People behind rice scheme will be sued to cover losses, Prayut says

[Robby nz]

You must also have to remember that at that time they were working in a hostile environment as the ones they were investigating were the then Govt who were running and defending the scheme and they were also hampered by having their budget cut. You may remember the defense of the scheme included intimidation and threats to NACC members and if I remember correctly grenade attacks and bullet holes by....Errr 'persons unknown'.

So, if we are to listen to Thai at Heart, then these intimidation tactics, and systematic efforts to interfere with an investigation, and direct indications of corruption are just 'business as usual' and politicians should be forgiven for any of those..? Right?

In Thailand, yup, they are very normal, or don't you read the news. Catch these people for personal corruption before finding them negligent would be preferable. Suing for negligence brings very serious precedent problems for the future.

This case is all about what someone can PROVE. All the talking under the sun won't get the case prosecuted successfully. Until they start producing serious evidence, I believe they won't succeed .

So intimidation of a checks and balances organization is normal, like having mobs demonstration outside their offices, grenades being thrown, budgets being cut to make it harder for them to do their work,

Possibly under Thaksins Govts for that is the way he works.

Yes going after Yingluck for negligence is a serious precedent that needs to be set in order to get it through to future governments and their ministers, whoever they may be, that they have a responsibility to the country and the people and they will be held accountable as they should be.

This is a chance here to set the standard of politicians behavior for the future, a standard of honesty and integrity and service to the people.

The first principal of democracy "Government for the people by the people"......... For the people right !

Lets get that through to future politicians who seem to think that democracy consists of elections then the winner take all.

Oh and I see you have gone back to 1967 to get something on the democrats, bad try at diversion, stick to the subject.

[Thai at Heart]

You must also have to remember that at that time they were working in a hostile environment as the ones they were investigating were the then Govt who were running and defending the scheme and they were also hampered by having their budget cut. You may remember the defense of the scheme included intimidation and threats to NACC members and if I remember correctly grenade attacks and bullet holes by....Errr 'persons unknown'.

So, if we are to listen to Thai at Heart, then these intimidation tactics, and systematic efforts to interfere with an investigation, and direct indications of corruption are just 'business as usual' and politicians should be forgiven for any of those..? Right?

In Thailand, yup, they are very normal, or don't you read the news. Catch these people for personal corruption before finding them negligent would be preferable. Suing for negligence brings very serious precedent problems for the future.

This case is all about what someone can PROVE. All the talking under the sun won't get the case prosecuted successfully. Until they start producing serious evidence, I believe they won't succeed .

So intimidation of a checks and balances organization is normal, like having mobs demonstration outside their offices, grenades being thrown, budgets being cut to make it harder for them to do their work,

Possibly under Thaksins Govts for that is the way he works.

Yes going after Yingluck for negligence is a serious precedent that needs to be set in order to get it through to future governments and their ministers, whoever they may be, that they have a responsibility to the country and the people and they will be held accountable as they should be.

This is a chance here to set the standard of politicians behavior for the future, a standard of honesty and integrity and service to the people.

The first principal of democracy "Government for the people by the people"......... For the people right !

Lets get that through to future politicians who seem to think that democracy consists of elections then the winner take all.

Oh and I see you have gone back to 1967 to get something on the democrats, bad try at diversion, stick to the subject.

I disagree unless they clarify very clearly how to hold them accountable. Losing govt money by subsidy or price intervention is not sufficient.

They need to prove genuine intentional damage to the future of the country that goes beyond financial. I.e. the decision has to provably hamper the country's financi status.

Otherwise, this way of prosecuting politicians will be used next time against another PM whose policies genrate a loss.

They should start with punishing blatent corruption , not policy failures.

[Robby nz]

You are still ducking and weaving around this T a H.

It is nothing to do with failed policy.

It is initially, in Yinglucks case, about failure to manage the policy from the position of chair of the rice policy committee which she took upon herself, that is where the negligence comes in.

From there we go to corruption within the scheme which again is not about failed policy but about crooked people ripping off the scheme.

These it could be argued are factors which contributed to the failure of the scheme.

