JAG]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[wolf5370]

Quoting the Bangkok Pundit does little to forward your argument - indeed just the opposite! The PDRC was nothing to do with the Senate Bill - it started out as the Anti-Amnesty Protests - and morphed (when Suthep jumped aboard) into the anti-Shin (and now PDRC) protests. The Senate Bill was already set top go through parliament until the Government tacked on the amendment to allow siblings of elected officials to stand for Senatorial Seats - a clear intention to allow nepotism and control of the second house - it was that which caused the bill to fail (and the legal irregularities of trying to pass it!) and not the elected/appointed argument.

His argument as quoted by you, is that the concept of a People's Assembly is delusional [sic] because the CC ruled against the legality of a bill that had been amended to make a sensible bill into one that was dangerous, short-sighted and against all previous agreement - how does one thing point to the other, they are totally unrelated.

By the way - who is the Bangkok Pundit to comment on democracy either? just some overtly biased blogger or nil repute!

What the Bangkokpundit is doing in the quote is exposing the hypocrisy of the PDRC when it comes to democracy.

The PDRC are but one faction of a united anti government movement.

The ones that are actually elected representatives of the people (PTP MP's) are deemed illegitimate in their actions but the faction who are merely self appointed (deluded) representatives of the people are somehow considered legitimate in their actions.

How can any discussions that the PDRC hold on the subject of Government and Democracy be taken seriously when they don't even accept that they have to operate under the same rules and regulations as everyone else?

As for the Bangkokpundit - he is a well resourced, informative source of information for anyone interested in the current state of affairs in Thailand. His opinion is as valid as yours, mine or Fab4's.

I would tend to agree with the hypocrisy of the PDRC - one can not block elections at the same time as spouting on about democracy, so in that I agree. I think the legitimacy of all parties in this shin-dig should be questioned - that does not mean that Thailand can not move forward under such circumstances though, it just means practical solutions will not be realised under the status quo (and I am talking historically here too - not just PTP, but 2001 on - or perhaps even before, although back then I was just a visitor albeit with a Thai family) - out of chaos comes order.

Your last quote, "As for the Bangkokpundit - <snip>...His opinion is as valid as yours, mine or Fab4's" - I totally agree, and indeed was my point entirely! That he is no more, or less, valid to quote on democracy as you, me or even PepperMe! (although I could not agree to the middle bit I snipped out - but horse for courses - I also do not listen to Blue Sky or UStream / UDDToday for the same reasons).

You seem quite eloquent and more apt to debate realistically than some, I feel you do your own debating skills ill service with such quotes (just as a PDRC supporter would by quoting Blue Sky) - just my opinion - as they say here, "up to you" (usually just before the price inflates)

[wolf5370]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

There is such a danger Jag - of course there is. However, that can be minimalized/mitigated with proper planning and execution of the "neutral governance" - the same was said for the last coup too, yet step down they did, and they had the power to ignore it. Whereas a neutral government going against the specially amended constitution (after their mandate had expired) would be in for a rude awakening. There is just such a danger every time a government takes office - especially here where there is a new party each time - and so little history that would be hard to walk away from.

[wolf5370]

Of far greater import is the need to amend the current laws relating to defamation. Until a person is able to cite an incident of corruption without fearing the threat of a defamation suit being lodged by the corrupt person, nothing can change.

Imagine a "people's council" member obtaining information about the elected local governor's corruption..... as the law currently stands, making such information public would invite a defamation claim by the governor, which would succeed irrespective of the truth or otherwise of the information.

Until there is a cultural and social climate in Thailand for The Truth to prevail, rather than emphasis on the protection of corrupt individuals, any steps to reduce corruption are futile.

yes indeed and to that list you can add the lifting of immunity from prosecution for sitting MPs. Everybody must be equal before the law.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Yes this is important - it should also come with a suspension once charged (under court order) - this would limit the delaying games that cause charges to be on hold for years at a time. Fix the time between charge and trial and only allow postponement on court order with sufficient reason to do so.

[ThailandNoob]

Is the army going to crack down on these people for "secession"?

Before you come back with the point that they explicitly stated that they want decentralisation, not separate countries, I would like to point out that the reds did the same thing.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Decentralisation of power to the regions is not secession, it is sensible policy designed to allocate money accordingly so that local decisions can be made as to the best way to spend/invest that money!!!

The Red Shirts said that they also just wanted decentralisation (what they may do if their demands are ignored is another topic).

And for once I actually agree with you on something. Thailand desperately needs decentralisation to avoid civil war (the difference between mainstream ideologies in the North and the South is too stark for them to coexist peacefully in a centralised state).

But I hardly see why it needs 18 months under an unelected "People's Council" to do this. Why can't Thailand first just finish the elections so the country can get out of limbo? After this, Pheu Thai, the UDD, the Democrats and the PDRC (plus whoever wants to come) meet and hammer out proposals for decentralisation. This shouldn't be as hard as it sounds since it has support in both camps (if only because they want to get away from each other). Finally the country can have a series of referendums. If the proposals are well thought out, then they would probably pass, since both sides are talking about the same thing. If not, then the group can revise the proposals and try again.

