NCPO may offer rice farmers subsidy of Bt1,700-per-rai in three-way meet today

[webfact]

RICE
NCPO may offer rice farmers subsidy of Bt1,700-per-rai in three-way meet today
Petchanet Pratruangkrai
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The military's ruling National Council for Peace and Order will today (June18) consider granting farmers a rice-production subsidy of Bt1,700 per rai, after farmers proposed Bt3,000 per rai.

The NCPO's economic team is scheduled to meet with farmers and rice millers today to finalise measures to help farmers in the upcoming rice-harvest season.

The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects. But farmers pleaded for some form of assistance as the market price for paddy white rice has dropped to only Bt5,000-Bt6,000 per tonne.

A senior government official said reducing the costs of production could be the final choice to help rice farmers, as it would not cost much. The military government will ask manufacturers of chemical fertiliser and pesticide to cooperate by reducing their retail prices.

Other cost-reduction measures could include asking landlords to reduce rental fees for rice plantations, and providing some funds for community cooperatives to purchase rice seeds.

However, a source with a fertiliser manufacturer said producers could only reduce their prices for a short period, since they faced rising costs of imported chemicals because of the weaker baht and other factors.

Vichian Phuanglamjiek, president of the Thai Rice Growers Association, said farmers wanted the government to grant them about Bt3,000 per rai (Bt18,750 per hectare) to reduce their production costs.

He said farmers wanted the government to set a price for rice based on the average production cost plus a 40-per-cent profit margin so they can survive.

Vichian pointed out that the cost of rice cultivation was currently Bt5,000-6,000 per rai, very close to the market price. Farmers are now facing losses.


-- The Nation 2014-06-18

[EricBerg]

By the time there will be elections a new party sponsored by the missunderstood fugitive may come with a new rice scheme offering the farmers ridiculously high prices again. If so, how will they vote then? Present government must make it cristal clear to the electorate that that would be another dead end street.

[Thai at Heart]

Finally. This might just work

A flat rate per rai. They should implement it for all crops.

[NongKhaiKid]

By the time there will be elections a new party sponsored by the missunderstood fugitive may come with a new rice scheme offering the farmers ridiculously high prices again. If so, how will they vote then? Present government must make it cristal clear to the electorate that that would be another dead end street.

The old saying ' if something sounds too good to be true then it probably is ' comes to mind.

I would suggest that if a political party re-emerged under a new name and promised high prices the recent fiasco would be forgotten by the average rice farmer who would instantly have Baht sign in their eyes.

Getting money or the hope of getting it trumps everything here.

[JRSoul]

Finally. This might just work

A flat rate per rai. They should implement it for all crops.

Nice little earner if you own 10,000 rai. Perhaps a cap?

And how about setting a maximum rental rate for rice farming land, rather than asking for a reduction? After all, there was a large increase in rents when PTP set up their scam, another nice little earner for corrupt land-owning politicians.

[taff33]

Chemicals costing more now because of a weaker baht,it didn't alter the price when the the baht was strong,all bullsh!t.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Thailand]

We won't, we will, we won't!

[Bluespunk]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

[ezzra]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

[chainarong]

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

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

I've asked that question before , Yingluck didn't answer, as she was over sea's, I thought all this subsidy schemes had been axed, how silly of me to think that.

[Valentine]

Perhaps better to pay farmers not to grow rice on x rai of their land which will help reduce the massive stockpile & give the land a chance to rejuvenate after years of intensive farming & fertlilizing.

[Emptyset]

Finally. This might just work

A flat rate per rai. They should implement it for all crops.

Nice little earner if you own 10,000 rai. Perhaps a cap?

And how about setting a maximum rental rate for rice farming land, rather than asking for a reduction? After all, there was a large increase in rents when PTP set up their scam, another nice little earner for corrupt land-owning politicians.

Any idea by roughly how much land rental went up? According to a large survey by the Thai Chamber of Commerce, about half of Thai farmers own their own land and another 40% part own, part rent. It's only a small % who only rent. So steps to reduce rental prices won't help everyone. It is a good idea in theory, I'm just wondering if unscrupulous land owners would take steps to get around it. Also, the survey suggests farmers earned on average 181,000 per year last year and 115,000 of that was due to the pledging scheme. So that's a huge loss if you take away the scheme. If they were subsidized to the amount they're asking for here, 3000 per rai, if the farmer has 20 rai (which seems to be about the average) that's 60,000, so they'd probably earn something like 120,000.

A substantial drop, but that's only if they get their demands. If they get what the junta is offering, they'll be making more like 90,000. Whether that's manageable, I have no idea. But it's almost a 100,000 less a year than what they were getting under PT on average.

As for productionc costs per rai, this from The Nation in 2012:

Wichian Phuanglamjiak, a deputy head of the Thai Rice Growers’ Association, said the estimate of per-rai farming cost was higher at Bt7,000 to Bt9,000, while the post-deduction rate for a similar policy initiated, but no longer in use, by the Democrat-led government would earn farmers Bt7,500 while the rate designated by the current government would earn them Bt12,000, however, with a delay in payment. He did not elaborate.

