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

[Eric Loh]

Still think land reform is the answer. Too many farmers don't owned land and rent at high prices from rich land owners. Bring back the old legislation set at 4 hectares limit on freely acquirable agriculture land. Forced the large agriculture land owners to sell their land to a land bank and re-sell to farmers. The old law of farmer cultivating only on their own land should be resumed. Past governments failed to implement land reform as most large owners are politicians. Now is no better time to enact land reform as NCPO has absolute power.

[realenglish1]

This is using your head. Direct subsidies. This is smart works all over the world with different countries and makes a lot of sense. Go for it Good Job Junta

Your doing the right thing

This time they have grabbed the bull by the horns.

[troglodyke]

who needs democracy and free enterprise capitalism when you've got Thainess.

hope they are not planning on exporting this rice as it might just run up against the world trade organisations rules http://www.wto.org/

[billd766]

Finally. This might just work

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

I agree with a flat rate per rai however the number of rai to be subsidised must be capped at an upper limit of perhaps 100 rai and not open ended as before and must be available to ALL farmers including those who only rent and do not own the land which it was not before.

[oldsailor35]

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

Obvious that you don't live in Isaan or Thailand as it is not so easy here.

[oldsailor35]

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

Pretty well all western farmers are subsidised by their governments, UK, Ireland Europe and USA (Heavily) But not Australia which has one of the most harsh of climatic conditions. Their government refuse to subsidise its farmers thus there are no lazy farmers in Australia which has got the worlds most efficient primary producers.

[oldsailor35]

Still think land reform is the answer. Too many farmers don't owned land and rent at high prices from rich land owners. Bring back the old legislation set at 4 hectares limit on freely acquirable agriculture land. Forced the large agriculture land owners to sell their land to a land bank and re-sell to farmers. The old law of farmer cultivating only on their own land should be resumed. Past governments failed to implement land reform as most large owners are politicians. Now is no better time to enact land reform as NCPO has absolute power.

Good one! There should be no absent farmers in Thailand. All land owners should be made to be "hands on" farm or sell the land to genuine farmers with the help of banks.

Land owners who rent land to farmers are nothing more than "Expensive Middlemen" which lowers the income of hard working farmers.

Edited June 18, 2014 by oldsailor35

[ratcatcher]

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

A harsh but realistic comment.

Except, many of these are people who are living on land that has been in the family for generations. They are often following the sufficiency economy espoused by the King. Remember, they have new shiny pickups to pay for and other costs all farm related.

I agree they should try to diversify if possible. Many of the farms are in the hands of wealthy absentee landlords, who own large tracts of land, living in the city and receiving rents from poorer farmers. A difficult situation.

[billsmart]

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.

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.

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

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.

I don't know about other areas of Thailand but in our area in 2013 all the rice was harvested and sold to the government in late-November. The farmers were told to expect payment in 2 or 3 weeks. Suthep had already been mercilessly hounding Yingluck for weeks or months by then. Yingluck dissolved her government on 9-Dec before she had made arrangements to pay for the rice. She apparently thought she would be able to secure the funds and make these payments while running the Caretaker Government and arranging for new elections. Suthep and the Election Commission had other ideas.

The non-payment was solely due to the political sparring. What do you mean it could have never worked? It did work. The farmers got paid just recently once the NCPO was in charge and ordered the debts be paid. I'm not saying Yingluck's Rice Scheme wasn't going to lose money, but that's why it's called a SUBSIDY and not an ENTERPISE-FOR-PROFIT.

Get your facts straight...

Edited June 18, 2014 by billsmart

[Bluespunk]

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.

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.

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

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.

I don't know about other areas of Thailand but in our area in 2013 all the rice was harvested and sold to the government in late-November. The farmers were told to expect payment in 2 or 3 weeks. Suthep had already been mercilessly hounding Yingluck for weeks or months by then. Yingluck dissolved her government on 9-Dec before she had made arrangements to pay for the rice. She apparently thought she would be able to secure the funds and make these payments while running the Caretaker Government and arranging for new elections. Suthep and the Election Commission had other ideas.

