Sale of rotten Thai rice to go ahead on December 1 despite protest

[sead]

So how are they better than the yingluck tragedy. Seems someone is up for some teamoney for a quick sale, since they even wont bother to earn some more cash

[rubl]

"However, Montatip Vaiyawanna, president of the Thai Agricultural Surveyors Association, said rice surveyors had not taken part in the government's rice inspection. She insisted that some of the rice from this lot could be sold for human consumption or feedmeal production, bringing in more money for the government."

If they didn't take part in the inspection, how do they know it's fit for consumption?

If they did take part why, as the govt rep said, didn't they say something at the time?

Perhaps FEAR such notice that any of the pledged rice was fit for human consumption runs counter to Prayut's claim that 90% was spoiled. The original survey done for Prayut's Rice Policy Committee found that only 10% of pledged rice stocks had spoiled or had missing bags. The Nation July 29, 2014

Maybe that fear has waned after 18 months of the Prayut regime.

I agree, especially since they said "She added that rice surveyor companies had also taken part in the rice inspection. If they wanted to oppose the auction, they should have done so earlier. Duangporn added that those rice surveyor companies would face legal action by the government as they were contributed to poor oversight of the rice stocks that caused the rotting."

Shut up or we'll prosecute--we need to get of this false evidence before the pretty mall haopping shopper goes on trial!

The "would face legal action" is not the same as your "shut up or we prosecute".

Now the question if the rice surveyor companies were also involved in the normal, yearly survey required for the accounting people, the people dealing with sale of government stock, etc. That is assuming there was a yearly survey. At least with the government hiring storage space all over the place a tighter control and survey was made necessary.

[Thai at Heart]

This undoubtedly opens the govt open to accusation of corruption. If the surveyors claim some is safe for Consumption, how on earth can this all be sold as rotten. Bear in mind, the volume designated as rotten is also figured in the cases for damage going on.

Classing rice as rotten when it isn't and thus increasing the damage is a bit off, all in all.

The OP has "some of it was of high enough quality to be sold for human consumption". I guess foreigners will surely believe this.

BTW in June 2014 we had 10% rotten, 80% of reasonable quality with 72% of 18m tonnes pledged checked. That could lead to 1.8m tonnes of rotten rice. Now we have "Altogether the government has 1.29 million tonnes of rotten rice and declining quality rice in government stocks."

Does this mean the volume designated as rotten is decreased on purpose the help lower figures in the damage case?

God knows what it means, but if they are going to prosecute someone for a figure of expected losses and they haven't even counted the quality of the tonnage they have in the warehouse I would suggest they havent got a clue.

How on earth they havent yet, accurately got one set of figures for everyone to work from God knows.

Possibly in the first numbers they were all excited to chase after Yingluck, now the reality comes out.

1mn tonnes rotten out of 60mn stored. Less than 2%. If I was her lawyer I would be checking what mould losses are in any normal year of operation. That sounds quite low.

[dageurreotype]

Astonishingly, there's a country that declare to the world that they're selling a rotten rice, would any other

food supplier get away with doing the same? and where in the world's health organizations to protests

such despicable sale? Dirty rotten scoundrels...

Not sure that I'd agree, according to the OP they're intending to sell it to the Thai industrial sector as raw materials, not export it as food.

Hopefully someone will ensure that this actually happens, given the potential for further damage to the reputation overseas of Thai rice, on top of what's already been seen.

IIRC Iran & West Africa had been less-than-happy with what they received. One might therefore wonder how much of the long-life warehoused rice, which has been exported in recent years as being of food-quality, was in fact rotten or sub-standard ?

And the millions of tons of rice supposedly-sold to China, but which never left the country (according to news-reports & court-cases), was that all top-notch quality ? Coming soon to a supermarket near you ?

Which is one of the reasons (besides the taste) I buy those big bags of Basmati from my local supermarket.

[rubl]

This undoubtedly opens the govt open to accusation of corruption. If the surveyors claim some is safe for Consumption, how on earth can this all be sold as rotten. Bear in mind, the volume designated as rotten is also figured in the cases for damage going on.

Classing rice as rotten when it isn't and thus increasing the damage is a bit off, all in all.