Oh, and have patience all in good time.

I don't think they will any institutiinalised corruption because the losses are simply explained by the system itself and the yield. Fraud in the system over buying 70,000,000 tonnes of product will be shown to be no more than normal. U think they invented all these tricks because yinglucks policy was in place. This stuff has been going on for donkeys years.

If the g to g deals had corruption who knows. Someone has already been done for the Iran deal. I believe most of the g to g deals were to make the market feel it was being sold.

Lots of MOU and nothing final.

Managing the system negligently. Many a lawyer would argue there was no way to manage it in a cost neutral manner. Would be interesting to see if she claims it wasn't her policy, but the party's or committees.

It would appear that the NACC does not agree with you on that one for they are already (as I posted already) looking seriously at corruption charges against former commerce ministers, but then again you may just have done a more thorough investigation than them.

If you had read the link I provided to the no confidence debate then you would know there is an very good chance of corruption regarding the G 2 G deals which by your post you consign to the same basket as the former finance minister telling lies about the economy to make investors feel good.

And telling lies about things while in government is fine.....right ?

It is not about managing it in a cost neutral way ( although it was supposed to be cost neutral) it is about managing it in a responsible way so costs were minimized and proper checks were kept on what was actually going on within the scheme, she was told over and over again that things were not right and ignored all warnings and did nothing except deny anything was wrong, she reportedly not even attending meetings she was supposed to chair.

There is nothing to show it wasn't managed responsibly and to the best they could do. The reduction in quality is normal in storage.

Yes, I reckon they told a white lie about the g to g stuff, because the actual story was always that it was an MOU not a contract. Repeatedly.

If the g to g stuff was fundamentally corrupt so be it. Should be a walk in the park to prove. That idiot who didn't deliver to Iran, is in the clink right?

Please tell us how it was managed responsibly, how proper inventories were kept proper budgets kept.

I can keep posting links all day as to the statements that everything was in order, all the rice is there and in good order and condition, denials of any problems, there is a huge trail of these statements which, given the information now at hand, are clearly false, you think this is good management ?

Reduction in quality is normal, like only around 20% of what is in storage at the time of inspection is high quality, that is the same quality as to when it was stored, the rest being poor quality or rotted away to useless.

And a reduction in quantity would also be normal I suppose, like sacks being replaced with scaffolding or just not there any more

Good you admit they lied, I will tell you something a lie is a lie regardless of what color the liar paints it and there was supposed to be contracts not just MOU's.

Check out this one :

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/757870-ex-commerce-ministers-secretary-faces-charges-over-fake-g-to-g-rice-deals/ DSI probes graft allegations in govt's rice pledging scheme

A snip :

Mr Vicha identified Mr Boonsong’s ex-secretary as Major Veeravuth Watjanapukka. He disclosed that after signing early last year of the bogus deals with a state enterprise in Guangdong and another in Hainan, rice traders were invited to the office of Veeravuth to be informed of the G-to-G rice deals and they were told to issue cashier check payable to the Foreign Trade Department and the check was to be given to Pol Maj Saravuth Sakulmeerith, former director of Public Warehouse Organistion.

All the people involved in these deals were linked to Siam Indiga company said, Mr Vicha.

After having received the checks for the rice deals, Mr Vicha said the PWO and the Marketing Organisation for Farmers notified Mr Somkid Oensupa, Mr Ratthanit Sojirakul and Mr Lit Pojai to arrange for the rice to be taken out of the warehouses supposedly to be shipped out to the two buyers in China but, actually, the rice shipments were locally distributed and were never exported.

[Robby nz]

So, if we are to listen to Thai at Heart, then these intimidation tactics, and systematic efforts to interfere with an investigation, and direct indications of corruption are just 'business as usual' and politicians should be forgiven for any of those..? Right?

In Thailand, yup, they are very normal, or don't you read the news. Catch these people for personal corruption before finding them negligent would be preferable. Suing for negligence brings very serious precedent problems for the future.

This case is all about what someone can PROVE. All the talking under the sun won't get the case prosecuted successfully. Until they start producing serious evidence, I believe they won't succeed .