The non-payment was solely due to the political sparring. What do you mean it could have never worked? It did work. The farmers got paid just recently once the NCPO was in charge and ordered the debts be paid. I'm not saying Yingluck's Rice Scheme wasn't going to lose money, but that's why it's called a SUBSIDY and not an ENTERPISE-FOR-PROFIT.

Get your facts straight...

Facts?

The scheme never worked because it cost more to buy the rice than it could be sold for.

Non payment of farmers had everything to do with the fact there was no money to pay for it. This was due to the fact that the scheme was unworkable.

The EC blocked nothing. They made it clear that new debt creation was illegal after an election was called and a caretaker govt was in power. PT could have gone ahead I guess but any legal action after that would have been on them.

There was no provision made by PT prior to this election being called for farmers to be paid, mainly because the scheme raised no money.

In addition farmers were not paid nationally for three months before all the political chaos kicked off [again due to PT's actions with their "give thaksin what he wants" amnesty bill]

These are facts. You might want to try them out.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Bluespunk

[billsmart]

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

So...do you also recommend that the government stop running all the public transportation in Bangkok, stop building public roads and highways, stop offering police, fire and emergency services, electricity, water, etc...???? These are often run at a loss generating no direct profit. But these are seen as important items of infrastructure that enable people to live in some comfort and allow businesses to operate and flourish.

Governments are not in the business to make money. Governments are in the business of assuring their constituents have the best quality of life possible - ALL their constituents - not just the wealthy and the smart and the educated, and not just those who live in Bangkok.

Sent from my Sony Vaio using Windows 7, MS Explorer and CAT CDMA.

[Valentine]

" 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.

IMO PT & their cronies knew exactly what they were doing in order not only to reap huge monetary rewards but a huge land grab as well aside from the inevitable cost increases imposed by the landlords, fertilzer sellers & the like.

[billsmart]

I don't know about other areas of Thailand but in our area in 2013 all the rice was harvested and sold to the government in late-November. The farmers were told to expect payment in 2 or 3 weeks. Suthep had already been mercilessly hounding Yingluck for weeks or months by then. Yingluck dissolved her government on 9-Dec before she had made arrangements to pay for the rice. She apparently thought she would be able to secure the funds and make these payments while running the Caretaker Government and arranging for new elections. Suthep and the Election Commission had other ideas.

The non-payment was solely due to the political sparring. What do you mean it could have never worked? It did work. The farmers got paid just recently once the NCPO was in charge and ordered the debts be paid. I'm not saying Yingluck's Rice Scheme wasn't going to lose money, but that's why it's called a SUBSIDY and not an ENTERPISE-FOR-PROFIT.

Get your facts straight...

Facts?

The scheme never worked because it cost more to buy the rice than it could be sold for.

Non payment of farmers had everything to do with the fact there was no money to pay for it. This was due to the fact that the scheme was unworkable.

The EC blocked nothing. They made it clear that new debt creation was illegal after an election was called and a caretaker govt was in power. PT could have gone ahead I guess but any legal action after that would have been on them.

There was no provision made by PT prior to this election being called for farmers to be paid, mainly because the scheme raised no money.

In addition farmers were not paid nationally for three months before all the political chaos kicked off [again due to PT's actions with their "give thaksin what he wants" amnesty bill]

These are facts. You might want to try them out.

We're obviously living in different universes.

Yes, the Rice Scheme provided the buying of rice for more than it could be sold for. That's why it's called a SUBSIDY! Look up the word!!!

The EC blocked the Caretaker Government from acquiring money from the General Fund and from acquiring government-backed loans (like bonds).

There was no money earmarked and set aside to pay the farmers before Yingluck dissolved the parliament. Yes, that was a mistake but I'm sure she thought she'd be able to do that as the Caretaker Government. These were after all legitimate government obligations. She was prevented from doing that by the EC. The Rice Scheme didn't have to raise any money at that time. The money was to be requisitioned from the General Fund or borrowed with government-backed loans. When LATER the rice was sold the revenue would be returned to the General Fund or to pay off a portion of the loans. Any outstanding balance becomes a governmental budget deficit and perhaps a part of the national debt . Again, look up the word SUBSIDY.

