Jump to content

Ex-ministers defend rice scheme via YouTube video


Lite Beer

Recommended Posts

Ex-ministers defend rice scheme via YouTube video
THE SUNDAY NATION January 18, 2015 1:00 am

Answer on Yingluck's behalf all questions posed by NLA

FOUR FORMER MINISTERS in the previous government led by Yingluck Shinawatra defended its rice-pledging scheme yesterday on her behalf via the YouTube video-sharing website.

The ministers answered all 35 questions posed by members of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) during an inquiry session on Friday, as part of an impeachment process against Yingluck, who is accused by the National Anti-Corruption Com-mission of negligence leading to corruption.

Yingluck did not show up for the inquiry session and the NLA resolved not to allow her lawyers or representatives to answer the questions on her behalf.

Former deputy prime minister Niwatthamrong Boonsongpaisal, former finance minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong, former prime minister's office minister Varathep Ratanakorn, and former deputy commerce minister Yanyong Phuangrach answered the 35 questions posed by NLA members via YouTube. Niwatthamrong explained the necessity of the rice scheme - that it was Pheu Thai Party's campaign, while other parties had a similar campaign.

He said that governments in other countries support agricultural products by subsidising at least 50 per cent of the farmers' average income, while Thai state subsidies also cover agricultural products in addition to rice.

In regard to the graft case, Kittiratt said the government had 14 processes to prevent corruption, including a panel appointed to scrutinise and reduce risks that could affect the country.

"There was also a proposal to reduce the price of the rice scheme, but it was strongly opposed by farmers along with the opposition party leader," the former finance minister said.

He said every time the government was accused of corruption, they did not stay still and appointed a subcommittee to eradicate corruption, which was headed by former minister Chalerm Yoobamrung.

Kittiratt also claimed that the rice-pledging scheme did not affect business negatively, saying the country should also note the beneficial aspects of the project as well. One NLA question asked why the government insisted on continuing with the rice-pledging scheme when related agencies voiced opposition to it.

Niwatthamrong said: "The National Anti-Corruption Commis-sion [NACC] forwarded documents to the government, [but] it only showed suggestions about the case, and the government then has received those suggestions on improving the project and strengthening the plan to prevent corruption."

In regard to the Office of the Auditor General, the former deputy PM said after the statement of project opening OAG did not propose to cancel, but one document on January 1, 2014 includes cancelling the project, which then the government was defunct already. (?)

Deputy Commerce Minister Varathep said the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI)'s claim that only one-fourth of farmers benefited from the rice scheme, but he did not understand how TRDI obtained such a figure, because up to 79 per cent of farmers received approximately Bt200,000.

"The NACC and NLA must see the accused as innocent prior to going to the justice system and if there is not enough information for a case the accused should be released, not perceiving the accused as guilty from the start," Varathep said.

He insisted that the NLA could not pursue the impeachment process further, because the punishment for such an offence covers a five-year ban from politics, but the military government had stated that the 2007 Constitution was now defunct, and the NACC's claim they had the legal authority to proceed was not considered lawful. However, the former commerce minister claimed that the rice-pledging scheme also increased rice prices on the world market, but they needed to be higher.

Meanwhile, NLA member Kittisak Rattanawaraha accused Yingluck yesterday of disrespect for failing to acknowledge the questions beforehand. "The exam paper was not leaked," said Kittisak, who was a member of the panel that asked questions. The former PM's failure to attend and answer questions by herself, showed she could not bring notes to read as answers - because she did not know what she would be asked.

He explained that NLA president Pornpetch Wichitcholchai had informed both the accused and accusers about the process earlier - that whoever comes on the first day must come to answer again. And both sides understood this clearly.

He also insisted that Yingluck had to come personally to answer the questions put by the assembly because the NLA had clearly sought her presence.

"It can be considered that Yingluck showed disrespect to the NLA, because each question was addressed directly to the accused", the subcommittee member said. Kittisak later urged the public to scrutinise this issue themselves, because the NLA had given an opportunity for the accused to come until 6pm on Friday, yet she did not show up.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Ex-ministers-defend-rice-scheme-via-YouTube-video-30252114.html

nationlogo.jpg
-- The Nation 2015-01-18

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many ' white lies ' one of the witnesses told this time but it's ok as they were only ' white ' and not serious.