So intimidation of a checks and balances organization is normal, like having mobs demonstration outside their offices, grenades being thrown, budgets being cut to make it harder for them to do their work,

Possibly under Thaksins Govts for that is the way he works.

Yes going after Yingluck for negligence is a serious precedent that needs to be set in order to get it through to future governments and their ministers, whoever they may be, that they have a responsibility to the country and the people and they will be held accountable as they should be.

This is a chance here to set the standard of politicians behavior for the future, a standard of honesty and integrity and service to the people.

The first principal of democracy "Government for the people by the people"......... For the people right !

Lets get that through to future politicians who seem to think that democracy consists of elections then the winner take all.

Oh and I see you have gone back to 1967 to get something on the democrats, bad try at diversion, stick to the subject.

I disagree unless they clarify very clearly how to hold them accountable. Losing govt money by subsidy or price intervention is not sufficient.

They need to prove genuine intentional damage to the future of the country that goes beyond financial. I.e. the decision has to provably hamper the country's financi status.

Otherwise, this way of prosecuting politicians will be used next time against another PM whose policies genrate a loss.

They should start with punishing blatent corruption , not policy failures.

Its not about intentional damage or loss through subsidy or anything else.

Its about not doing the job they take on just the same as in any other job.

Why should politicians be any different from any other employee ? they are in fact employed by the country and the people to run the country.

If an employee in any other business does not do the job they are given or take on then they can expect at the very least censure or more likely be sacked.

You may say that they can be at an election, however to make it clear that non performance or corruption as in any other profession or business will have serious consequences needs to be done.

[rubl]

I disagree unless they clarify very clearly how to hold them accountable. Losing govt money by subsidy or price intervention is not sufficient.

They need to prove genuine intentional damage to the future of the country that goes beyond financial. I.e. the decision has to provably hamper the country's financi status.

Otherwise, this way of prosecuting politicians will be used next time against another PM whose policies genrate a loss.

They should start with punishing blatent corruption , not policy failures.

A scheme which is positioned and defended as 'self-financing' and which still costs the State 700 billion Baht in barely 2-1/2 years is not a simple policy failure. It's gross negligence with criminal aspects suspected.

[Thai at Heart]

You are still ducking and weaving around this T a H.

It is nothing to do with failed policy.

It is initially, in Yinglucks case, about failure to manage the policy from the position of chair of the rice policy committee which she took upon herself, that is where the negligence comes in.

From there we go to corruption within the scheme which again is not about failed policy but about crooked people ripping off the scheme.

These it could be argued are factors which contributed to the failure of the scheme.

Oh, and have patience all in good time.

I don't think they will any institutiinalised corruption because the losses are simply explained by the system itself and the yield. Fraud in the system over buying 70,000,000 tonnes of product will be shown to be no more than normal. U think they invented all these tricks because yinglucks policy was in place. This stuff has been going on for donkeys years.

If the g to g deals had corruption who knows. Someone has already been done for the Iran deal. I believe most of the g to g deals were to make the market feel it was being sold.

Lots of MOU and nothing final.

Managing the system negligently. Many a lawyer would argue there was no way to manage it in a cost neutral manner. Would be interesting to see if she claims it wasn't her policy, but the party's or committees.

It would appear that the NACC does not agree with you on that one for they are already (as I posted already) looking seriously at corruption charges against former commerce ministers, but then again you may just have done a more thorough investigation than them.

If you had read the link I provided to the no confidence debate then you would know there is an very good chance of corruption regarding the G 2 G deals which by your post you consign to the same basket as the former finance minister telling lies about the economy to make investors feel good.

And telling lies about things while in government is fine.....right ?

It is not about managing it in a cost neutral way ( although it was supposed to be cost neutral) it is about managing it in a responsible way so costs were minimized and proper checks were kept on what was actually going on within the scheme, she was told over and over again that things were not right and ignored all warnings and did nothing except deny anything was wrong, she reportedly not even attending meetings she was supposed to chair.

There is nothing to show it wasn't managed responsibly and to the best they could do. The reduction in quality is normal in storage.