Once this is done, the North can vote for their area to be run by Skype, and the South can be run by unelected People's Councils (if that is what people there really want).

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Putting aside for the moment that the Red Leadership only changed to "decentralisation" after warnings from the army that secession would be dealt with harshly - and complaints being lodged with the police - there needs to be a forum where such change can take place. Neither side will trust the other to form an interim government now - and frankly the PTP have shown that they can not be trusted with policy making and following the rules whilst in government (not saying the Dems or anyone else would either). This leaves an independent think tank to bring in such changes - and we are not just talking about devolution/decentralisation, but anti-corruption, new/firmer/precise election law, house make up (Senate in particular), Military promotion and powers, police reform, judicial reform, budgeting, taxes (national and local), governorship system, constitutional reform, and so on - an awful lot in real terms.

No one is going to trust referendums any more than they do elections - first move is to start with a clean sheet without the vested interests controlling what that sheet looks like.

The Reds are never going to trust Suthep's picks any more than the Dems would trust Thida's etc. So, I would like to see Suthep's general plan put into action (I think it is the only way to go now - anything else, at best, stores it all up for the next time around - the Reds started it all in 2010 (or perhaps to a lesser extent the PAD with the airport a few years before that) and the PDRC have followed suit - the genie is out of that little bottle ) - but with a non-partisan experts list put together by a joint cross-party group consisting of the Government, PDRC, Red Shirt Leadership, Dems, etc in equal number - maybe each making their own fixed length list in the dark, cross referencing the lists to see if there are any cross over people - and then with the rest, taking turns to cut a name. Until the 300 or whatever makes sense. Might still end up with some ringers, but they should be stymied by their opposite number - and guidelines as to qualifications should see that even they still contribute positively.

Put in a emergency, special amendment to the constitution for a fixed term governance to be dissolved under a forward dated resolution from the crown to dissolve after 20 months and election after 24 months.

The Red leadership always only publicly supported decentralisation, not secession. They made it clear in their first speeches on the topic. But whether or not some elements actually do want secession (and promoted decentralisation instead because they knew it was illegal) is another topic.

Where is this "neutral think tank" going to fall out of the sky from? And, didn't you read the recent article where the PDRC said that "a neutral People's Council would be too difficult" and that "one does not invite a defeated enemy to form a government together" (or words to that effect).

"No one is going to trust referendums any more than they do elections - first move is to start with a clean sheet without the vested interests controlling what that sheet looks like."

The only people who don't trust elections are Suthep's mob. And for all their rumblings about vote rigging, the elections were declared free and fair by the international community, with the only criticism being directed towards the yellow side for their efforts to disrupt it.

While such a committee is making reform proposals on decentralisation or whatever (which really need to be put to a referendum to get legitimacy), why can't Thailand have an elected government? Any kind of appointed government is going to be seem as a yellow power grab by the reds, who will fear that they are here to stay. Look how many times Suthep has declared deadlines for his demonstrations to pack up and go home, and yet they are still here. And please don't say that it should be left to the courts to enforce a resolution dissolving the government. The red side will have very well founded fears that the courts will invent some loophole to suspend democracy forever.

And BTW you say that the Reds started it all in 2010, I could say that the Yellows started it in 2006. But a more mature analysis would be to say that this turmoil was inevitable if Thailand was ever going to make the transition from a feudal to a modern society.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited March 17, 2014 by ThailandNoob

[SICHONSTEVE]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

[ThailandNoob]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

You really believe this???

Look at the land scandal in 1995. Look at Abhisit's promise to hold elections in late 2010. More recently, how many times has Suthep promised to step down if his "final push" didn't succeed.

I would rather trust people that need to go to the polls every year to stay in power. At least this places an upper limit on what they can get away with. If Suthep and his mob (who as I pointed out have rich histories of dishonesty) get to run the country via their unelected People's Council, they will have no such constraints and things will be even worse.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Fat Haggis]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

[SICHONSTEVE]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

You really believe this???

Look at the land scandal in 1995. Look at Abhisit's promise to hold elections in late 2010. More recently, how many times has Suthep promised to step down if his "final push" didn't succeed.

I would rather trust people that need to go to the polls every year to stay in power. At least this places an upper limit on what they can get away with. If Suthep and his mob (who as I pointed out have rich histories of dishonesty) get to run the country via their unelected People's Council, they will have no such constraints and things will be even worse.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes, I do, I have already stated my beliefs.

Abhisit would have kept to his word had he been allowed to. If you followed what actually happened you would be aware that it was none other than Thaksin, via a phone call/Skype message to his 3 red shirt lackey's that he was not prepared to have the blockades dismantled and the protesters to go back home (which was all that Abhisit was asking for as his side of the bargain). Thaksin wanted more than this and didn't play ball - it seems that the PDRC have turned the tables on Thaksin by adopting exactly the same strategies and demands as he used in 2010 - how wonderfully ironic!!!!

