Rice-pledging scheme helped the country, Wattana insists

[webfact]

Rice-pledging scheme helped the country, Wattana insists
THE NATION



BANGKOK: -- FORMER commerce minister Wattana Muangsuk yesterday defended the rice-pledging scheme against allegations that it distorted market forces and caused huge losses, saying it was a public policy aimed at stimulating the economy and domestic consumption.

The ex-minister defended the scrapped scheme ahead of the scheduled start of the trial of former PM Yingluck Shinawatra by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders later this month for alleged negligence in overseeing the scheme and failing to stop graft and losses of at least Bt500 billion.

"The rice-pledging scheme was implemented under a strict financial and monetary discipline," Wattana said. "The government was able to keep the fiscal balance by ensuring that state expenses and present and future financial commitments were at a level which the |government was able to finance.

"The country enjoyed financial stability. The allegations that the project shouldered heavy losses and the government set aside a huge budget or sought loans to write off losses, creating bad debts and putting the country's financial system at risk of going bankrupt, were a misunderstanding and false.''

Wattana said the Yingluck government implemented the rice-pledging scheme by intervening in the market mechanism under a public policy protected by Article 84 (8) of the now-defunct 2007 Constitution. He said the article stipulated that the state must protect and maintain maximum interest for farmers in the production and marketing of agricultural produce.

The scheme was aimed at stimulating the economy and increasing farmers' purchasing power in order to raise domestic consumption.

"It was not normal rice deals by the state. We fixed the pledging price higher than the market price with the intention of helping the farmer," Wattana said.

"But when we released or sold rice from the stockpiles, we might have done it at higher or lower prices than the pledging price. It is not about making a profit or a loss as many people have said in trying to distort the issue.''

He argued that all economic policies had expenses depending on the size of the policies, such as the Abhisit government handing out Bt2,000 cheques to each citizen with an income less than Bt15,000 and the Prayut government allowing tax deductions if someone spent at least Bt15,000 shopping in the week up to the new year.

"Projects which aim to help poor people have never been regarded as illegal," he said.

Wattana said corruption allegations involving the rice-pledging scheme resulted from its implementation and not because the policy was wrong.

He said issues ranged from corruption over the humidity and weight of rice, allegations about importing rice from nearby countries to benefit from the scheme, damage from improper storage of the rice, rice degradation, corruption over rice deals and delays in rice deals.

"When the government was warned about the corruption, it adopted several necessary measures to prevent corruption and damage instead of revoking the project," he said.

Wattana said the Yingluck government implemented the scheme for five crop seasons and transferred the money directly to farmers' bank accounts through the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Co-operatives - an amount totalling Bt878 billion.

He said the scheme boosted farmers' purchasing power and domestic consumption. He cited tax collected by the Revenue Department from 2012-2014, which showed an average of Bt1,793 |billion, while from 2009-2011 it had collected an average tax of Bt1,306 billion. The increase was Bt397 billion a year on average or 30 per cent.

For VAT collection, he said from 2012-2014 the department collected an average of Bt678 billion, while from 2009-11 it collected an average of Bt503 billion, an average increase of Bt174 billion per year or 34 per cent.

He said state and private savings in 2011 reached Bt7,990 billion and the country's total savings in 2014 reached Bt12,010 billion - a rise of Bt4,019 billion. National savings increased 50 per cent while public debt to GDP in 2014 stood at 46 per cent, which was less than 50 per cent, as restricted by the law.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Rice-pledging-scheme-helped-the-country-Wattana-in-30276074.html


-- The Nation 2016-01-04

[halloween]

" The allegations that the project shouldered heavy losses and the government set aside a huge budget or sought loans to write off losses, creating bad debts and putting the country's financial system at risk of going bankrupt, were a misunderstanding and false.''

Tell that to the farmers. And the bankers, and the accountants, and the world financial press. It was all a big lie, our rice policy was a huge success.

[EricBerg]

Shameless denial. And terribly arrogant to think the redshirt-supporters will believe his crap. The tide is gradually turning away from guys like this. Better late than never.

[chainarong]

On the face of it Wattana is either in denial or in another country , one needn't go through step by step detail for his benefit as everyone knows the true results however I only have one question to Wattana , if the country was so economical sound sir why did the banks refuse to lend money to your administration to pay out the farmers who hadn't received a satang .............................................

[apetley]

I can understand paying the farmers over the market rate to improve their lot but trying to defend a scheme where less than 20% of it's cost went to those it was supposedly aimed at is shameless.

If they really wanted to help the farmers a direct subsidy based on the amount of rice delivered to the rice mill would have been far better.

The Govt of the day was warned of exactly what was likely to happen when they introduced the scheme and surprise surprise happen it did.

[Bluespunk]

It may be a New Year but the lies are the same.