The OP has "some of it was of high enough quality to be sold for human consumption". I guess foreigners will surely believe this.

BTW in June 2014 we had 10% rotten, 80% of reasonable quality with 72% of 18m tonnes pledged checked. That could lead to 1.8m tonnes of rotten rice. Now we have "Altogether the government has 1.29 million tonnes of rotten rice and declining quality rice in government stocks."

Does this mean the volume designated as rotten is decreased on purpose the help lower figures in the damage case?

God knows what it means, but if they are going to prosecute someone for a figure of expected losses and they haven't even counted the quality of the tonnage they have in the warehouse I would suggest they havent got a clue.

How on earth they havent yet, accurately got one set of figures for everyone to work from God knows.

Possibly in the first numbers they were all excited to chase after Yingluck, now the reality comes out.

1mn tonnes rotten out of 60mn stored. Less than 2%. If I was her lawyer I would be checking what mould losses are in any normal year of operation. That sounds quite low.

It seems you have to read again.

June 2014 about 72% of 18m tonnes was surveyed and 10% of that 72% found rotten, 80% of 72% found a reasonable quality.

The previous government (and the current one honoring contracts for already pledged rice of the first season 2013/2014) bought a total of more than 60m tonnes of paddy which normally would lead to about 45 - 50m tonnes rice.

Anyway first you complain about a possibility that the volue of rotten rice has been 'manipulated' upward and confronted with data you just blunder on. I would have expected the volume of rotten rice to increase over the years, but it seems to have decreased. Now of course Ms. Yingluck's lawyer may state that the current government provided figures for rotten rice are way too low and demand a recount.

PS assuming good rice is sold first and 'bad', 'rotten' rice left behind one would expect the percentage of rotten rice to increase although I'm not sure how much the shrinkage due to rotting is

Edited November 24, 2015 by rubl

[Thai at Heart]

This undoubtedly opens the govt open to accusation of corruption. If the surveyors claim some is safe for Consumption, how on earth can this all be sold as rotten. Bear in mind, the volume designated as rotten is also figured in the cases for damage going on.

Classing rice as rotten when it isn't and thus increasing the damage is a bit off, all in all.

The OP has "some of it was of high enough quality to be sold for human consumption". I guess foreigners will surely believe this.

BTW in June 2014 we had 10% rotten, 80% of reasonable quality with 72% of 18m tonnes pledged checked. That could lead to 1.8m tonnes of rotten rice. Now we have "Altogether the government has 1.29 million tonnes of rotten rice and declining quality rice in government stocks."

Does this mean the volume designated as rotten is decreased on purpose the help lower figures in the damage case?

God knows what it means, but if they are going to prosecute someone for a figure of expected losses and they haven't even counted the quality of the tonnage they have in the warehouse I would suggest they havent got a clue.

How on earth they havent yet, accurately got one set of figures for everyone to work from God knows.

Possibly in the first numbers they were all excited to chase after Yingluck, now the reality comes out.

1mn tonnes rotten out of 60mn stored. Less than 2%. If I was her lawyer I would be checking what mould losses are in any normal year of operation. That sounds quite low.

It seems you have to read again.

June 2014 about 72% of 18m tonnes was surveyed and 10% of that 72% found rotten, 80% of 72% found a reasonable quality.

The previous government (and the current one honoring contracts for already pledged rice of the first season 2013/2014) bought a total of more than 60m tonnes of paddy which normally would lead to about 45 - 50m tonnes rice.

Anyway first you complain about a possibility that the volue of rotten rice has been 'manipulated' upward and confronted with data you just blunder on. I would have expected the volume of rotten rice to increase over the years, but it seems to have decreased. Now of course Ms. Yingluck's lawyer may state that the current government provided figures for rotten rice are way too low and demand a recount.

This is the point. It can't have decreased. That is an impossibility.

Yield on rice is about 60%. They bought 90mn over the years it was in place. They have 1.??? how much rotten?

Apparently they don't know. I am surprised all the accumulated loss over 3 crops is this low at this point. Over a 3 or 4 year period 5 to 10% would be expected under conditions in Thailand. It is almost impossible with this volume to manage it at all just because of the volume.

[tomross46]

what can one do with rotten rice?