[SICHONSTEVE]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

[HonestQuietBob]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

Edited March 17, 2014 by HonestQuietBob

[metisdead]

A post in which a reply had been made within the quoted post with different colored font has been removed as this has changed the content of the quoted post:

15) Do not make changes to quoted material that changes the intended meaning of the quoted post

[Issangeorge]

I don't agree with an appointed people's council anymore than anyone else. However if everybody is against the appointed people's council, why is there no outcry over Jatupon being appointed Redshirt leader?

Sent from my i-mobile IQ X using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[SICHONSTEVE]

I don't agree with an appointed people's council anymore than anyone else. However if everybody is against the appointed people's council, why is there no outcry over Jatupon being appointed Redshirt leader?

Sent from my i-mobile IQ X using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I don't think that many posters think that it was a wise move and have commented on this fact.

Also, I wouldn't say that the army chief (means the collective army) is terribly impressed with having a thug at the head of a political movement (or bandit, as he refers him as).

Maybe not Thaksin actually - hands up those who think its a good and sensible promotion!!! Is there anyone left?

Edited March 17, 2014 by SICHONSTEVE

[SICHONSTEVE]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

Lets just say that we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one!!

[djjamie]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

Your reply is a predictable PTP belief. It is not fact.

Accused terrorist, accused mass murderer convicted criminal fugitive thaksin attempted to claim protesters disrupted elections, but voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests tell a different story entirely, especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime allegedly draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted. I repeat UNINTERRUPTED. The Northeast recorded the highest turnout with 56.14%, followed by the North with 54.03%, the South with 44.88 per cent and Central region with 42.38 percent. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Go figure. Facts, NOT beliefs state differently to your agenda driven rhetoric.The terrible voter turnout alone is an indication of the illegitimacy of the PTP regime, since not voting was considered a sign of support for the PDRC campaign. However, those that did vote, did not necessarily vote for the PTP. The only major regime on the ballot paper. Many defaced their ballots in protest, others checked "no vote." While the regime is gloating over their "victory" in its one-party election or when admitting defat refer to the 2011 election as the true indication of it's popular mandate, the fact that less than 50% of the population bothered to vote means the true majority of Thais have lost faith in the process or are directly opposed to the regime.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

Having an accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP as a leader reinforced with the above facts stating the failure of the 2014 elections (not the ones from 3 years ago) indicate to me that the majority do want reform before elections.

The only facts you can state are facts regarding the 2011 election. Yep, the PTP got the majority. Woppy do…That was 3 years ago.

Time to accept the will of the majority eve if you don't like it accept it.

I have purposely neglected to answer the remaining questions because it is simply speculation and I cannot base it on facts…….yet. Though as predictable that night follows day you have already based your answers on beliefs.

"Facts" - The PTP's greatest enemy.

"Beliefs" - Their greatest friend.

[HonestQuietBob]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

Lets just say that we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one!!

This response disappoints me Steve.

Your a man with a lot to say and one that's not shy to state his beliefs clearly and forcefully.

So why the silence here?

If you can do nothing else but respond to one of the above points, please I would like to know what your opinion is on the changes that have been made to the electoral system over the years to favour the Democrats and try to somehow get them over the line in an election.

Do you support them?

Do you think they're just?

Do you think Sutheps' reform agenda will just be a continuation of the previous efforts to distort elections?

I see you've decided to give a "like" to djjamie for his response which leads me to believe that you do have an opinion but for some reason just won't respond.

Please don't go all shy on me now.

Edited March 17, 2014 by HonestQuietBob

[HonestQuietBob]

I think everyone agrees that there is an urgent need of reformation, but as it stands it appears that the majority want elections before them, nobody should be counting a non vote as a no vote, people often abstain when they know that it's going to be a waste of time, as in this case, the elections were always going to be questionable, and given that the Dems refused to stand.. so many people would have thought to themselves, we the election is going to be nullified so why waste my time.

Everyone is guilty of assumption, and I really do wonder how many TVF members would feel if the PTP were to either remain in power, or reclaim power in 12-18 months?? What then?

What's happened to this big final final final push? A few days doesn't equate a week later.. kind of makes you think that if this is Sutheps idea of a few days, what's his idea of 12-18 months for reformation going to be like??

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

Your reply is a predictable PTP belief. It is not fact.

Accused terrorist, accused mass murderer convicted criminal fugitive thaksin attempted to claim protesters disrupted elections, but voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests tell a different story entirely, especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime allegedly draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted. I repeat UNINTERRUPTED. The Northeast recorded the highest turnout with 56.14%, followed by the North with 54.03%, the South with 44.88 per cent and Central region with 42.38 percent. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Go figure. Facts, NOT beliefs state differently to your agenda driven rhetoric.The terrible voter turnout alone is an indication of the illegitimacy of the PTP regime, since not voting was considered a sign of support for the PDRC campaign. However, those that did vote, did not necessarily vote for the PTP. The only major regime on the ballot paper. Many defaced their ballots in protest, others checked "no vote." While the regime is gloating over their "victory" in its one-party election or when admitting defat refer to the 2011 election as the true indication of it's popular mandate, the fact that less than 50% of the population bothered to vote means the true majority of Thais have lost faith in the process or are directly opposed to the regime.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

Having an accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP as a leader reinforced with the above facts stating the failure of the 2014 elections (not the ones from 3 years ago) indicate to me that the majority do want reform before elections.

