Few parties like direct election of PM

[Lite Beer]

CHARTER WRITING
Few parties like direct election of PM
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Many want to maintain selection system despite opinion polls showing otherwise

About a third or 23 of the 74 existing political parties, including Pheu Thai, have voiced support for maintaining the system in which the House of Representative elects the prime minister, General Lertrat Ratanavanich, chairman of the National Reform Council (NRC) sub-panel on gathering views and opinions, said yesterday.

The revelation came after groups including the Council of University Presidents of Thailand, King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) and the NRC sub-panel on political reform proposed that the prime minister be directly elected by voters.

Recent opinion polls have also found that most members of the public want to have the right to vote for their prime minister directly.

Meanwhile, Lertrat said Pheu Thai had submitted its views on political reform and adjustments for the so-called independent organisations under the constitution.

Another consensus of the 23 political parties, submitted in writing to the NRC, included that the requirement of MPs belonging to a political party remain, though 11 of these parties want no limits to the terms served by MPs.

Hybrid Senate favoured

As for the Senate, all parties that submitted their views said they preferred a hybrid system, where part of the Senate is elected and the remainder selected.

Parties that submitted their proposals and opinions in writing included Chart Thai Pattana, Chart Pattana, Bhum Jai Thai and Pheu Thai. Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva had relayed his party's proposals in person earlier.

Lertrat said that judging by the response, it could be concluded that most political parties wanted to see the system in which the prime minister is chosen by the House to remain and that the bicameral legislature of an upper and lower House be maintained.

Most of the political parties also favour maintaining the one-MP-per-district system as well as having all MPs belong to a political party, because they say this strengthens political parties and makes them credible.

They also want to maintain the system of 125 party-list MPs as before.

Lertrat said that though 11 political parties did not want to see term limits imposed on MPs, 10 parties said MPs should only be allowed to serve two consecutive terms.

As for the minimum age of eligible voters, the majority of the political parties want it to be set at 18.

In relation to the process of selecting members of independent organisations under the charter, most parties called for a more diverse group of applicants as well as a more diverse set of selectors.

Most parties also said that the serving term of members of some independent organisations, such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission, be reduced from nine to five years.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Few-parties-like-direct-election-of-PM-30249244.html

-- The Nation 2014-12-06

[mikemac]

Anything the PTP supports stinks to high heaven.

[Thai at Heart]

They surveyed 74 parties? How many actually have any seats in parliament?

[whybother]

Did I read that correctly? Do PTP want a half selected Senate?

[noitom]

Vejijiva speaks. He can again , recommend to any of his remaining followers, that Thais stay away from any democratically held elections.

[whybother]

Vejijiva speaks. He can again , recommend to any of his remaining followers, that Thais stay away from any democratically held elections.

Yes. Abhisit speaks. As did all the other party leaders.

[Somtamnication]

If they had direct elections, no one would win nor have a majority. I can just imagine a 74 party government coalition (Benny Hill theme music in the background).

[worgeordie]

If the political parties are against it,it must be a good thing,so do it,

74 political parties,only in Thailand,have the Monster Raving Loony

Party have a branch here.

regards Worgeordie

[scorecard]

Who cares what pt want. There would be no doubt they will push whatever system is ultimately good for the trough, not what's good for Thailand and for the benefit of all Thais.

Some other parties the same.

[Chris Lawrence]

'As for the Senate, all parties that submitted their views said they preferred a hybrid system, where part of the Senate is elected and the remainder selected.'

If a party is dominant at the election, shouldn't they have the right to occupy the seats they won? If they win the senate, they govern; if part senate is selected much harder to govern? Part hand picked senate sounds as though no one wants to hand over control?

[whybother]

'As for the Senate, all parties that submitted their views said they preferred a hybrid system, where part of the Senate is elected and the remainder selected.'

If a party is dominant at the election, shouldn't they have the right to occupy the seats they won? If they win the senate, they govern; if part senate is selected much harder to govern? Part hand picked senate sounds as though no one wants to hand over control?

The Senate is a "checks and balances" part of the system. In Australia, which also uses the Westminster system, the Senate is often not controlled by the government, so that limits what the government can do. They need to compromise and make deals with smaller parties to get their changes through.

[rubl]

Personally I blame Ms. Yingluck for this mess. She behaved more like a President than like a Prime Minister.