I stopped a long time ago at being amazed over the sheer cheek of this type of person here who has no hesitation or guilt and fronts up, spouts off and expects to be believed because of who he is or at least thinks he is.

Edited by Caveat Emptor
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yingluck need to answer the questions herself. It's that simple.

The problem would be every time she said she didn't understand the question it would be a genuine response not a delaying tactic.

In a country where taking responsibility for one's actions, or lack of, isn't done she's happy in her belief she did nothing wrong since she never attended any meetings of the committee she chaired and never followed up on what was being done. She did admit that at one time she thought something was wrong but the thought passed and that was that.

That reminded me of one of my favourite jokes of all time

Shortened version

A (certain hair coloured) lady who refused to move after occupying a seat in 1st class with an economy ticket on a flight to Miami, after many attempts to convince her to move to economy before the plane could take off the co-pilot intervened and said - I'll handle this, he whispered something in her ear and she immediately got up and when to her economy assigned seat without another word. Eventually one of the cabin crew asked him what he had said - he simply replied - I told her 1st class was going to New York cheesy.gifcheesy.gifcheesy.gifcheesy.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose she will now answer any questions put to her

"What they said",

regards Worgeordie

If asked to re-cap what was said on her behalf she can always say she doesn't exactly know since she wasn't at the hearing in line with her policy of not attending meetings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very shrewd move. This will be shown around Lanna & Isaan before the verdicts come up, thereby incensing her supporters even more.

You wish ! I think it has got to the stage where most of her supporters have tired of her nonsense and the only ones to worry about being "incensed" are the redshirts and they will not lift a finger unless there is a dollar in it for them.

Personally I would like to see them try something, but I can't see those toothless tigers doing much. Opportunist cowards the lot of them.

you think too mut, so how many YS supporters do you know who are tired of her?. As usual you are spouting rubbish again.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very shrewd move. This will be shown around Lanna & Isaan before the verdicts come up, thereby incensing her supporters even more.

You wish ! I think it has got to the stage where most of her supporters have tired of her nonsense and the only ones to worry about being "incensed" are the redshirts and they will not lift a finger unless there is a dollar in it for them.

Personally I would like to see them try something, but I can't see those toothless tigers doing much. Opportunist cowards the lot of them.

you think too mut, so how many YS supporters do you know who are tired of her?. As usual you are spouting rubbish again.

Coming from a red propaganda monger like yourself your flame is laughable. The only time you comment is to disagree with someone's opinion. Try posting something of merit instead of your usual nasty red rubbish.

Before the 2011 election the yellow cheerleaders were spouting the same line. 'The reds & Thaksin are finished' they frothed! You ask for merit from others but make totally unsubstantiated claims of "most of her supporters have tired of her nonsense". You have as much merit as the terrorist monk.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

A very shrewd move. This will be shown around Lanna & Isaan before the verdicts come up, thereby incensing her supporters even more.

In other words the get very quick very quickly club using the situation to get one step closer to a possible /maybe new trough.

In other words more disrespect for moral approaches to building balanced democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you think too mut, so how many YS supporters do you know who are tired of her?. As usual you are spouting rubbish again.

Coming from a red propaganda monger like yourself your flame is laughable. The only time you comment is to disagree with someone's opinion. Try posting something of merit instead of your usual nasty red rubbish.

Before the 2011 election the yellow cheerleaders were spouting the same line. 'The reds & Thaksin are finished' they frothed! You ask for merit from others but make totally unsubstantiated claims of "most of her supporters have tired of her nonsense". You have as much merit as the terrorist monk.

'Terrorist Monk'? 'Thaksin'?

and here I was thinking this was about the 700 billions the RPPS as 'self-financing' scheme lost the country.

Next we'll discuss the value of "it must be true, I saw the clip on youtube"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, did the legal team of Ms. Yingluck forward the youtube clip to the NLA? Did they include the written statement with Ms. Yingluck confirming to agree with the clips contents and to see it as the answer she would otherwise have given herself if only she had had the time to do so?

BTW 'subsidy'? The RPPS was not a subsidy, it was a 'self-financing' scheme, didn't need reservations in the National Budget. Even the day before the scheme formally started Kittirat stated that the costs of 440 billion Baht would be regained by the sale of rice.

Kittirat lies, admits to lying and sees nothing wrong in it.

Who would believe anything a serial self admitting liar says?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...