So going on that, it seems like even if their demands are met, many could struggle break a profit, and some might have trouble breaking even. I got the numbers from here: http://asiancorrespondent.com/119643/what-do-farmers-think-of-rice-pledging-part-2/ (I'm not great with stats so it's possible I might have misinterpreted the figures).

[Bluespunk]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

A lot of people farm rice in Thailand.

Ultimately they will vote in the next govt.

What PT did was the same as many govts in keeping the electorate happy, where they went wrong was implementing an economically inept, unsustainable, idiotic scheme that could never work.

Other govts [and it would seem the NCPO] have been more logical and economically prudent.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Bluespunk

[Emptyset]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

A lot of people farm rice in Thailand.

Ultimately they will vote in the next govt.

What PT did was the same as many govts in keeping the electorate happy, where they went wrong was implementing an economically inept, unsustainable, idiotic scheme that could never work.

Other govts [and it would seem the NCPO] have been more logical and economically prudent.

Yeah. I'm not sure it was the total amount of money PT spent that was the main problem, it was more the corruption and inefficiency. More could have been achieved with less. 500 billion in three years - they could've likely provided enough for farmers with 300 billion if the money was given in straight subsidies per rai instead of all these middlemen etc being involved and skimming money off. Plus people smuggling rice in to pledge. If NCPO are going to subsidize per rai, I think it's superior to the way PT did it (though I'll admit to knowing next to nothing about it other than what I've read online)... question is, will it be enough? Looking at the figures I posted above, farmers might well end up struggling.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Emptyset

[billsmart]

This is the same type of subsidy given by Abhisit's government when he was PM: a payment per rai under cultivation rather than a purchase of rice.

His subsidy was lower than what's being discussed here: THB 900 per rai for paddy rice and THB 1,200 per rai for jasmine rice. There was a limit of 50 rai per farmer. Some limit should be a part of this scheme. The payment was paid to the grower not the owner of the land if the land had been rented out. The grower had to show a contract between him and the owner, and the owner had to show his deed. The land had to actually have rice planted on it.

This subsidy was abused by land owners, if not farming themselves, by demanding a percentage of the subsidy payment from the growers, and of course by claims being made for land that was not actually under rice cultivation. Bribes were given locally to certify rice cultivation so the land would qualify.

I'm sure the NPCO is aware of this type of corruption and will do what it can to minimize it. At least this stolen money went to the famers and bribes to local officials and not to wealthy middle-men, warehouses, rice exporters or senior politicians.

Edited June 18, 2014 by billsmart

[Bernard Flint]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

Because they are buying the vote for the future government ie, the yellows

[billsmart]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

Wrong... Abhisit offered the very same type of subsidy being discussed here. See my post above for more details...

[Bluespunk]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

Because they are buying the vote for the future government ie, the yellows

Many govts, of all political factions, in the past have given the farmers support. Yellow, red, green, white or blue, the colour don't matter, they all do it.

[billsmart]

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

Wrong... The previous governments (purposely plural) gave subsidies to rubber farmers such as expert on-site advice, training and even free trees.

[Bluespunk]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

Wrong... Abhisit offered the very same type of subsidy being discussed here. See my post above for more details...

Wrong, the democrats subsidy didn't destroy Thailand's rice industry, didn't result in thousands of farmers having their rice taken but not paid for, didn't lead to suicides and ruinous loans from money lenders. It was as viable and worked as well as any subsidy does. It may not have been perfect but it was not the inept, unworkable, idiotic policy PT introduced. PT had no idea what they were doing and that is why their scheme was such a catastrophe for Thailand.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Bluespunk

[billsmart]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

Wrong... Abhisit offered the very same type of subsidy being discussed here. See my post above for more details...

Wrong, the democrats subsidy didn't destroy Thailand's rice industry, didn't result in thousands of farmers having their rice taken but not paid for, didn't lead to suicides and ruinous loans from money lenders. It was as viable and worked as well as any subsidy does. It may not have been perfect but it was not the inept, unworkable, idiotic policy PT introduced. PT had no idea what they were doing and that is why their scheme was such a catastrophe for Thailand.

Abhisit's subsidy was mismanaged also and as I've said there was plenty of corruption, but the subsidy was paid. It was paid because the Red Shirts didn't try to block those payments as did the Yellow Shirts when Yingluck dissolved the government to hold new election.

Yingluck paid the previous subsidies on rice crops. The delay in payment of this last one (4Q 2013) has to be placed squarely on the Yellow Shirts and the Election Committee. Yingluck wanted to pay them, tried to pay them but was blocked by her political opponents. I was a well-played political squeeze and very representative of the obstructionist and illegal tactics the Yellow Shirts used to finally give the military enough reason to seize the government.

[fab4]

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

It beggar the question, why only rice farmers are being so pampered? why not other crop

growers that aren't doing all that well right now like the rubber farmers?

I've asked that question before , Yingluck didn't answer, as she was over sea's, I thought all this subsidy schemes had been axed, how silly of me to think that.