The rotten rice can be used to produce methane, through a fermentation process. This should reduce the need to use sugar cane, in the production of Bio Gas. Or as mentioned by an elightened individual, it could be used to increase the production of the clear alcohol substance, know to some as OH! my head hurts, after drinking copious quantities of the elixure.

[tomross46]

Whay was ever dome with the rice that was damaged in the flood? Is that rice still on the books? This sale of rotten rice might just be the start of clearing out damaged inventory. What is the % of inventory? It is good to see that these steps sre being taken by the Government.

[rubl]

The OP has "some of it was of high enough quality to be sold for human consumption". I guess foreigners will surely believe this.

BTW in June 2014 we had 10% rotten, 80% of reasonable quality with 72% of 18m tonnes pledged checked. That could lead to 1.8m tonnes of rotten rice. Now we have "Altogether the government has 1.29 million tonnes of rotten rice and declining quality rice in government stocks."

Does this mean the volume designated as rotten is decreased on purpose the help lower figures in the damage case?

God knows what it means, but if they are going to prosecute someone for a figure of expected losses and they haven't even counted the quality of the tonnage they have in the warehouse I would suggest they havent got a clue.

How on earth they havent yet, accurately got one set of figures for everyone to work from God knows.

Possibly in the first numbers they were all excited to chase after Yingluck, now the reality comes out.

1mn tonnes rotten out of 60mn stored. Less than 2%. If I was her lawyer I would be checking what mould losses are in any normal year of operation. That sounds quite low.

It seems you have to read again.

June 2014 about 72% of 18m tonnes was surveyed and 10% of that 72% found rotten, 80% of 72% found a reasonable quality.

The previous government (and the current one honoring contracts for already pledged rice of the first season 2013/2014) bought a total of more than 60m tonnes of paddy which normally would lead to about 45 - 50m tonnes rice.

Anyway first you complain about a possibility that the volue of rotten rice has been 'manipulated' upward and confronted with data you just blunder on. I would have expected the volume of rotten rice to increase over the years, but it seems to have decreased. Now of course Ms. Yingluck's lawyer may state that the current government provided figures for rotten rice are way too low and demand a recount.

This is the point. It can't have decreased. That is an impossibility.

Yield on rice is about 60%. They bought 90mn over the years it was in place. They have 1.??? how much rotten?

Apparently they don't know. I am surprised all the accumulated loss over 3 crops is this low at this point. Over a 3 or 4 year period 5 to 10% would be expected under conditions in Thailand. It is almost impossible with this volume to manage it at all just because of the volume.

Oh come on, 'can't', 'impossible', and providing incorrect figures yourself?

Between 2011-10-07 and December 2013 a total of 69m tonnes of paddy was pledged. With a conversion reduction of 40% that leaves 60% or 42m tonnes of rice.

Deduct what Thailand consumes locally, deduct what was sold abroad. Leaves 18m tonnes mid-2014. At that time 10% of 72% survey was rotten. That suggested 1.8m could be a total. The current figures are "1.29 million tonnes of rotten rice and declining quality rice in government stocks".

Not three crops, but FIVE. With the government paying way over market price everybody started to farm rice.

As for losses, 500 billion Baht low? For a 'self-financing' scam lasting barely more than two years?

[trogers]

"...despite opposition from rice quality surveyors who called for the suspension of the auction as they believe the rice could be sold for human consumption..."

The test is in the eating. Have family members of these surveyors eat from the said rice on national TV for a week.

[bangrak]

This fworthless rice should be domated to the poor of Phillipines. They have had their rice crop destroyed by Typhones this year. It would be good karma for Thailand.

Alas, not a new idea to give rotten products not fit for human consumption to people in need, there are even some specialised organisations making tons of money worldwide ...selling that kind of garbage! Do you also have no ethics, at all?

Locally I remember some incidents with help-packages from the YS 'government' for victims of the last floods...

[swissie]

A matter of clever marketing: Sell it to 5 star Restaurants in Europe and put it on the menu under "Original Vintage Thai Rice", recommending a 50 Euro bottle of Vintage Wine to go with it.

After spending the next day in the toilet, they will exclaim: "There was something wrong with the Vintage Wine".

All a matter of marketing.

Cheers.