Yes, I reckon they told a white lie about the g to g stuff, because the actual story was always that it was an MOU not a contract. Repeatedly.

If the g to g stuff was fundamentally corrupt so be it. Should be a walk in the park to prove. That idiot who didn't deliver to Iran, is in the clink right?

Please tell us how it was managed responsibly, how proper inventories were kept proper budgets kept.

I can keep posting links all day as to the statements that everything was in order, all the rice is there and in good order and condition, denials of any problems, there is a huge trail of these statements which, given the information now at hand, are clearly false, you think this is good management ?

Reduction in quality is normal, like only around 20% of what is in storage at the time of inspection is high quality, that is the same quality as to when it was stored, the rest being poor quality or rotted away to useless.

And a reduction in quantity would also be normal I suppose, like sacks being replaced with scaffolding or just not there any more

Good you admit they lied, I will tell you something a lie is a lie regardless of what color the liar paints it and there was supposed to be contracts not just MOU's.

Check out this one :

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/757870-ex-commerce-ministers-secretary-faces-charges-over-fake-g-to-g-rice-deals/ DSI probes graft allegations in govt's rice pledging scheme

A snip :

Mr Vicha identified Mr Boonsongs ex-secretary as Major Veeravuth Watjanapukka. He disclosed that after signing early last year of the bogus deals with a state enterprise in Guangdong and another in Hainan, rice traders were invited to the office of Veeravuth to be informed of the G-to-G rice deals and they were told to issue cashier check payable to the Foreign Trade Department and the check was to be given to Pol Maj Saravuth Sakulmeerith, former director of Public Warehouse Organistion.

All the people involved in these deals were linked to Siam Indiga company said, Mr Vicha.

After having received the checks for the rice deals, Mr Vicha said the PWO and the Marketing Organisation for Farmers notified Mr Somkid Oensupa, Mr Ratthanit Sojirakul and Mr Lit Pojai to arrange for the rice to be taken out of the warehouses supposedly to be shipped out to the two buyers in China but, actually, the rice shipments were locally distributed and were never exported.

That's the one they found very easily. Quite exactlt what happened is as far as I can work out, they fraudulently claimed it was for export but it never was.

But people have been arrested and court cases brought. What more should be done in this context?

The totals on hand have been reportedly agreed with the army audits to be very close and there is no mention of the missing millions of tonnes as mentioned previously.

The volume on hand is what they expected. They talk about the product deteriorating in grade and this is an exceedingly selective process. They estimate 10% is at the same quality as put into the warehouse.

To be expected when stored for this long. 10+ is mouldy. I am amazed it isn't more from this length of storage. There is little that could have been done to prevent this deterioration, but there is talk of suing the warehouses for damage.

That will be a very long drawn out thing and I promise most warehouse contracts won't cover natural ageing in store.

[halloween]

That's the one they found very easily. Quite exactlt what happened is as far as I can work out, they fraudulently claimed it was for export but it never was.

But people have been arrested and court cases brought. What more should be done in this context?

The totals on hand have been reportedly agreed with the army audits to be very close and there is no mention of the missing millions of tonnes as mentioned previously.

The volume on hand is what they expected. They talk about the product deteriorating in grade and this is an exceedingly selective process. They estimate 10% is at the same quality as put into the warehouse.

To be expected when stored for this long. 10+ is mouldy. I am amazed it isn't more from this length of storage. There is little that could have been done to prevent this deterioration, but there is talk of suing the warehouses for damage.

That will be a very long drawn out thing and I promise most warehouse contracts won't cover natural ageing in store.

There is a simple way to prevent deterioration from long storage - stop buying overpriced rice that you can't sell. An amazingly simple solution not adopted because the party's political gain was more important than the nation's loss.

[Thai at Heart]

That's the one they found very easily. Quite exactlt what happened is as far as I can work out, they fraudulently claimed it was for export but it never was.

But people have been arrested and court cases brought. What more should be done in this context?

The totals on hand have been reportedly agreed with the army audits to be very close and there is no mention of the missing millions of tonnes as mentioned previously.