The only facts you can state are facts regarding the 2011 election. Yep, the PTP got the majority. Woppy do…That was 3 years ago.

Time to accept the will of the majority eve if you don't like it accept it.

I have purposely neglected to answer the remaining questions because it is simply speculation and I cannot base it on facts…….yet. Though as predictable that night follows day you have already based your answers on beliefs.

"Facts" - The PTP's greatest enemy.

"Beliefs" - Their greatest friend.

Oh well then, here we go......

A. I am going to ignore all the crap about Thaksin and go straight to the election results

B. The turnout was low because the Democrats boycotted. It really is as simple as that. Why on earth would a labourer in Bangkok bother to travel all the way to his home provence to vote in an election that had only one significant candidate and was likely to get annulled by the biased "independent" agencies? Any political savvy person knows that the closer the expected result the more important the turnout - the reds had this one won before the first vote was even cast because the Democrats took all their toys and went home. They did what they had to do to win and no more.

C. Not voting was considered a sign of support for PDRC. What a silly thing to say. Please can you tell me who the 25% of voters who didn't vote in 2011 were sending a sign of support for? Maybe they were just ahead of their time and were "casting " the first ever non-votes for the PDRC. It is a foolish notion to claim that every eligible Thai voter who did not tick a box for PTP is a Suthepsta. If support has dropped off so significantly for PTP, why did the Democrats not contest the election and take the easy win? Why are they still trying to avoid an election and go for an appointed council? While neither of us knows the exact level of support for either faction only a very few diehard deluded true believers of the yellow cause actually think PTP are not by far the best supported political organisation in the nation.

D. Again I ignore all the crap about Thaksin

E. You believe that the majority of Thais want to voluntarily give up their right to decide who will govern them because:

1 - Thaksin is a bad man

2 - voter turn out in a boycotted election was lower than the turn out in the previous non-boycotted election.

Well,

1 - Thaksin was, is and remains the most popular politician on the Thai landscape.

2 - See B above

Nobody knows the exact level of support for "reforms before elections" but the dwindling numbers of Suthepsta's gives us all a fair indication of what the true state of affairs is.

E. The rest is all speculation you say, and you cannot base it on facts you say.

Interesting.

Interesting and wrong I say.

- Much like Suthep, the coup government of 2006 preached reforms then elections and who wins gets to govern. The constitution was altered, PPP won the elections and..... surprise, surprise - they were not left alone and allowed to govern. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

- The alterations to the election system by the coup government and the Abhisit Democrat government are as I have stated and are again FACTS. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

I think we're done here, unless your mate Steve has finally found his voice and has something to say.

Well, do ya punk?

[djjamie]

Oh well then, here we go......

A. I am going to ignore all the crap about Thaksin and go straight to the election results

B. The turnout was low because the Democrats boycotted. It really is as simple as that. Why on earth would a labourer in Bangkok bother to travel all the way to his home provence to vote in an election that had only one significant candidate and was likely to get annulled by the biased "independent" agencies? Any political savvy person knows that the closer the expected result the more important the turnout - the reds had this one won before the first vote was even cast because the Democrats took all their toys and went home. They did what they had to do to win and no more.

C. Not voting was considered a sign of support for PDRC. What a silly thing to say. Please can you tell me who the 25% of voters who didn't vote in 2011 were sending a sign of support for? Maybe they were just ahead of their time and were "casting " the first ever non-votes for the PDRC. It is a foolish notion to claim that every eligible Thai voter who did not tick a box for PTP is a Suthepsta. If support has dropped off so significantly for PTP, why did the Democrats not contest the election and take the easy win? Why are they still trying to avoid an election and go for an appointed council? While neither of us knows the exact level of support for either faction only a very few diehard deluded true believers of the yellow cause actually think PTP are not by far the best supported political organisation in the nation.

D. Again I ignore all the crap about Thaksin

E. You believe that the majority of Thais want to voluntarily give up their right to decide who will govern them because:

1 - Thaksin is a bad man

2 - voter turn out in a boycotted election was lower than the turn out in the previous non-boycotted election.

Well,

1 - Thaksin was, is and remains the most popular politician on the Thai landscape.2 - See B above

Nobody knows the exact level of support for "reforms before elections" but the dwindling numbers of Suthepsta's gives us all a fair indication of what the true state of affairs is.

E. The rest is all speculation you say, and you cannot base it on facts you say.

Interesting.

Interesting and wrong I say.

- Much like Suthep, the coup government of 2006 preached reforms then elections and who wins gets to govern. The constitution was altered, PPP won the elections and..... surprise, surprise - they were not left alone and allowed to govern. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

- The alterations to the election system by the coup government and the Abhisit Democrat government are as I have stated and are again FACTS. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

I think we're done here, unless your mate Steve has finally found his voice and has something to say.

Well, do ya punk?

I will now follow your argument pattern.