Perhaps that's because you're an anonymous westerner on an internet forum, so she was hardly likely to listen to you anyway.

Back in the real world, the PTP gave the rubber farmers a "fertiliser" subsidy of 2,520 baht per rai up to maximum of 25 rai back in September 2013. This in addition to whatever price they could get on the market for their rubber.

[Bluespunk]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

Wrong... Abhisit offered the very same type of subsidy being discussed here. See my post above for more details...

Wrong, the democrats subsidy didn't destroy Thailand's rice industry, didn't result in thousands of farmers having their rice taken but not paid for, didn't lead to suicides and ruinous loans from money lenders. It was as viable and worked as well as any subsidy does. It may not have been perfect but it was not the inept, unworkable, idiotic policy PT introduced. PT had no idea what they were doing and that is why their scheme was such a catastrophe for Thailand.

Abhisit's subsidy was mismanaged also and as I've said there was plenty of corruption, but the subsidy was paid. It was paid because the Red Shirts didn't try to block those payments as did the Yellow Shirts when Yingluck dissolved the government to hold new election.

Yingluck paid the previous subsidies on rice crops. The delay in payment of this last one (4Q 2013) has to be placed squarely on the Yellow Shirts and the Election Committee. Yingluck wanted to pay them, tried to pay them but was blocked by her political opponents. I was a well-played political squeeze and very representative of the obstructionist and illegal tactics the Yellow Shirts used to finally give the military enough reason to seize the government.

Nonsense, the payments for the rice were not being paid long before the protests began. Don't start with the whole 'EC blocked payment line' because it's simply not true.

The non payment was solely due to the utter incompetence of the scheme and the fact it could never have worked. Nothing to do with anyone but those inept enough to introduce it.

[monkeycountry]

"He said farmers wanted the government to set a price for rice based on the average production cost plus a 40-per-cent profit margin so they can survive."

When you are producing a product noone wants to pay for, then you are not supposed to survive by continuing to produce it, you are supposed to produce something else instead, or at the very least enhance your existing product!

[robblok]

Finally. This might just work

A flat rate per rai. They should implement it for all crops.

Nice little earner if you own 10,000 rai. Perhaps a cap?

And how about setting a maximum rental rate for rice farming land, rather than asking for a reduction? After all, there was a large increase in rents when PTP set up their scam, another nice little earner for corrupt land-owning politicians.

I agree 100% that there should be a cap. No cap would put money in hands who dont need it.

[tingtongteesood]

Don't give them any subsidy. If rice is unprofitable then grow something else or sell your land and take another job....

[rickirs]

Looks like populist policies directed towards a specific sector of society are too irresistible for any governing body. Populist legislation does have a legitimate purpose and benefit to society if done in a responsible and accountable manner. "Responsible" includes a program of auditing the effectiveness of the program to assure it delivers an effective outcome, ie., lower cost of rice production that results in higher farmer profits on the open market. Otherwise, such programs just become another way to buy electorate loyalty.

[belg]

rice has dropped to 5000 baht per tonne, but the previous governement wanted to give 15.000

nice bite in the butt with subsidy and trying to do price manipulation

only subsidy should be : free use of mecanical planting device or harvesting

[seajae]

" The junta earlier decided not to support farmers as previous elected governments had done through costly pledging or price-guarantee projects."

Why the plural? Only one govt offered costly pledging/price guarantee schemes as far as I recall.

Wrong... Abhisit offered the very same type of subsidy being discussed here. See my post above for more details...

Wrong, the democrats subsidy didn't destroy Thailand's rice industry, didn't result in thousands of farmers having their rice taken but not paid for, didn't lead to suicides and ruinous loans from money lenders. It was as viable and worked as well as any subsidy does. It may not have been perfect but it was not the inept, unworkable, idiotic policy PT introduced. PT had no idea what they were doing and that is why their scheme was such a catastrophe for Thailand.

Abhisit's subsidy was mismanaged also and as I've said there was plenty of corruption, but the subsidy was paid. It was paid because the Red Shirts didn't try to block those payments as did the Yellow Shirts when Yingluck dissolved the government to hold new election.

Yingluck paid the previous subsidies on rice crops. The delay in payment of this last one (4Q 2013) has to be placed squarely on the Yellow Shirts and the Election Committee. Yingluck wanted to pay them, tried to pay them but was blocked by her political opponents. I was a well-played political squeeze and very representative of the obstructionist and illegal tactics the Yellow Shirts used to finally give the military enough reason to seize the government.

so tell us again why yl didnt make any of the payments owing to the farmers in the 3 months prior to leaving office/the protests(or why she didnt organizre the money for it before leaving office) or is that simply to hard for you, seems the truth is being forgotten here but then that is what you lot do best, use innuendo and bullsh*t.

[StefanBBK]

I know I might become very unpopular in a moment, but me thinks if it is not profitable to grow rice, then the farmers need to find themselves a different crop. Same as any other business. If what you are doing does not yield enough profits, you stop and do something else.

Money should be spend on providing alternatives, not supporting loosing money.

Also, can anyone explain why the cost of Rice went up, in the supermarket that is...

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app