Small parties name three figures they will back as new PM

[khunken]

It may appear that too many people are cramming on to Pheu Thai's stage. But - on closer inspection, one of those proposed is none other than Pongthep Thepkanjana, who is part of Thaksin's trusted inner circle.Therefore, this clearly leaves the door open for Thaksin, and as such ought to be viewed as not quite the independent proposal as it might appear to be.

Yes, I was thinking that was an odd proposal. However it's only a starting point for further discussion, and I'm pretty sure he'd be dropped from consideration pretty quickly. How about the other two? I don't recognize their names, but I'd probably prefer them to, say, Palakorn Suwanarat or Pridiyathorn Devakula. As I understand it what they want is to bring more parties together for further proposals. I think it's premature to start definitely ruling people out.

Supachai Panichpakdi is a former DEmocrat party member who has been head of the WTO and UNCTAD. IMO he would be a very good pick to lead the Democrat party. I don't think he would take the job of interim PM nor would he be acceptable to Thaksin.

[3NUMBAS]

they wont last long, his highness Suthep wont like em either and plan to oust them as well

[surangw]

When it comes to " figures" I was thinking : Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse and Superman

but they seem to end up with goofy

[Old Man River]

It may appear that too many people are cramming on to Pheu Thai's stage. But - on closer inspection, one of those proposed is none other than Pongthep Thepkanjana, who is part of Thaksin's trusted inner circle.Therefore, this clearly leaves the door open for Thaksin, and as such ought to be viewed as not quite the independent proposal as it might appear to be.

One current PTP, one known Democrat and one probably in the middle. It sounds smart to me.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Dogmatix]

It may appear that too many people are cramming on to Pheu Thai's stage. But - on closer inspection, one of those proposed is none other than Pongthep Thepkanjana, who is part of Thaksin's trusted inner circle.Therefore, this clearly leaves the door open for Thaksin, and as such ought to be viewed as not quite the independent proposal as it might appear to be.

Pongthep is a shady character who poses as a legal expert and had has apparently been a judge but, nevertheless, threatens the courts and comes out with distorted self-serving interpretations of the law. Boon is regarded as a somewhat dubious businessman. Supachai is OK but not politically neutral.

It is interesting that no one seems to give much for YL's chances of survival. She must feel rather discouraged.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Dogmatix

[northernjohn]

How about "Thai Workers Party" Working for the Thai people, identify with the good working people of Thailand , instead of believing in a vaccum , democracy is a loosely termed word that means nothing in Thailand , therefore should not be included in any political party platform as it is not true, until you have freedom of speech there is no Democracy.

Freedom of speech is just a red hearing. It is being used as a cover up for the real problems ion Thailand. There is and never will be a country with freedom of speech. Some will have more freedom than others but all will have restrictions.

The sooner people get this freedom of speech nonsense out of the talk the sooner they can get on to the real problems in Thailand.

Thailand would see a lot more news if the libel laws were modified.

They are the biggest problem with what is in the media.

[northernjohn]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If any of the three accept to be placed in nomination , they should craft a platform for reform and run on that platform. Those specific reform actions. It shouldn't be personality contest but a government policy contest. It is constructive that these small groups have formed a coalition and unified their intent at least to some degree. In doing so, they show considerably more leadership than either Suthep or Yingluck.

Also their platform should have no popular promises that are doomed from the start. Sound planning for the present and the future. Also include a means to deal with the South. It has been swept under the carpet for two and a half years now. The Army is not the means to a peaceful south. The people of the south must be considered.

The Dems are only going to this EC meeting to reiterate their demand for reforms before elections... They won't join the next one unless at least the electoral reforms are complete to make them free and fair fro the first time ever in Thailand's history.

If they don't get at least this, they will boycott it.

If they join in the election without this... It is like saying that they were wrong to boycott the Feb 2nd election.... because nothing will have changed.

If a new election goes ahead, I guarantee it will be disrupted again. Maybe not by blockades, but by strategic mass 'no voting'. Which will be equally effective in preventing a government and a mandate.