Is thaksin an accused mass murderer, accessed terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP that supported the coup in 1992 because it suited his agenda, but denounced the cup in 2006 because it did not hit his agenda (yes yes yingluck is the PM)? With out the usual cop out of "well the DEM's did this…." ………Can YOU admit that thaksin is the above conflicted persona? Concentrate now. Concentrate. Don't answer with the PDRC excuse…Just answer the question…..

Don't forget, what I am saying is fact……….Fact, mate. not Belief.

Answer my question. Your peers are watching...

Edited March 17, 2014 by djjamie

[JAG]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

May I explain why I believe that Suthep and the PDRC cannot be trusted to allow elections.

One must look behind Suthep, who in many ways is the front man, at who is driving the anti government campaign. This campaign has been planned and funded with the intention of ejecting Pheu Thai from government, and making sure they never return. The stakes are as high as they come, what form of government the kingdom will have over the foreseeable future, and who will be in control. Bear in mind there is an unhappy but inevitable event and its consequences to be managed soon.

Thaksin remains the single most influential presence, and arguably commands more support than any other political presence in the Kingdom. We can argue why that is, and the rights and wrongs of it until the cows come home, but it remains the case. In any election his faction will win, or at least the risk of that is too great to chance. Therefore once(if) Pheu Thai is removed from power, I am convinced that there will not be another election, at least not one in which the franchise is available in the regions which support Thaksin.

What will be the result - I hope and pray not civil war, I have a wife and child here. There will be I am sure widespread opposition away from Bangkok, can the army hold the line, no, apart from some carefully trained and well equipped units in and around the capital, it is largely a poorly trained and I'll equipped comic opera outfit.

That's my 5 Quid's worth. I rather hope I have got it wrong. I don't think I have

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[djjamie]

...is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

What you should appreciate 'fat haggis' is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent (caretaker) government and the numbers were in double digits in most provinces!!! It is a fact that PTP's popularity as severely diminished on account of their frauds, corruption and lies and dishonesty being revealed for all they are as all of their policies have been a complete disaster.

I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform as this does nothing to solve the problems. The only way that Thailand can move forward is for a mammoth effort to be made in order to devise an unelected council that is acceptable to all - I wish them luck on that one!!!

This final push thing means nothing - he is simply using this tactic (as Thai's often do) to rally his troops and put as much pressure on the government as possible. This is not a lie or dishonesty as he cannot really guess what numbers will turn out, or how much of a determined fight Yingluck has been told to put up by Thaksin in order to cling on to power.

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

The opposition has the duty to hold them to account and with the reforms it will be far more difficult to cheat, use blatant populist policies to garner votes, the police will not be under Thaksin's control as he will have been cleared out and as long as the government behaves itself and governs responsibly then the courts will not be permanently on their backs. Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

The high "no" is easily accounted for by the absence of the Democrats in the election.

In fact - you may as well consider all the "no's" to be the de facto Democrat vote.

Nice to see they cracked double digits in most provinces.

Well done boys.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

I say - I do think that a majority of people do want elections before reform.

Who is right? Who is wrong? Me? You?

Truth is we're both just guessing and neither of us know what the majority want - so the whole exercise is really just a pointless waste of time.

This final push thing means nothing

Ain't that the truth

If, after the reforms are in place the PTP wins (assumes they are still around, which is highly dubious) then they hold the right to govern.

Kind of reminds me of the situation after the military coup government re-jigged the constitution in 2007 and said whoever wins the next election holds the right to govern.

How'd that work out?

Suthep, who retires after his mission is completed, has gone on record as saying that "he will respect the PTP to govern if they win fair and free elections", post reform.

The reforms Suthep wants to implement are ones that ensure that the reds can never win an election again. Look at all the changes to the system made by the yellows from 2007 onwards. They all reduce democracy.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…

So, lets start on forming this council and get these reforms under way as it is the ONLY way to go!!!

Let's not - your post outlines the ONLY way to not go.

is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

Your reply is a predictable PTP belief. It is not fact.

Accused terrorist, accused mass murderer convicted criminal fugitive thaksin attempted to claim protesters disrupted elections, but voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests tell a different story entirely, especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime allegedly draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted. I repeat UNINTERRUPTED. The Northeast recorded the highest turnout with 56.14%, followed by the North with 54.03%, the South with 44.88 per cent and Central region with 42.38 percent. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Go figure. Facts, NOT beliefs state differently to your agenda driven rhetoric.The terrible voter turnout alone is an indication of the illegitimacy of the PTP regime, since not voting was considered a sign of support for the PDRC campaign. However, those that did vote, did not necessarily vote for the PTP. The only major regime on the ballot paper. Many defaced their ballots in protest, others checked "no vote." While the regime is gloating over their "victory" in its one-party election or when admitting defat refer to the 2011 election as the true indication of it's popular mandate, the fact that less than 50% of the population bothered to vote means the true majority of Thais have lost faith in the process or are directly opposed to the regime.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

Having an accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP as a leader reinforced with the above facts stating the failure of the 2014 elections (not the ones from 3 years ago) indicate to me that the majority do want reform before elections.