I don't know of any farmers who sold rice three months before the government was dissolved. There were certainly none in my area. The government did pay for rice they bought at the beginning of the 2nd quarter. There are 2 rice crops here every year. A "paddy rice" crop the first 4 months of the year and a jasmine rice crop in the 3rd and 4th quarter. Your assertion on this sounds bogus to me.

Those are the facts in my universe - which by the way is outside the boundaries of Bangkok and squarely in the rice lands near Issan.

Edited June 18, 2014 by billsmart

[thumper101]

Hre we go again... No desire to fix the problem, just throw money at it and hope it goes away for another year.

Let's keep the farmers with their hands out, rather than educate them or subsidize materials.

I could pull off an easy con with land subsidies just to het the 1,700 per rai out of the governmeny's 'free money for all' pot.

It is not hard to rent cheap land at say 40 rai parcels and have many of them all over... plant a very conservative crop... don't bother with fertilizers or anything expensive like that... get it harvested and your profit is the subsidy. 68,000 per 40 rai parcel.

I am sure there are plenty of Thais out there that will suss out many different scams to cream out the cash... With subsidized materials, you can't really do that.

Bunch of amateurs.

[winstonc]

poor old bill not every farmer lives in your perfect area...again why were they not paid from late august...just answer this simple question.without your area being involved thailand is bigger than your little soi. you know..maybe you have a different universe that you live in because its not thailand or you would have answered a straight question put to you countless times... allow me to re-phrase my question then..where were the e.c. and suphep late august...

[Bluespunk]

I don't know about other areas of Thailand but in our area in 2013 all the rice was harvested and sold to the government in late-November. The farmers were told to expect payment in 2 or 3 weeks. Suthep had already been mercilessly hounding Yingluck for weeks or months by then. Yingluck dissolved her government on 9-Dec before she had made arrangements to pay for the rice. She apparently thought she would be able to secure the funds and make these payments while running the Caretaker Government and arranging for new elections. Suthep and the Election Commission had other ideas.

The non-payment was solely due to the political sparring. What do you mean it could have never worked? It did work. The farmers got paid just recently once the NCPO was in charge and ordered the debts be paid. I'm not saying Yingluck's Rice Scheme wasn't going to lose money, but that's why it's called a SUBSIDY and not an ENTERPISE-FOR-PROFIT.

Get your facts straight...

Facts?

The scheme never worked because it cost more to buy the rice than it could be sold for.

Non payment of farmers had everything to do with the fact there was no money to pay for it. This was due to the fact that the scheme was unworkable.

The EC blocked nothing. They made it clear that new debt creation was illegal after an election was called and a caretaker govt was in power. PT could have gone ahead I guess but any legal action after that would have been on them.

There was no provision made by PT prior to this election being called for farmers to be paid, mainly because the scheme raised no money.

In addition farmers were not paid nationally for three months before all the political chaos kicked off [again due to PT's actions with their "give thaksin what he wants" amnesty bill]

These are facts. You might want to try them out.

We're obviously living in different universes.

Yes, the Rice Scheme provided the buying of rice for more than it could be sold for. That's why it's called a SUBSIDY! Look up the word!!!

The EC blocked the Caretaker Government from acquiring money from the General Fund and from acquiring government-backed loans (like bonds).

There was no money earmarked and set aside to pay the farmers before Yingluck dissolved the parliament. Yes, that was a mistake but I'm sure she thought she'd be able to do that as the Caretaker Government. These were after all legitimate government obligations. She was prevented from doing that by the EC. The Rice Scheme didn't have to raise any money at that time. The money was to be requisitioned from the General Fund or borrowed with government-backed loans. When LATER the rice was sold the revenue would be returned to the General Fund or to pay off a portion of the loans. Any outstanding balance becomes a governmental budget deficit and perhaps a part of the national debt . Again, look up the word SUBSIDY.