The volume on hand is what they expected. They talk about the product deteriorating in grade and this is an exceedingly selective process. They estimate 10% is at the same quality as put into the warehouse.

To be expected when stored for this long. 10+ is mouldy. I am amazed it isn't more from this length of storage. There is little that could have been done to prevent this deterioration, but there is talk of suing the warehouses for damage.

That will be a very long drawn out thing and I promise most warehouse contracts won't cover natural ageing in store.

There is a simple way to prevent deterioration from long storage - stop buying overpriced rice that you can't sell. An amazingly simple solution not adopted because the party's political gain was more important than the nation's loss.

Careful what u wish for.

Next will be a flat rate per rai subsidy offered to all farmers.

PTP isn't stupid. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Edited January 1, 2015 by Thai at Heart

[halloween]

There is a simple way to prevent deterioration from long storage - stop buying overpriced rice that you can't sell. An amazingly simple solution not adopted because the party's political gain was more important than the nation's loss.

Careful what u wish for.

Next will be a flat rate per rai subsidy offered to all farmers.

PTP isn't stupid. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

What I wish for is MPs who care more for the country than themselves and their party. PTP is not stupid, it is a venal and corrupt group willing to sell their vote to a criminal who uses that to his own benefit.

A flat rate per rai to all farmers, restricted to small holdings and low incomes, could be acceptable. Under PTP, like with their rice scam, it would have no restrictions and be another scam.

BTW Yingluk/PTP would have little culpability for the rice scam debt if they had at some stage stopped it. Yes, they tried, but bowed to farmers pressure. if they had admitted a mistake, and wore the political consequences, they could claim poor judgement. But they didn't despite the evidence apparent to all of the damage being caused, and for that they are culpable.

[Thai at Heart]

There is a simple way to prevent deterioration from long storage - stop buying overpriced rice that you can't sell. An amazingly simple solution not adopted because the party's political gain was more important than the nation's loss.

Careful what u wish for.

Next will be a flat rate per rai subsidy offered to all farmers.

PTP isn't stupid. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

What I wish for is MPs who care more for the country than themselves and their party. PTP is not stupid, it is a venal and corrupt group willing to sell their vote to a criminal who uses that to his own benefit.

A flat rate per rai to all farmers, restricted to small holdings and low incomes, could be acceptable. Under PTP, like with their rice scam, it would have no restrictions and be another scam.

BTW Yingluk/PTP would have little culpability for the rice scam debt if they had at some stage stopped it. Yes, they tried, but bowed to farmers pressure. if they had admitted a mistake, and wore the political consequences, they could claim poor judgement. But they didn't despite the evidence apparent to all of the damage being caused, and for that they are culpable.

And you really think any of the other policital parties give two hoots about their constituents and the future of the country over their own wallets?

My lord, this really is the height of naivety.

You are asking Thai politicians to display a level of honest behaviour with their constituents that goes way beyond the more developed west and is entirely subjective.

If only Cameron had admitted that his policy of austerity had hurt so many of the neediest in the country.

Versus, I am cutting the deficit.

Or Obama with if only he had admitted that bailing out GM was a mistaken folly

Versus I saved hundreds of thousands of jobs.

It won't work

[halloween]

What I wish for is MPs who care more for the country than themselves and their party. PTP is not stupid, it is a venal and corrupt group willing to sell their vote to a criminal who uses that to his own benefit.

A flat rate per rai to all farmers, restricted to small holdings and low incomes, could be acceptable. Under PTP, like with their rice scam, it would have no restrictions and be another scam.

BTW Yingluk/PTP would have little culpability for the rice scam debt if they had at some stage stopped it. Yes, they tried, but bowed to farmers pressure. if they had admitted a mistake, and wore the political consequences, they could claim poor judgement. But they didn't despite the evidence apparent to all of the damage being caused, and for that they are culpable.

And you really think any of the other policital parties give two hoots about their constituents and the future of the country over their own wallets?

My lord, this really is the height of naivety.

You are asking Thai politicians to display a level of honest behaviour with their constituents that goes way beyond the more developed west and is entirely subjective.

If only Cameron had admitted that his policy of austerity had hurt so many of the neediest in the country.