The only facts you can state are facts regarding the 2011 election. Yep, the PTP got the majority. Woppy do…That was 3 years ago.

Time to accept the will of the majority eve if you don't like it accept it.

I have purposely neglected to answer the remaining questions because it is simply speculation and I cannot base it on facts…….yet. Though as predictable that night follows day you have already based your answers on beliefs.

"Facts" - The PTP's greatest enemy.

"Beliefs" - Their greatest friend.

Oh well then, here we go......

A. I am going to ignore all the crap about Thaksin and go straight to the election results

B. The turnout was low because the Democrats boycotted. It really is as simple as that. Why on earth would a labourer in Bangkok bother to travel all the way to his home provence to vote in an election that had only one significant candidate and was likely to get annulled by the biased "independent" agencies? Any political savvy person knows that the closer the expected result the more important the turnout - the reds had this one won before the first vote was even cast because the Democrats took all their toys and went home. They did what they had to do to win and no more.

C. Not voting was considered a sign of support for PDRC. What a silly thing to say. Please can you tell me who the 25% of voters who didn't vote in 2011 were sending a sign of support for? Maybe they were just ahead of their time and were "casting " the first ever non-votes for the PDRC. It is a foolish notion to claim that every eligible Thai voter who did not tick a box for PTP is a Suthepsta. If support has dropped off so significantly for PTP, why did the Democrats not contest the election and take the easy win? Why are they still trying to avoid an election and go for an appointed council? While neither of us knows the exact level of support for either faction only a very few diehard deluded true believers of the yellow cause actually think PTP are not by far the best supported political organisation in the nation.

D. Again I ignore all the crap about Thaksin

E. You believe that the majority of Thais want to voluntarily give up their right to decide who will govern them because:

1 - Thaksin is a bad man

2 - voter turn out in a boycotted election was lower than the turn out in the previous non-boycotted election.

Well,

1 - Thaksin was, is and remains the most popular politician on the Thai landscape.

2 - See B above

Nobody knows the exact level of support for "reforms before elections" but the dwindling numbers of Suthepsta's gives us all a fair indication of what the true state of affairs is.

E. The rest is all speculation you say, and you cannot base it on facts you say.

Interesting.

Interesting and wrong I say.

- Much like Suthep, the coup government of 2006 preached reforms then elections and who wins gets to govern. The constitution was altered, PPP won the elections and..... surprise, surprise - they were not left alone and allowed to govern. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

- The alterations to the election system by the coup government and the Abhisit Democrat government are as I have stated and are again FACTS. All of this is irrefutable fact. I can see why you avoided responding to this point - no amount of foolishness can get you around the obvious here.

I think we're done here, unless your mate Steve has finally found his voice and has something to say.

Well, do ya punk?

is that a 'no' vote is a protest vote against the incumbent...

Your reply is a predictable PTP belief. Not fact.

Accused terrorist, accused mass murderer convicted criminal fugitive thaksin attempted to claim protesters disrupted elections, but voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests tell a different story entirely, especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime allegedly draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted. I repeat UNINTERRUPTED. The Northeast recorded the highest turnout with 56.14%, followed by the North with 54.03%, the South with 44.88 per cent and Central region with 42.38 percent. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Go figure. Facts, NOT beliefs state differently to your agenda driven rhetoric.The terrible voter turnout alone is an indication of the illegitimacy of the PTP regime, since not voting was considered a sign of support for the PDRC campaign. However, those that did vote, did not necessarily vote for the PTP. The only major regime on the ballot paper. Many defaced their ballots in protest, others checked "no vote." While the regime is gloating over their "victory" in its one-party election or when admitting defat refer to the 2011 election as the true indication of it's popular mandate, the fact that less than 50% of the population bothered to vote means the true majority of Thais have lost faith in the process or are directly opposed to the regime.

"I don't think that a majority of people do want elections before reform"

Having an accused mass murderer, accused terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP as a leader reinforced with the above facts stating the failure of the 2014 elections (not the ones from 3 years ago) indicate to me that the majority do want reform before elections.

The only facts you can state are facts regarding the 2011 election. Yep, the PTP got the majority. Woppy do…That was 3 years ago.

Time to accept the will of the majority eve if you don't like it accept it.

I have purposely neglected to answer the remaining questions because it is simply speculation and I cannot base it on facts…….yet. Though as predictable that night follows day you have already based your answers on beliefs.

"Facts" - The PTP's greatest enemy.

"Beliefs" - Their greatest friend.

[HonestQuietBob]

Is thaksin an accused mass murderer, accessed terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive unelectable leader of the PTP that supported the coup in 1992 because it suited his agenda, but denounced the cup in 2006 because it did not hit his agenda (yes yes yingluck is the PM)? With out the usual cop out of "well the DEM's did this…." ………Can YOU admit that thaksin is the above conflicted persona? Concentrate now. Concentrate. Don't answer with the PDRC excuse…Just answer the question…..

Don't forget, what I am saying is fact……….Fact, mate. not Belief.

Answer my question. Your peers are watching...

fact, belief,fact, belief, fact, belief.......

Coherency is becoming an issue here.