I don't know of any farmers who sold rice three months before the government was dissolved. There were certainly none in my area. The government did pay for rice they bought at the beginning of the 2nd quarter. There are 2 rice crops here every year. A "paddy rice" crop the first 4 months of the year and a jasmine rice crop in the 3rd and 4th quarter. Your assertion on this sounds bogus to me.

Those are the facts in my universe - which by the way is outside the boundaries of Bangkok and squarely in the rice lands near Issan.

It was economic ineptitude, a subsidy is sustainable [look up that word] this idiotic scheme was not. A subsidy does not destroy your position as the world leader in exports. It is meant to enhance it.

Keep telling yourself all the farmers were paid, but it ain't true.

The EC told PT to create debt for a new government was illegal. What PT wanted to do was not allowed by law. They were told that. All the EC did was ensure PT abided by the law, in other words their job.

You can tell people to look up words and capitalise all you want, but you are still wrong.

[NongKhaiKid]

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?

Like the old Peter Sellers movie this is ' A Shot in the Dark ' so i'm guessing that the Thai's one time status as No. 1 exporter in the rice industry gave farmers a folk hero status which although diminished isn't completely played out.

PTP gave a sweetheart deal which backfired big time and now rice farmers have a mindset that they will and must be looked after.

[billsmart]

poor old bill not every farmer lives in your perfect area...again why were they not paid from late august...just answer this simple question.without your area being involved thailand is bigger than your little soi. you know..maybe you have a different universe that you live in because its not thailand or you would have answered a straight question put to you countless times... allow me to re-phrase my question then..where were the e.c. and suphep late august...

winstonc: To directly answer your question I searched the BKK News first for "Suthep" august (and September) 2013 and then for "rice news" august (and september) 2013. I didn't bother looking up EC because they weren't in the mix until after Dec 9. Here's what I found:

Suthep

August - nothing, late September

» If the Democrat Party is banned, even the prime minister will be turning to the only senior leader not involved – the possible saviour, Suthep Thaugsuban

But more importantly to support my assertions and challenge yours:

Rice News

August & September

» Protesting rubber farmers stop southern trains, no change in high govt rice price & exports fall but will recover soon.

» Govt refuses to buy farmer's rubber at above market prices, elections and Greek debt dangers & rejected rice safe, FDA insists.

» Losses on rice sales looming, farmers agree to lower prices for their rice next season & coal operation in Samut Sakhon shut down.

» China rice contract for 1.2 million tonnes questioned, Malaysia to build anti-smuggling wall along Thai river border & SEC fines executives B1.6m for insider trading

...and this one mentioning planned gov't bonds in Nov 2013

» New income taxes will take effect this year, govt bond to help fund rice plan & Thai firm's Dawei concession taken away.

Please note that there is NOTHING (all caps) about government non-payment or late payments to farmers of rice obligations in Aug or Sep 2013, so I still reject your assertion of that.

Don't expect me to do this much work again to research "facts" you spew out. I did so this time first for my own sake to see if I could figure out what you were talking about, and second to assure you that I will respond to any questions and challenges put to me - even though my response might just be "FK O%f!".

Edited June 18, 2014 by billsmart

[billsmart]

I think the differences of opinion displayed and of even the differences in assertions of “facts” that has been posted on this forum is powerful testimony to the complex question of the best practices of government and what role subsidies should play in those practices, if any. If there are such disparate opinions among presumably well-educated, experienced, business and politically savvy Falangs from countries where capitalism and democracy is well established, you can only imagine how difficult this issue must be for the Thais. They are charged with creating a system of government and economy that best serves all their citizenry. That’s not an easy job especially when there’s such an economic, educational and even cultural gap between the urban and rural areas.

The facts of the matter (my facts anyway) are that all parties involved support subsidies for agriculture, particularly rice production. The Yellow Shirts lead by Abhisit offered rai-based rice subsidies. The Red Shirts lead by Yingluck offered the now infamous rice purchasing subsidies. Now it looks like the Military Junta will also offer some kind of rice subsidies. And He-Whose-Name-Cannot-Be-Mentioned has perhaps been the biggest supporter of Thai agriculture.