If PTP manage to gather 10 million of the popular vote and there are 20 million no votes, there is no mandate to govern from the people. Also no quorum can be reached for parliament if the winning candidates in around 200 (Dem) constituencies out of the 500 can not be declared winners because they did not beat the 'no vote'.

So it will be just another waste of taxpayer's money.

Well I can't say as I blame them

The election process needs reform or we will continue to get bad government. New laws or penalties for existing ones need to be put in to the existing laws.

Breaking them the penalties should be swiftly administered. You buy one vote and in one week you are in jail for two years. Sell your vote for 500 baht and you are fined 2,500 baht.

Harsh yes but it is time to get rid of these self serving people and replace them with people who care about all of Thailand.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

First of all, the pad/pdrc/democrats are not demanding 'reforms before elections'--this is diversion designed to hide their extremist agenda; their real demand is that an 'appointed' dictator and his 'council'( that is appointed by them, or their little anti-democracy clik backed by some old military supremos and several billionairs) be installed and given FULL POWERS for an indefinent period. They claim that during this time this idiot will make 'reforms' which they have never detailed. It's an obvious sham.

Secondly, the elections in this country are free and fair, they are monitored by the 'pro-establishment EC and some international orgs, if there is any doubt then more international monitors can be brought in. The PhuaThai and non-democrat parties win the vast majority of the votes so this notion that the democrats would win the election 'if only it was free and fair' is a joke.

and then this ridiculous claim that the majority of Thai's are against elections so they 'vote no' because that's what Suthep and the democrats want them to do.. OH! here's an idea, since the dems and their 'no' voters are the majority-why don't they just tell their 'no' voters to vote for them, that way they can get their 'people's council' running the country--funny the pad/pdrc/dems havn't figured that out yet, considering their the 'smart and sophesticated' ones.

The Dems are only going to this EC meeting to reiterate their demand for reforms before elections... They won't join the next one unless at least the electoral reforms are complete to make them free and fair fro the first time ever in Thailand's history.

If they don't get at least this, they will boycott it.

If they join in the election without this... It is like saying that they were wrong to boycott the Feb 2nd election.... because nothing will have changed.

If a new election goes ahead, I guarantee it will be disrupted again. Maybe not by blockades, but by strategic mass 'no voting'. Which will be equally effective in preventing a government and a mandate.

If PTP manage to gather 10 million of the popular vote and there are 20 million no votes, there is no mandate to govern from the people. Also no quorum can be reached for parliament if the winning candidates in around 200 (Dem) constituencies out of the 500 can not be declared winners because they did not beat the 'no vote'.

So it will be just another waste of taxpayer's money.

"...since the dems and their 'no' voters are the majority-why don't they just tell their 'no' voters to vote for them.."

Since the Democrats "dissolved" themselves as a political party so that their protest activities would not get the party banned from elections for the next five years, and because no Democrat registered as a candidate for the election, they were not on the ballot and write-in candidates are forbidden. PDRC claims that there was a majority of "no votes" made in the election but the EC has never released (assuming it even bothered to tally votes) voting results to confirm the "no vote" count. But the PDRC leader Suthep made it clear that no anti-government protestor was to vote at all. Remember what happened when Abhisit announced that he was going to exercise his right to vote in the election, albeit a "no vote?" The next day he reversed his statement saying he will not vote at all. No doubt Suthep had a word with him about not following orders. Now according to the Thai constitution, people who didn't vote in an election are prevented from voting in the next election. But you can count on the EC to waive the constitution in the pursuit of resolving political conflicts to allow Democrats to register candidates and vote in the next election.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The 3 people are no doubt Thaksin stooges who won't propose reforms, and who will be interested more in the financial benefits of running for the PM position than helping the country.

Without reforms, nothing will change. Parliament will be full of PT who will railroad through Thaksin's policies. The Amnesty Bill will be back one day as Thaksin wants to come home. The dear chap is homesick, which only goes to show that his absurd wealth and that amassing more and more money don't make him happier. The Democrats may as well boycott the election as the government doesn't listen to them in Parliament anyway.