Is Thaksin an accused......yada........yada...........yada........

He indeed is.

The list of accusations against Thaksin is very much more substantial than what you cite.

He has been accused of a great many things. Mostly baselessly.

Much the same as his sister is currently being accused of rigging the lottery.

So what's your point?

Accusations mean nothing without convictions.

Lets test the above statement shall we?

I believe that djjamie is guilty of being a mass murder.

You have now been accused. (baselessly accused!)

With that said I shall now always refer to you as "accused mass murderer djjamie"

(Can you now see how ridiculous your position is here?)

So, am I correct to refer to you as an accused mass murderer from here on in or is it just nonsense that only genetically insufficient individuals could accept?

Accusations mean nothing without convictions.

So back to the changes to the electoral system made by the yellow side - What do you think? Good or bad?

Please do tell.

[Fat Haggis]

Without the Dems participating it was known well in advance that there would not be enough seats to make a government, perhaps this is the reason why there was 25% less of a turnout in the election as they knew it was a waste of time ??

[ThailandNoob]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

You really believe this???

Look at the land scandal in 1995. Look at Abhisit's promise to hold elections in late 2010. More recently, how many times has Suthep promised to step down if his "final push" didn't succeed.

I would rather trust people that need to go to the polls every year to stay in power. At least this places an upper limit on what they can get away with. If Suthep and his mob (who as I pointed out have rich histories of dishonesty) get to run the country via their unelected People's Council, they will have no such constraints and things will be even worse.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes, I do, I have already stated my beliefs.

Abhisit would have kept to his word had he been allowed to. If you followed what actually happened you would be aware that it was none other than Thaksin, via a phone call/Skype message to his 3 red shirt lackey's that he was not prepared to have the blockades dismantled and the protesters to go back home (which was all that Abhisit was asking for as his side of the bargain). Thaksin wanted more than this and didn't play ball - it seems that the PDRC have turned the tables on Thaksin by adopting exactly the same strategies and demands as he used in 2010 - how wonderfully ironic!!!!

I followed the events of 2010. I remember that the reason the whole deal fell through was that reds didn't believe Abhisit was sincere in his promise to hold elections. All the had to go on was Abhisit's word that he would dissolve parliament and call elections (and the reds already had reason to mistrust Abhisit, since the honest thing to do when you come into power in a backroom deal is to hold an election so no-one can question your mandate. In my home country even certain politicians who I consider extremely slimy have done this).

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[SICHONSTEVE]

OK, one last time.

I know that the populist policies were clearly there to garner votes to gain power and then return Thaksin back to Thailand a free man. It was obvious to me and many other Dem leaning posters that this was the case and we collectively disapprove of such actions.

In the early days (I don't know about now BTW as it does seem that Yingluck has decided to appoint some of her own people to Thaksin's consternation) that, due to the fact that Yingluck was a TOTAL novice (and shouldn't have been there) Thaksin appointed his relations , police buddies and serfs to look after HIS interests. One of the first things that happened was for him to have a new Thai passport delivered to him by hand (despite this being illegal). To most of his appointee ministry chiefs, their job entailed working for Thaksin (not Thailand, but Thaksin).

Anyway. what I have laid out above describes the dangers and folly of this evil dictator. He had to be stopped as he was playing his own game of politics that stretched/ignored/sneered at the old constitution for his own benefit and towards gaining huge personal financial gains.

The army saw the dangers of a 'dictator in action' with no signs of never wanting to stop. They had no alternative other than to take him out and alter/reform the constitution to keep him and his string of newly formed parties in check. They dismantled some of the tools and mechanisms that he was exploiting to carry out his illegal activities such as the fully elected senate packed with 'his people' and made it more accountable and difficult to pass bills and laws in order to stymy his rampant corruption due to the appointed element.

This had some stalling effect and when he wanted lots of money to play with to pay for his populist policy disasters (all of them) and tried to get Yingluck out of the mess she found herself in, he tried to bypass parliamentary law that obstructed him getting his filthy hands on the money by passing bills early in the morning (4.00 AM) and all sorts of other devious tricks and practices so that 2.3 trillion baht could be used as he wished in the guise of massive projects such as the high speed railway. Because these had to go through feasibility and environmental impact studies and had to be scrutinised and approved by parliament, all which takes time, he decided that he wanted them done in secrecy without any form of justification for them to be assessed as to their worthiness and value for money taking place.

This, like so many things that Yingluck has been told by him to do has, on the whole, involved plenty of illegal and unethical goings on that have broken the law and fallen foul of the present constitutional laws.

I haven't even mentioned the ILLEGAL amnesty bill and only brushed upon his planned reverting of the senate back to a fully elected chamber in order for him to ram any bill he wants through without any transparency or checks and balances ie: ruling in dictatorial fashion in bypassing government (enabling secretive corruption to thrive).

To answer your question, these changes/reforms to the constitution are indeed essential and necessary as parliamentary behaviour MUST BE accountable, transparent, and the electoral process (which is extremely flawed) needs to be cleaned up. As to the resultant changes to the constitution favouring the Democrats I think they almost certainly will as everyone will be playing by the book and these populist schemes that are used to the full by Thaksin will be outlawed or at least effectively costed out to ensure that they wont become too burdensome on the government finances (like the rice scam and to a lesser extent, the others).

