Jump to content

Ms Yingluck says she feels relieved after having clarified the NACC’s charges


Recommended Posts

Posted

Ms Yingluck says she feels relieved after having clarified the NACC’s charges

1-9-2015-7-58-25-PM-wpcf_728x413.jpg

BANGKOK: -- Former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra said today that she felt relieved after having clarified to the National Legislative Assembly all the charges related to the rice pledging scheme lodged against her by the National Anti-Corruption Commission.

She made the above remark to reporters at the parliament after she defended herself against the charges by the NACC which were presented to the NLA by Mr Vicha Mahakhun, a member of the NACC, as he opened the impeachment case against Ms Yingluck.

In presenting her defence, the ex-prime minister pleaded for justice from the NLA saying that she had already been stripped of all political posts and there was no point to impeach her.

She told the Press that she had clarified all the charges against her and hoped that the public had heard of what she had said to the NLA.

In presenting the NACC’s case, Mr Vicha told the NLA that the NLA had already warned the government of Ms Yingluck more than once about suspected corruption in the rice pledging scheme but they were all ignored.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/ms-yingluck-says-feels-relieved-clarified-naccs-charges

thaipbs_logo.jpg
-- Thai PBS 2015-01-09

Posted

If Ms Yingluck is satisfied she has demonstrated her innocence to the NACC, then I suppose that is good enough for me. And since they have already stripped her of all power they should just drop any further prosecutions of her.

This sounds like 'dog whistle' language to sway her 'low information' voters that any continued prosecution is really persecution caused by hate for her brother and not for any wrongdoing on her part. Well played, Yingluck, well played. You have excellent advisors. (can we blame all the losses on that mysterious 'Third Hand?)

side note: in the US, the term 'dog whistle' means to speak in a way that only certain groups will understand your real message; the same as only dogs can hear a dog whistle.

Yep. Rex and Fido have already come out with the old "but the cat did it too!" argument.

Posted

"she felt relieved after having clarified to the National Legislative Assembly all the charges"

Being a non-native English speaker it may be me, but somehow I didn't think Ms. Yingluck was asked to clarify the charges the NACC has against her. She's supposed to defend herself, cast doubts on the charges, ask the NACC to clarify and so blink.png

  • Like 2
Posted

Somebody please give this lady a big hug and tell her how brave she was to stand up to this relentless onslaught against her character.

That's the least she deserves.

Some people bring these things on themselves though.

Posted

I'm new to this debate..

The UK which is comparable in population to Thailand spends 200 Billion GBP ($300 Billion) on welfare benefits..

Yingluck loses $15 billion helping her countries most poorest and this is an issue???

I know we are not comparing apples with apples here but there may be another way of looking at this.

Corruption has not been quantified yet.. so that argument must be put aside for the time being.

  • Like 1
Posted

I'm new to this debate..

The UK which is comparable in population to Thailand spends 200 Billion GBP ($300 Billion) on welfare benefits..

Yingluck loses $15 billion helping her countries most poorest and this is an issue???

I know we are not comparing apples with apples here but there may be another way of looking at this.

Corruption has not been quantified yet.. so that argument must be put aside for the time being.

I'm new to this debate..

No. You're not. You've been a member of this forum for three and a half years. Willful ignorance or are you trying to fool us?

If you really are new to the debate, why have you taken sides when, if you are new to the debate, you don't really have enough information to be posting anything without showing your ignorance on the matter?

  • Like 1
Posted

Once again she shown dignity and grace and she has really rattled you yellow junta dem supporters and mainly because not only because she a Shinawatra but a woman.

Really have a look at jamie he claimed she is a convicted criminal I have asked him time after time to list her convictions past and present yet he can't and yet now seeks the attention of the mods to try and get posts removed that he doesn't agree with.

Well the underlying truth is that the people elected the PTP and Yingluck and her party and no matter which way you slice they are the government elected by the people and people supporting this sham should be ashamed.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

So when are they going to impeach Suthep for his Palm Oil deals and for the government land which he gave to his "Hi-so" mates on Phuket and his enroachment on to government land on Koh Samui , just to make his family property bigger. Come on, this was blatent corruption, but they are trying to crucify Yingluck instead maybe for mistakes. And how about the murder of innocent protesters sheltering in a temple when the army opened fire against them with live ammunition, all under Sutheps orders, and the nurse who was killed by the army live fire, doing what she was trained to do, namely tender to the injured.

This is nothing but a Democrat witchhunt which will cause so much turmoil in Thailand as the people of the north will just not stand for it.

Let's get one thing straight,if we are talking about who needs to face prosecution ?let's start an orderly que with Thaksin leading the way!

The people of the North will stand for anything,from him because he said" I will make all Thais rich in 6 months" they are still waiting and still believing anything!

Edited by MAJIC
  • Like 1
Posted

"she felt relieved after having clarified to the National Legislative Assembly all the charges"

Being a non-native English speaker it may be me, but somehow I didn't think Ms. Yingluck was asked to clarify the charges the NACC has against her. She's supposed to defend herself, cast doubts on the charges, ask the NACC to clarify and so blink.png

You are quite correct! Seems the Thai pbs is spinning this new release for the junta. I don't really understand why TV chose to use this as it seems to be so far from what she actually said? Other news releases quote her quite differently such as "Yingluck denies all charges" and "I have no position left to be impeached from".

She also stated: "I denied all charges by both the NACC and the Democrat party and I insist I ran the program correctly and transparently. "The program was well received by people. It's a social contract that my government was bound to implement. My party understands farmers...how they are perennially plagued with debts, meager incomes and low rice prices. The rice-pledging scheme would change that. It would allow farmers to stand on their feet. And pledging is the best way to do it, not the guarantee method of the TDRI [Thailand Development Research Institute]. "A government must take care of its low-income people. Besides, rice pledging is not new. It's been used for 33 years." Farmers never had real bargaining power. Guaranteeing the grain — the method championed by the TDRI and the opposition Democrat party — doesn't help and is more corruption-prone since rice was not accounted for. The quantities could easily be manipulated and market prices will not increase.

"Subsidizing farmers is nothing new. Every country helps its bread winner. It's a burden of a government. Japan's subsidies are $3.3 billion a year for its farmers, Thailand $2 billion. Every country helps its farmers. It's not the matter of running a balance sheet. "Figures of lost grain of the subcommittee closing the program's accounts are not correct. Both the Marketing Organization for Farmers and the Public Warehouse Organization insisted the grain was still there. There are discrepancies in inventory numbers. If they are reconciled the way I suggested, the losses could be 250 billion baht from 330 billion. I did tell them this but the NACC chose to listen to the subcommittee.

"Rice pledging creates the multiplier effect and therefore more production, investment and gross domestic product. The government can then collect more taxes. The program did not affect fiscal discipline either. The Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperative borrowed at 20% of the expenditure budget, guaranteed by the Finance Ministry. The cabinet also resolved to manage the program's liquidity by gradually selling the stockpile so the program could finally run on its own. Selling 19 million tonnes of the stock is not necessary. There's no need to issue bonds. "Selling 70 billion baht worth of the stock... borrowing the balance from the contingency budget to get a total of 90 billion baht to repay farmers. Eventually, this government did what I had laid the groundwork for.

Posted

It would seem the "But Suthep" defense is all her supporters on here have.

You should get the message to her and she can use it herself when question time comes.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...