It’s my opinion that Thai agricultural subsidies, particularly for rice production, are for the present going to be a permanent feature of Thai economic and social planning. I’m sure we all hope that whatever government is in power – military junta, Yellow or Red Shirt democracy – that there will be continuing efforts to minimize mismanagement and the opportunities for corruption, theft and abuse of these subsidies.

So with this post I'll try to disengage myself from this thread and leave the rest of you to argue about the details...

[khunken]

I don't know about other areas of Thailand but in our area in 2013 all the rice was harvested and sold to the government in late-November. The farmers were told to expect payment in 2 or 3 weeks. Suthep had already been mercilessly hounding Yingluck for weeks or months by then. Yingluck dissolved her government on 9-Dec before she had made arrangements to pay for the rice. She apparently thought she would be able to secure the funds and make these payments while running the Caretaker Government and arranging for new elections. Suthep and the Election Commission had other ideas.

The non-payment was solely due to the political sparring. What do you mean it could have never worked? It did work. The farmers got paid just recently once the NCPO was in charge and ordered the debts be paid. I'm not saying Yingluck's Rice Scheme wasn't going to lose money, but that's why it's called a SUBSIDY and not an ENTERPISE-FOR-PROFIT.

Get your facts straight...

Facts?

The scheme never worked because it cost more to buy the rice than it could be sold for.

Non payment of farmers had everything to do with the fact there was no money to pay for it. This was due to the fact that the scheme was unworkable.

The EC blocked nothing. They made it clear that new debt creation was illegal after an election was called and a caretaker govt was in power. PT could have gone ahead I guess but any legal action after that would have been on them.

There was no provision made by PT prior to this election being called for farmers to be paid, mainly because the scheme raised no money.

In addition farmers were not paid nationally for three months before all the political chaos kicked off [again due to PT's actions with their "give thaksin what he wants" amnesty bill]

These are facts. You might want to try them out.

We're obviously living in different universes.

Yes, the Rice Scheme provided the buying of rice for more than it could be sold for. That's why it's called a SUBSIDY! Look up the word!!!

The EC blocked the Caretaker Government from acquiring money from the General Fund and from acquiring government-backed loans (like bonds).

There was no money earmarked and set aside to pay the farmers before Yingluck dissolved the parliament. Yes, that was a mistake but I'm sure she thought she'd be able to do that as the Caretaker Government. These were after all legitimate government obligations. She was prevented from doing that by the EC. The Rice Scheme didn't have to raise any money at that time. The money was to be requisitioned from the General Fund or borrowed with government-backed loans. When LATER the rice was sold the revenue would be returned to the General Fund or to pay off a portion of the loans. Any outstanding balance becomes a governmental budget deficit and perhaps a part of the national debt . Again, look up the word SUBSIDY.

I don't know of any farmers who sold rice three months before the government was dissolved. There were certainly none in my area. The government did pay for rice they bought at the beginning of the 2nd quarter. There are 2 rice crops here every year. A "paddy rice" crop the first 4 months of the year and a jasmine rice crop in the 3rd and 4th quarter. Your assertion on this sounds bogus to me.

Those are the facts in my universe - which by the way is outside the boundaries of Bangkok and squarely in the rice lands near Issan.

Well you need to have a look outside your 'universe'. There are normally 3 rice crops per year in Thailand. This is likely the main reason the land becomes degraded and more & more fertilizer is required to produce low rice per Rai output.

You are just parroting PTP propaganda by blaming everyone but the real culprits for the non-payment of money to rice farmers. PTP failed to ensure that sufficient funds were available when they stood down. Subsequent events were just a failure of a caretaker government to understand their legal constraints.

[Jonmarleesco]

'... the cost of rice cultivation [is] currently ... very close to the market price. Farmers are now facing losses.'

That's how markets work, like it or not. Perhaps it's time to realise that Thailand needs to reduce its rice production, substantially.

Introduce retraining for younger farmers, with active support in getting a job at the end of the retraining. Help the remaining farmers to update equipment and production methods; and to diversify. And concentrate on improving education, at all levels, in the rural communities.

[Theoutsider]

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

It a staple food for a lot of people.