There will just be more street protests as Thaksin rams through his self-serving laws, clips the powers of the independent organizations, implements vote-buying populist schemes, etc. The mess will go on as long as Thaksin is alive.

"as long as Thaksin is alive"......I think he's quite healthy

and reforms???? For what benefit? For the leaders? Yes! But for the people? Probably not. There is a proverb: Fish stinks from the head....

The only reforms that politicians wish are those that give them the advantage to win elections by legal means and not necessarily "fair" means. Just the same as in the US when different political parties want to "redistrict" voting areas to give their own party an electoral advantage. Here they use the excuse of "reforms" to eliminate corruption in Thailand, but like to know who really believes corruption could ever be eliminated here since it is in this country's DNA. There is corruption in almost every country in this world, so the objective of "eliminating" corruption is an unachievable goal in any event and good only when speaking on a stage in front of protestors. It seems to be the unstated job of politicians regardless of country to manipulate the people which voted for them for personal benefit in many cases, as is apparently the case with the Senate Leader in the US Harry Reid who is supporting kicking a rancher off land he and his family has worked for 100 years just so Mr. Reid can do his private deal with the Chinese to construct a solar farm on this land.

Great quote from Ronald Reagan: "If it moves, tax it, if it keeps moving regulate it, if it stops moving subsidize it".

"... so Mr. Reid can do his private deal with the Chinese to construct a solar farm on this land."

The site that the Chinese company was planning to buy to build a solar electric power plant is NOWHERE near the federal lands the rancher Bundy has been disputing with the federal government. In June 2013 the company cancelled the project because it couldn't get any customers for its power and terminated its agreement with the federal government to buy the land for its project.

Your example is flawed, therefore, your conclusion is flawed. You need to contrive a better example.

[personchester]

If any of the three accept to be placed in nomination , they should craft a platform for reform and run on that platform. Those specific reform actions. It shouldn't be personality contest but a government policy contest. It is constructive that these small groups have formed a coalition and unified their intent at least to some degree. In doing so, they show considerably more leadership than either Suthep or Yingluck.

That would be a sensible solution to solve the current political problems, but it might perhaps not be accepted by the two opposite leaders ... Yingluck and Suthep.

[pkspeaker]

Oh paleese..Suthep is so full of shit..

>Here are some of Suthep's suggestions:

>Point 1: An electoral system free from vote buying.

The Bangkok Post Spectrum ran an article months ago that called out the 'vote-buying' charge as non-sence, The EC and international orgs monitor the elections, then there's the 'populist policies that amount to vote buying charge'-this ignors the fact that bangkok and the south (the democrats supposed 'stronghold') get even more entitlements then the north and neast.

>Point 2: Effective measures to end corruption

hmm.. that's not overly vague or anything..and only Suthep's 'people's council' of democrats can inact these "Effective measures to end corruption" ASIF the other 50or60 political are 'against' "Effective measures to end corruption"

>Point 3: People should have the power to remove politicians and administrative power should be decentralised by electing >provincial governors

people do have the power to remove politicians-it's called an election. OK 'elected provicial governors' I'll give him that one, he actually made a specific demand; although why he didn't request this reform when the constitution was being re-written after the last coup, or why he didn't put an amendment through while he was deputy PM a few years ago?

>Point 4: A police reform, so that the police force would "truly belong to the people" and perform their duties under the >command of the elected governor of their respective province

This is fine, put it thru the parliament, any MP can write a new reform law and lobby the other MPs to support it, a democrat can get certain PT Mps to support his bill, a politician has to work the system, he can't just scream 'corruption' at everyone and hope to get his way..

Lemme say one thing about 'power decentralization': IT WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY CREATE MORE CORRUPTION! When you decentralize power-you create these little 'fiefedoms' all over the place-Think BossHog and the Dukes of Hazard. Right now when there is graft -you can bash Yingluck and the NaCC over the head and tell them to go out there and end it, with decentralization-its like you give these provinces tax payer money and instead you have to go after 50 Bosses out there, especially MEDIA presure its much easier to shame a central govt in the newspapers, then it is some obscure boss in the boonies, and then the PM says "well what can i do, he has the power out there-its outa my hands."