Edited March 18, 2014 by SICHONSTEVE

[Dogmatix]

Deleted by Dogmatix

Edited March 18, 2014 by Dogmatix

[SICHONSTEVE]

The next item on the agenda (post reforms) is free and fair elections. This committee won't be running the government in the interim - they will be working in the background devising the reforms before holding ensuing elections to choose the government whence the neutral government/body will step down!!!

That's very reassuring.

However, in reality...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

This will probably receive hoots of derision but I honestly believe that Suthep and the PDRC are being honourable in their intentions whereas the red side do not know what the word 'truth' means or 'honour' and 'accountability' for that means........you can throw in others like 'democracy' (not as relevant as it is made out to be) as well as 'fairness', 'justice' and 'compassion'.

That's my personal beliefs so fire away chaps.

You really believe this???

Look at the land scandal in 1995. Look at Abhisit's promise to hold elections in late 2010. More recently, how many times has Suthep promised to step down if his "final push" didn't succeed.

I would rather trust people that need to go to the polls every year to stay in power. At least this places an upper limit on what they can get away with. If Suthep and his mob (who as I pointed out have rich histories of dishonesty) get to run the country via their unelected People's Council, they will have no such constraints and things will be even worse.

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yes, I do, I have already stated my beliefs.

Abhisit would have kept to his word had he been allowed to. If you followed what actually happened you would be aware that it was none other than Thaksin, via a phone call/Skype message to his 3 red shirt lackey's that he was not prepared to have the blockades dismantled and the protesters to go back home (which was all that Abhisit was asking for as his side of the bargain). Thaksin wanted more than this and didn't play ball - it seems that the PDRC have turned the tables on Thaksin by adopting exactly the same strategies and demands as he used in 2010 - how wonderfully ironic!!!!

I followed the events of 2010. I remember that the reason the whole deal fell through was that reds didn't believe Abhisit was sincere in his promise to hold elections. All the had to go on was Abhisit's word that he would dissolve parliament and call elections (and the reds already had reason to mistrust Abhisit, since the honest thing to do when you come into power in a backroom deal is to hold an election so no-one can question your mandate. In my home country even certain politicians who I consider extremely slimy have done this).

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I have read his book 'The Simple Truth' and his sincerity and righteousness come across in spades. Him and Korn are the only honest and trustworthy politicians around.

These two are like 'Batman and Robin' in how they act and in their beliefs of right and wrong and we should treasure them as a rare commodity in the LOS.

[HonestQuietBob]

I followed the events of 2010. I remember that the reason the whole deal fell through was that reds didn't believe Abhisit was sincere in his promise to hold elections. All the had to go on was Abhisit's word that he would dissolve parliament and call elections (and the reds already had reason to mistrust Abhisit, since the honest thing to do when you come into power in a backroom deal is to hold an election so no-one can question your mandate. In my home country even certain politicians who I consider extremely slimy have done this).

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I have read his book 'The Simple Truth' and his sincerity and righteousness come across in spades. Him and Korn are the only honest and trustworthy politicians around.

These two are like 'Batman and Robin' in how they act and in their beliefs of right and wrong and we should treasure them as a rare commodity in the LOS.

I too have read the book "The SImple Truth" and found it to be just "Simple".

It is a one sided whitewash of events in which he takes absolutely zero responsibility for his actions and the deaths that he is at the very least partly responsible for.

Batman and Robin?

Again with the delusional line a thinking that Thaksin is pure evil and those opposed to him are pure as the driven snow.

Abhisit is no more than a presentable face shown to the rest of world to cover for an unseemly machine seeking to overthrow democracy in the LOS.

He is not a saviour - he is just a naughty boy!

[Arkady]

The last major reform of Thailand's national administration system was put in place by King Chulalongkorn in the 1890s and that is effectively what we have today. The Siamese provinces of the 19th century had been governed by nobles who operated like war lords, controlling the revenues collected in their fiefdoms and passing on only an average of 20% to the royal treasury as a sort of tribute to avoid interference. Most of the royal family rarely went outside Bangkok and left the provinces to these noble families. To implement his vision of a modern Siam with railways etc Chulalongkorn needed to obtain complete control of the tax revenues and deal with corruption in the nobility and the royal family. Centralisation was the answer to this, combined with the establishment of a function that resembled today's office of the auditor-general, staffed up with British auditors who were mainly retired administrators recruited from nearby British colonies where they retired at 50 in those days. The nobility railed against these administrative reforms and the members of the royal family, who were in central government as ministers etc, bridled against the audit function, so that the King had to introduce the reforms slowly and carefully to avoid rebellion. But in the end he succeeded andbuilt out the railway system covering the whole country which is incidentally the same single track narrow gauge railway system we have today virtually unchanged.

Now that 125 years have past it is time for another wide sweeping set of reforms. But where is the man or woman of vision and strength like Chulalongkorn to do the job? Certainly none of today's politicians.