With properly functioning PMs no one would question them being elected by parliament. One might even go so far as to suggest that a person from the largest party be appointed 'informateur' to inquire and report on cabinet feasibilities and be appointed 'formateur' (and implicitly PM) to get a cabinet /government together.

Of course this implies a working democratic / parliamentary system

[Rumble]

Unfortunately for the sake of stability and peace direct election is the only way to go for the time being.

[Pi Sek]

Who cares what pt want. There would be no doubt they will push whatever system is ultimately good for the trough, not what's good for Thailand and for the benefit of all Thais.

Some other parties the same.

Some?

[whybother]

Unfortunately for the sake of stability and peace direct election is the only way to go for the time being.

Direct election for PM would go along the lines of party list votes. I don't really see how that would change anything as far as "stability and peace" is concerned.

[Pi Sek]

Unfortunately for the sake of stability and peace direct election is the only way to go for the time being.

Indeed unfortunate... as the Democrats & Peua Thai (the two mainstream parties) and Chart Thai Pattana and Bhum Jai Thai (the two parties who won enough seats to have made up a significant coalition factor in the last 10 years) disagree with you.

I understand both Peua Thai and the Democrats eventually want a totally elected Senate (or so they have publicly claimed), but Peua Thai want the upper and lower houses to be elected under the same terms (effect: governments are autocratic and self-scrutinising) and the Democrats want controls in place to make sure the lower house is accountable to the upper house (effect: governments are accountable and forced to act democratically, but "old" power trumps an elected government).

This isn't as easy as "letting the people decide".

[oztaurus]

Democracy - government of the people, by the people, for the people ...

"Recent opinion polls have also found that most members of the public want to have the right to vote for their prime minister directly."

yet the parties which supposedly represent the will of their constituents ...

"About a third or 23 of the 74 existing political parties, including Pheu Thai, have voiced support for maintaining the system in which the House of Representative elects the prime minister,"

so, in line with most western democracies, the political system reflects the direct opposite of the will of the people. Cue a rousing chorus of CCR's "Fortunate Son"

[FangFerang]

Odd that the Dems and PTP are in agreement over what to do, and what not to do...but not surprising. No politician wants the PM to be directly elected.

Both majority parties, being the Dems and PTP, strongly advocate the current 'winner takes all' elections, requiring the MPs to each belong to a political party, and making certain that the majority in power at the time elects the PM.

"Recent opinion polls have also found that most members of the public want to have the right to vote for their prime minister directly." And all sides said "No way -- it's winner take all." Seems the pots and kettles are still calling each other black...and simultaneously ignoring public desires. Most Thais in several polls said they wanted the government to be less centralized, and all nodded agreement, and then cut village funds by half, assuring that the money (and power it creates) stays in Bangkok.

Same same. But different.....

Nothing has changed. I do not believe anything will change, except some redistricting to make sure the Dems can actually win an election, something they haven't done in ten years.

Hilariously, even TVF posters know that to escape this endless cycle, and it has been a cycle for almost thirty years now, there needs to be constitutional checks and balances to prevent late-night legislation and to ensure stability. There also needs to be provisions that the opposition of any elected government are still participatory in a meaningful way, such as requiring significant expenditures and potentially volatile legislation needs a "super majority" and again all politicians are quietly saying "no."

The very people that protested for change, ala' PDRC and Dems, are advocating stagnation. The very people claiming to be a voice of the people, the PTP, are ignoring the people's voices.

Both sides suck broken wind and exhale poisonous gas.

Edited December 6, 2014 by FangFerang

[mrjohndub]

Democracy - government of the people, by the people, for the people ...

"Recent opinion polls have also found that most members of the public want to have the right to vote for their prime minister directly."

yet the parties which supposedly represent the will of their constituents ...

"About a third or 23 of the 74 existing political parties, including Pheu Thai, have voiced support for maintaining the system in which the House of Representative elects the prime minister,"

so, in line with most western democracies, the political system reflects the direct opposite of the will of the people. Cue a rousing chorus of CCR's

One can only imagine what policy the Democrats back in this matter. Most likely a PM nominated by the Privy Council.

Gen. Prayuth's party likely argued for the breaking of oracle bones.