Versus, I am cutting the deficit.

Or Obama with if only he had admitted that bailing out GM was a mistaken folly

Versus I saved hundreds of thousands of jobs.

It won't work

Nice attempt at changing the subject. Hoping for reform may be naive, prosecuting the criminals formerly in government is one way to achieve it.

[Robby nz]

That's the one they found very easily. Quite exactlt what happened is as far as I can work out, they fraudulently claimed it was for export but it never was.

But people have been arrested and court cases brought. What more should be done in this context?

The totals on hand have been reportedly agreed with the army audits to be very close and there is no mention of the missing millions of tonnes as mentioned previously.

The volume on hand is what they expected. They talk about the product deteriorating in grade and this is an exceedingly selective process. They estimate 10% is at the same quality as put into the warehouse.

To be expected when stored for this long. 10+ is mouldy. I am amazed it isn't more from this length of storage. There is little that could have been done to prevent this deterioration, but there is talk of suing the warehouses for damage.

That will be a very long drawn out thing and I promise most warehouse contracts won't cover natural ageing in store.

Easily found or not you told us there were no contracts only MOU's and this was done under false contracts.

As far as I know this has as yet to be taken to court.

What has been discovered to be missing is only what is missing from what was supposed to be in storage at the time of the inspections.

There is no way of telling how much has disappeared over the life of the scheme and the 2.2 million tons would seem to be a reasonable estimate.

Unless the previous administration or the ministries (which still exist) can come up with a proper accounting of what was bought, sold, lost through fire, flood or stolen then we will never know how much has disappeared.

There should have been proper accounts and records kept of every transaction both in and out of the scheme and every ton of rice should be able to be accounted for. There are large numbers of chair warming paper shufflers and budgets in place to do these things and it was the responsibility of those in charge of the scheme to make sure this was done and done correctly.

There should have been regular reports to the policy committee, there was an inspection committee, there should have been detailed records kept and scrutinised by the policy committee (led by its absent chair) these reports and records should now be available as proof of good governance of the scheme.

I would suggest that if they existed at all then they would have already been brought forward as proof of said good governance.

If they do not exist or are hidden for some reason then it clearly shows someone has not dome their job.

As for deterioration, it would appear to be excessive rather than as you say minimal, for the rice pledged in the scheme has only been in storage 3 years, no doubt a matter of opinion but that's not what its about.

Its about negligence in the governance of the scheme followed by corruption within the scheme.

[Thai at Heart]

What I wish for is MPs who care more for the country than themselves and their party. PTP is not stupid, it is a venal and corrupt group willing to sell their vote to a criminal who uses that to his own benefit.

A flat rate per rai to all farmers, restricted to small holdings and low incomes, could be acceptable. Under PTP, like with their rice scam, it would have no restrictions and be another scam.

BTW Yingluk/PTP would have little culpability for the rice scam debt if they had at some stage stopped it. Yes, they tried, but bowed to farmers pressure. if they had admitted a mistake, and wore the political consequences, they could claim poor judgement. But they didn't despite the evidence apparent to all of the damage being caused, and for that they are culpable.

And you really think any of the other policital parties give two hoots about their constituents and the future of the country over their own wallets?

My lord, this really is the height of naivety.

You are asking Thai politicians to display a level of honest behaviour with their constituents that goes way beyond the more developed west and is entirely subjective.

If only Cameron had admitted that his policy of austerity had hurt so many of the neediest in the country.

Versus, I am cutting the deficit.

Or Obama with if only he had admitted that bailing out GM was a mistaken folly

Versus I saved hundreds of thousands of jobs.

It won't work

Nice attempt at changing the subject. Hoping for reform may be naive, prosecuting the criminals formerly in government is one way to achieve it.

Got to get them all on all sides if this supposed reform is going to work, or it ends in a.farcical tit for tat

[halloween]

Nice attempt at changing the subject. Hoping for reform may be naive, prosecuting the criminals formerly in government is one way to achieve it.