Point 5: A bureaucracy reform

Again VAGUE ill-defined reforms.

Point 6: Solving the problems inherent in education, social affairs, public health and transport, an economic system free of monopoly. Investment in transport infrastructure as answer to the countrys needs, not to politicians.

Again this is vague, of cource any govt wants to 'solve inherent problems'

>To the above I would add the red shirt intimidation making it almost impossible for the Democrat party to canvass in areas >such as Chiang Mai, Udon Thani, Pathum Thani, Samut Prakarn, Nonthaburi and others.

This is a false charge Abhist recently threw out there, he failed to cite a single example of 'red shirts' attacking or intimidating democrat canvassers. If there is the democrats can complain to the police and the EC, the EC is pro-establishment and they wold be all over this. Why would the redshirts do this? The PT or some other non-democrat party is going to win those provines anyways and the PT wins landslide victories.. Why the hell would they help the democrats sabotage the elections? its just another 'establishment' gimmik to sabotage democracy by calling it 'corrupt'.

>The elephant is not in the room but, from abroad, still has an insidious control over his party and the supposed law >enforcers. You are correct in the sense that he will never agree to real reform in Thailand.

Um yea, and at least 5 other billionairs have 'insidious' control over the democrats, as do some military supremos.

[tingtongteesood]

I would say that you are far more full of the brown stuff personally.....

[pkspeaker]

ok..but assuming i'm being too hard on Suthep..has he ever explained how 'decentrilization' would reduce corruption? or does the PDRC just throw any idea out there-that might sound as if it's 'new' because in reality they have no new idea's.

To me, decentrialization means more power to the provinces, yet they continue to receive cash from the central government.

[tomhell]

Quote: The Dems are only going to this EC meeting to reiterate their demand for reforms before elections

It seems to me this slogan " reforms before election" was repeated many times like a mantra. Is this for good luck or merit?

Are the any concrete reforms published to the public?

Thanks for the answer.

Tom

.

The Dems are only going to this EC meeting to reiterate their demand for reforms before elections... They won't join the next one unless at least the electoral reforms are complete to make them free and fair fro the first time ever in Thailand's history.

If they don't get at least this, they will boycott it.

If they join in the election without this... It is like saying that they were wrong to boycott the Feb 2nd election.... because nothing will have changed.

If a new election goes ahead, I guarantee it will be disrupted again. Maybe not by blockades, but by strategic mass 'no voting'. Which will be equally effective in preventing a government and a mandate.

If PTP manage to gather 10 million of the popular vote and there are 20 million no votes, there is no mandate to govern from the people. Also no quorum can be reached for parliament if the winning candidates in around 200 (Dem) constituencies out of the 500 can not be declared winners because they did not beat the 'no vote'.

So it will be just another waste of taxpayer's money.

What makes you believe that the no vote figures will be that high, if there is no threat of violence towards the voters?

I think you might get a bit of a shock if you believe that.

[Robby nz]

Suthep has been attacked for saying he would suggest an interim PM without naming any names and now we have a group who are saying the same thing with names being included.

Not a lot of difference.

[tomhell]

When 30 Parties suggest who is interim PM - it sounds like democracy

When Suthep (one person) want to decide who is interim PM - it sounds like dictatorship.

Am I wrong ?

Tom

Suthep has been attacked for saying he would suggest an interim PM without naming any names and now we have a group who are saying the same thing with names being included.

Not a lot of difference.

[tingtongteesood]

Not when those '30 parties' are all 'Slaves of Thaksin' as I would bet they are.....

[rubl]

"A group of 30 small and little-known political parties yesterday short-listed three prominent figures they would support as a new leader to try to lead Thailand out of the political crisis."

An interesting case of perception and obfuscation. Those 30 parties and probably close to 60 or so in total never get a single seat in a general election. That means that they do not have a parliamentary say in choosing a PM.

The news item seems just aimed at further promoting a quick election now. Of course the Pheu Thai will have no problem in 'respecting' the wish of these many parties and promise to consider Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana and the two others.

Edited April 21, 2014 by rubl