[mikemac]

Personally I blame Ms. Yingluck for this mess. She behaved more like a President than like a Prime Minister.

With properly functioning PMs no one would question them being elected by parliament. One might even go so far as to suggest that a person from the largest party be appointed 'informateur' to inquire and report on cabinet feasibilities and be appointed 'formateur' (and implicitly PM) to get a cabinet /government together.

Of course this implies a working democratic / parliamentary system

Actually, I thought she was more of a shopper than a President or PM.

[devaram]

This is a compete load of rubbish. Why is honesty so difficult for these people including the one who wrote the article?

[binjalin]

Who cares what pt want. There would be no doubt they will push whatever system is ultimately good for the trough, not what's good for Thailand and for the benefit of all Thais.

Some other parties the same.

The majority of the Thai electorate that's who and the new system will seek to 'fix' that and that's where the trouble will come

[cocopops]

Did I read that correctly? Do PTP want a half selected Senate?

Presumably it's a tactical retreat. At this point they will agree to anything that is not completely antithetical to their goals so that they can more credibly object to any delays of elections later on.

If they quibble over things like this now they give their opponents the opportunity to get the rhetoric going again and expose themselves to accusations of self interest. The less confrontational they are, the more sympathetic they'll look when the eventual election gets closer. And the more difficult it will be for the junta to create a system stacked against them.

Our current leadership should not underestimate PTP and associates. The people calling the shots for them are a lot cannier than they seem.

Edited December 6, 2014 by cocopops

[scorecard]

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

Did I read that correctly? Do PTP want a half selected Senate?

Presumably it's a tactical retreat. At this point they will agree to anything that is not completely antithetical to their goals so that they can more credibly object to any delays of elections later on.

If they quibble over things like this now they give their opponents the opportunity to get the rhetoric going again and expose themselves to accusations of self interest. The less confrontational they are, the more sympathetic they'll look when the eventual election gets closer. And the more difficult it will be for the junta to create a system stacked against them.

Our current leadership should not underestimate PTP and associates. The people calling the shots for them are a lot cannier than they seem.

In general terms I agree with your comment, but perhaps cunning rather than cannier.

[Thai at Heart]

Unfortunately for the sake of stability and peace direct election is the only way to go for the time being.

Indeed unfortunate... as the Democrats & Peua Thai (the two mainstream parties) and Chart Thai Pattana and Bhum Jai Thai (the two parties who won enough seats to have made up a significant coalition factor in the last 10 years) disagree with you.

I understand both Peua Thai and the Democrats eventually want a totally elected Senate (or so they have publicly claimed), but Peua Thai want the upper and lower houses to be elected under the same terms (effect: governments are autocratic and self-scrutinising) and the Democrats want controls in place to make sure the lower house is accountable to the upper house (effect: governments are accountable and forced to act democratically, but "old" power trumps an elected government).

This isn't as easy as "letting the people decide".

Thing is the pooyais want their cake and to eat it.

They want their power to extend to vetoing the parliament, but can't achieve that democratically.

It wouldn't matter if the senate was completely appointed, if its powers are reasonable in respect to the parliament. These numpties want the guise of a democratic senate with the right of veto.

So of course the parties say give us anything but a completely appointed senate because it brings some chance to influence it. In a way, a completely appointed senate with limited powers is better than a demkcratic elected one with too much power.

[Alwyn]

Anything the PTP supports stinks to high heaven.

Glad you're still keeping an open mind on things

[surangw]

"Many want to maintain selection system despite opinion polls showing otherwise

many=those with influence

vote= choosing the least detestable of the lot

[aimbc]

I thought the idea was to remove political influence and maker a better system. Isn't all these bright problems due to the thinking of the self serving interest of these politicians?

I hope they won't get any of their wishes. Or else all of this would be for nothing.

And 74 parties, come on now! I think this is because Thais distrust each other and can't work together to achieve a common goal. Or there are just too much corruption money to be had for the party In charge.

[Gonsalviz]

The mere fact that the parties don't like it, means it is a good thing.

[Gonsalviz]

If they had direct elections, no one would win nor have a majority. I can just imagine a 74 party government coalition (Benny Hill theme music in the background).

It's perfect. All they could ever do before was further corruption. Perhaps with a 74 party coalition they would be stymied and couldn't anything which is better that what they have had.