Got to get them all on all sides if this supposed reform is going to work, or it ends in a.farcical tit for tat

I didn't specify any side, though the stand-out achievers are the subject of this thread. And if it ends in a tit for tat, isn't the objective still attained?

[rubl]

It seems the discussion is still zigzagging along. For some it is difficult to accept that a scheme positioned and defended as 'self-financing' can be more than a silly policy, a subsidy gone wrong.

700,000,000,000 Baht

Not even part of the deficit planned and budgeted in the National Budgets. 'self-financing' in a revolving funds only. It would have doubled the planned deficits over 2011/2012, 2012/2013, it would have had effects on the Government's rating, interest on bonds, etc., etc. It's like the 1.14 trillion Baht 1997 leftover debts put under the carpet at BoT to allow a better position for the government to lent 2.4 trillion Baht at a decent 'pay back over 50 years' rate.

Negligence my foot. Criminal is the only correct word to describe these activities.

[Thai at Heart]

Nice attempt at changing the subject. Hoping for reform may be naive, prosecuting the criminals formerly in government is one way to achieve it.

Got to get them all on all sides if this supposed reform is going to work, or it ends in a.farcical tit for tat

I didn't specify any side, though the stand-out achievers are the subject of this thread. And if it ends in a tit for tat, isn't the objective still attained?

No, because it becomes politically expedient to hold leverage over some more than others

[Dumu Ali]

Hey this Prayuth is looking Justice I think good man for Thailand everybody seems to love him very much

[mikemac]

Hey this Prayuth is looking Justice I think good man for Thailand everybody seems to love him very much

And a lot of people don't love him at all because he is not part of the Shin regime and plays by a different set of rules. Making the people who were responsible ??? for the disastrous rice scheme accountable for their actions/in-actions is a good example.

If the Shins were still in power the losses would have been swept under the carpet, lied away, covered up and probably hidden with funds "borrowed" from the massive loan the Shins were chasing.

If the General only ever does one good thing for Thailand I hope he makes an example of this evil family.

[Robby nz]

As a little aside, I saw this little item in todays "Thailand Live" which if implemented may help prevent a repeat of a topic like this in the future :

9 occupations could be required to undergo a test to gain employments

BANGKOK, 2 January 2014 (NNT)-The Department of Skill Development (DSD) will be testing workers for their skills in the jobs that could potentially be harmful to the public.

I would suggest that politicians be top of the list followed closely be civil servants.

[Thai at Heart]

As a little aside, I saw this little item in todays "Thailand Live" which if implemented may help prevent a repeat of a topic like this in the future :

9 occupations could be required to undergo a test to gain employments

BANGKOK, 2 January 2014 (NNT)-The Department of Skill Development (DSD) will be testing workers for their skills in the jobs that could potentially be harmful to the public.

I would suggest that politicians be top of the list followed closely be civil servants.

Classic headline. Where will they find qualified candidates?

[Robby nz]

As a little aside, I saw this little item in todays "Thailand Live" which if implemented may help prevent a repeat of a topic like this in the future :

9 occupations could be required to undergo a test to gain employments

BANGKOK, 2 January 2014 (NNT)-The Department of Skill Development (DSD) will be testing workers for their skills in the jobs that could potentially be harmful to the public.

I would suggest that politicians be top of the list followed closely be civil servants.

Classic headline. Where will they find qualified candidates?

No Idea T a H, definitely not on this site.

Have a nice evening.

[DaffyDuck]

Classic headline. Where will they find qualified candidates?

No Idea T a H, definitely not on this site.

Have a nice evening.

Excellent burn! Kudos.

[Thai at Heart]

Classic headline. Where will they find qualified candidates?

No Idea T a H, definitely not on this site.

Have a nice evening.

Excellent burn! Kudos.

Since u arrived Daffy, the chances definitely didn't improve.

[DaffyDuck]

He was talking about you, mostly, and your ilk.

[Robby nz]

He was talking about you, mostly, and your ilk.

Not quite true Daffy there are far worse than T a H on this site.

[DaffyDuck]

He was talking about you, mostly, and your ilk.

Not quite true Daffy there are far worse than T a H on this site.

True, hence my reference to " and your ilk. " ;-)