More Tv's To The Thai People

[webfact]

Wissanu still wants Meechai to head CDC
THE NATION


Meechai

TEAM OUTLINES REASONS WHY THE NRC REJECTED CHARTER DRAFT

BANGKOK: -- DEPUTY PRIME Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said yesterday that he would try to persuade former Senate Speaker Meechai Ruchuphan to head the new Constitution Drafting Committee.

Wissanu said he had appointed a four-member team to survey the reasons the National Reform Council rejected the old CDC's proposed charter and some had been reported to him.

The first group of NRC members had many reasons and would have voted it down regardless.

The second group cited academic issues such as non-elected prime ministers, the National Strategic Reform and Reconciliation Committee (NSRRC) and appointed senators.

The third group liked the draft charter but wanted the election to be postponed until the economy's health could be restored.

Wissanu denied knowing about Meechai's refusal to accept the invitation to head the CDC, saying he was not sure what Meechai's answer would be. However, he should have all 21 names of the members of the CDC by the end of this month, he said.

Chaturon Chaisang, a former key member of the Pheu Thai Party, countered Wissanu's claim that the charter writers could not complete their work in just three months.

"They took more than a year writing the [rejected] charter, so they have a lot of information already. It can go faster because this new CDC will not be taking opinions from anybody," he said.

The question was not whether the road map to the election should run 20 months - or 11 months as he had suggested - but whether the drafting would include public participation or incorporate the opinions of the people.

"What would happen if they intentionally frame the charter so that people will reject it in the plebiscite? Then we might have to keep composing charters again and again?"

'Game back to zero'

Former NRC member Sombat Thamrongthanyawong said he did not believe that Wissanu had in mind to make all political parties dissolve themselves and re-register to prevent large ones from enjoying an advantage over small and new ones.

Wissanu did not mean that but only wanted to cite some hypothetical cases to counter Chaturon's proposal that the timeline be reduced, he said.

Having all parties register again - or setting the game back to "zero" - would not reduce the advantage that big parties have. Even if big parties were disbanded, their former members could still apply to the same party under a new name.

"It's just a waste of time and too much of a hassle to do all this," he said.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said the time spent in crafting the new constitution would depend on whether the new CDC wanted to start from scratch or from previous charters.

The new charter writers should brainstorm on what could be learned from the controversial points and criticism of the previous draft charter, such as the move to add the NSRRC, which he opposes.

However, there must be a mechanism to prevent an elected government from causing damage to the country, he said.

"I don't deny that under special circumstances, we need to have a special power to prevent losses to the state. But this mechanism or special power must [not result in] a dual state administration," Abhisit said.

The new CDC members should have the freedom to design the charter and not have to accept recommendations from the Cabinet, like the old one led by Borwornsak Uwanno, he said.

When it comes time for the referendum, people must realise that the charter has not only legal implications but also economic and social aspects.

"If it failed to pass, how would the world community look at us, and what would be the possible economic repercussions? Would people's livelihoods be affected?"

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Wissanu-still-wants-Meechai-to-head-CDC-30269439.html


-- The Nation 2015-09-24

[Srikcir]

"Having all parties register again - or setting the game back to "zero" - would not reduce the advantage that big parties have."

Chaturon is correct.

If MMP were in place for the 2011 elections the PTP would still have the majority of constituency and proportional seats. Twenty-six parties that had less than 1% of the vote (MMP threshhold is typically 3-5%!), they still would have not gained any constituency seats and their number of proportional seats would have remained about the same - insignificant.

There is no reason to delay elections to re-register parties for a "zero-sum" result. If the problem is that new parties need to register, then NLA can amend election laws to do so immediately.