Direct election of Thai Cabinet may solve a lot of problems

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE
Direct election of Cabinet may solve a lot of problems
KRIS BHROMSUTHI

BANGKOK: -- Members of the Constitutional Drafting Committee (CDC) and National Reform Council (NRC) are now faced with one major dilemma - how to create a political environment that allows for a stable government and an effective checks-and-balances system.

Before the party-list system was introduced and regulations put in place to create strong political parties and government, administrations under the 1991 Constitution were incredibly unstable. None of them were able to last beyond one term, and there were many medium-sized parties that crossed the floor of Parliament.

Then came the so-called "People's Constitution" in 1997, which focused on a strong civil government and political parties. Since then, however, Thai politics has been dominated by one political party - that of Thaksin Shinawatra - which won every election since 2001 until the military stepped in on May 22.

Yet, despite his continued success in the polls, Thaksin-led governments have been accused of corruption, abuse of power and parliamentary dictatorship. Hence, Bangkok's middle and upper class, along with some bureaucrats and top brass, decided that Thaksin's grip was too powerful and that something had to change.

The NRC sub-panel on political reform initially favoured the idea of having a directly elected Cabinet to allow for a clearer separation of power - much like the US system - in order to allow for a stable government and a more effective checks and balances.

However, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and NRC member Prasarn Marukpitak voiced their opposition yesterday, with Abhisit pointing out that in recent years, the executive branch has already been too strong and that this proposal would only strengthen it further. Prasarn, meanwhile, said any such move would encourage more corruption and capitalist politics.

On the other hand, NRC member Chai-Anan Samudavanija voiced his support on Friday, pointing out that this system would allow stability and continuity of government.

However, sources from the CDC said such a system had never been implemented in Thailand and they did not wish to create risks for the country by imposing an untried political set-up.

Nakarin Mektrairat, a CDC member, recently came out to suggest that using Germany's "proportion representation system" would, in effect, reduce the gap between bigger and smaller parties and hence stop any one party from becoming too powerful.

Given that at this point in time, all sides seem to disagree on how to achieve their ultimate goal, the best thing might be to pay attention to the very distinct and clear opinion of the public. Surveys conducted by Bangkok University and NIDA offer a clear-cut answer - people want a directly elected prime minister.

I believe the direct Cabinet election idea should also be taken seriously because it responds to the people - they distrust politicians' representatives and want to take matters into their own hands by electing their executives.

The idea of a directly-elected Cabinet is also very interesting because this proposal offers a compromise between the notions of preventing any one individual from becoming too powerful and creating an environment for a stable government.

Getting the Cabinet, instead of just the premier, directly elected would cut down on the prime minister's power as he or she could no longer claim the democratic legitimacy gained from an election. Instead, all candidates on the Cabinet list would play a part in gaining votes.

Also, this system could make way for a more stable government, as the Cabinet should be able to claim democratic legitimacy and hence draw more support from medium and small parties in Parliament.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Direct-election-of-Cabinet-may-solve-a-lot-of-prob-30248970.html


-- The Nation 2014-12-02

[Mango Bob]

It looks like you will be voting every Sunday for one thing or another the way they are going now. Remember guys no alcoholic on those election days also.

[lostinisaan]

To let foreigners like Arnold become a politician doesn't seem to solve the problem either.

Okay, maybe guys like Ronald Reagan.

Edited December 2, 2014 by lostinisaan

[gk10002000]

all governing officials should be elected. Granted there should be some allowances for appointed officials, but even they have to be approved after being nominated. An example is the USA Cabinet members. They have a lot of power, Defense, health and human Services, etc. But all cabinet members are appointed and then must be confirmed by the House and Senate

[whybother]

The cabinet should make their decisions on the advice of their department heads. Get the right people to run the department and all the cabinet need to do is advise them of their policy. Seems to work in a lot of other countries.

[chainarong]

All members of parliament should be voted in for both the lower house (House of reps) and the senate , (house of review) I am using the Westminster OZ model, members either can be independent or belong to a party, (no cronyism by appointing their own senators like at present)., all members must have no criminal record history

[ChrisY1]

These people will flog this out for ever.....if the Thai system continues to allow political parties to vie for parliament, as they should, the working class voters will always be dominant......and this is what the elite are trying to stop........!

Modelling other countries successful systems is a good way to go..........but again....the elite will remain adamant that they must keep control.

And so Thai politics will continue to fail the people for the satisfaction of the wealthy..........

[Chris Lawrence]

Sounds as though they want to cloud the election process? Why would you vote a whole cabinet in at an election?

I still think the judicial system has the most levels of corruption available, along with the military to step in and take over or act in the way they feel best.

But they are two areas that can't be looked at as, the military are in control and cannot have any critisim leveled against them.

[marinediscoking]

I don't see how this would change anything. Most countries are dominated by a 2 party system democrats and republicans or conservatives and labor. Once the parties are formed the same bankgok middle class are going to vote for their partly (republicans) and issan/north thaialnd is going to vote for the democrats. The PM/President would be voted by the majority of the population which in most likely terms would be a democrat put fourth by that party. Same Same.

[Pib]

all governing officials should be elected. Granted there should be some allowances for appointed officials, but even they have to be approved after being nominated. An example is the USA Cabinet members. They have a lot of power, Defense, health and human Services, etc. But all cabinet members are appointed and then must be confirmed by the House and Senate

Only the Senate does confirmation of cabinets members, Supreme Court judges, ambassadors, and other Presidential appointments per the Constitution.

[15Peter20]

The continuous subversion of democracy in Thailand by whichever side is out of power will only be resolved once the white elephant issue is done and dusted.

Until then, failure will be built in to any form of 'democracy' these people can come up with.

[rickirs]

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

all governing officials should be elected. Granted there should be some allowances for appointed officials, but even they have to be approved after being nominated. An example is the USA Cabinet members. They have a lot of power, Defense, health and human Services, etc. But all cabinet members are appointed and then must be confirmed by the House and Senate

Just so there's no confusion: all US executive-level members (ie., Cabinet Secretaries and Undersecretaries) are first nominated by the President and then presented to the Senate only for confirmation. Without confirmation candidates cannot perfom any executive-level responsibilities. Senate confimation requires 3/5ths majority vote [60]. A Senator can hold confirmation indefinitely except by 3/5ths majority vote of the Senate. After confirmation, the President can then make the appointment. Some US executive-level members such as Secretaries of Defense and State hold very powerful positions but all serve at the pleasure of the President. The President can dismiss any executive-level member without explanation or appeal.

[mike324]

There is no problem with the Thai system of democracy, it works, its functional. The only problem there is, is with the law enforcement. If laws written in the constitution are strongly enforced, we would not really have much corruption. Its simple as that, no matter what type of democracy you adopt, what type of election there are, if laws can't be enforced nothing really matters.

[WhizBang]

Eliminate the Party List system. You run for office and are either elected, or not. Period.

As for the cabinate, it is supposed to be trusted advisors to the President/PM, so should be selected by the President/PM and then confirmed in the Senate.