[rubl]

Well with Pheu Thai stating two months ago to have paid out 800 billion Baht directly to farmers with 1.4 million rice farming families out of 3.2 million participating in the RPPS I would surely hope that all that money did benefit someone here in Thailand.

[trogers]

So those farmers who committed suicide due to non-payment from this wonderous rice scam were just a misunderstanding?

He can lie straight face while they hung?

[jaywalker]

"The rice-pledging scheme was implemented under a strict financial and monetary discipline," Wattana said."

WOW! Even Pinocchio wasn't this bad!

[Seastallion]

"and the Prayut government allowing tax deductions if someone spent at least Bt15,000 shopping in the week up to the new year.

"Projects which aim to help poor people have never been regarded as illegal," he said."

Eh? Come again..... How many poor people spend 15 000 in a week on shopping, and how many of them even pay tax in the first place.

The example is one of helping the rich (again).

Two things come out of this:

1. It's a poor example to support Watana's stance, and

2. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!!!! Prayut, whiskey tango foxtrot are you doing?

[robblok]

"The rice-pledging scheme was implemented under a strict financial and monetary discipline," Wattana said."

WOW! Even Pinocchio wasn't this bad!

I wonder why the rice pledging scheme was not included in the budget when it was the same size as the health budget (on a yearly basis). I don't call that discipline, i call that fraud and so do most other accountants. Once you know the cost of something you have to include it in the budget. Can you imagine 200 billion (not taking the full cost in one year as that would be unfair) is about the same size as the health budget and it was NOT included in the budget.

[Seastallion]

Lets take Wattana's statements as truth and reasonable (just for argument's sake).

In which case, all the people facing charges now should still be facing charges..... for utter incompetence and stupidity.

[LannaGuy]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

[robblok]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

[Ricardo]

"The allegations that the project shouldered heavy losses and the government set aside a huge budget or sought loans to write off losses, creating bad debts and putting the country's financial system at risk of going bankrupt, were a misunderstanding and false.''

The project didn't 'shoulder heavy losses', it merely incurred them.

The government didn't "set aside a huge budget", it claimed the scheme would be self-financing, so it didn't need to set aside any budget for it.

The government didn't 'seek loans to write off losses', it sought loans to finance the negative cash-flow, ignoring the losses which inevitably arose.

It didn't 'create bad debts', the losses were carried-forward, and are only now crystalising as the stored stocks are slowly sold-off, and won't become "bad debts" until the later governments walks away from paying the loans.

The country was never at risk "of going bankrupt", it was and remains a good risk.

So everything he claims is true, in a sense, but rather misses the point that the scheme was an unmitigated disaster !

[LannaGuy]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

Edited January 4, 2016 by LannaGuy

[worgeordie]

The ones who gained the most were, middle men,mill owners,warehouse operators,

the did very nicely,while taxpayers were the big losers.

regards Worgeordie

[robblok]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

[meatboy]

"The rice-pledging scheme was implemented under a strict financial and monetary discipline," Wattana said."

WOW! Even Pinocchio wasn't this bad!

is he now on the road safety committee.

[metisdead]

6) You will not post comments that could be reasonably construed as defamation or libel.

Defamation is the issuance of a statement about another person or business which causes that person to suffer harm. It does not have to be false to be defamatory. Libel is when the defamatory statement is published either in a drawing, painting, cinematography, film, picture or letters made visible by any means, or any other recording instruments, recording picture or letters, or by broadcasting or spreading picture, or by propagation by any other means. Defamation is both a civil and criminal charge in Thailand.

A post in violation of the above has been removed.

[LannaGuy]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

it was supposed to be self-funding and why "deliberate" what's the conspiracy theory? I'm afraid it's not about rice it's about censored

[dru2]

And just how was this "self-funding" supposed to work in the real world?

[Baerboxer]

Most countries have subsidised farming schemes and it's normal you think this was expensive go look at Europe or America. Does this mean they handled it competently? no, but this is not about rice

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

Correct Rob. And by taking it off budget they could keep the accounts away from parliamentary scrutiny.

The rampant corruption, whether by design or just some taking advantage of the mismanagement, simply made matters worse and diverted very large amounts of money away from the claimed recipients.

All warnings were ignored and the only hope was to use some of the ThB 2.2 trillion loan, which PTP also wanted away from parliamentary scrutiny, to mask it.

The have had chances to defend it - but the Commerce Ministry and Finance Ministry constantly contradicted one another, as did individuals within each ministry. They have never produced accounts or meeting minutes showing corrective actions taken.

The whole thing was a gamble on being able to manipulate world rice prices or use some of the 2.2 trillion to hide any losses. And, it appears, according to independent reports that very little money actually went to help poor farmers.

[trainman34014]

It did help....them lose a lot more money than they would have done without it !!

[Baerboxer]

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

it was supposed to be self-funding and why "deliberate" what's the conspiracy theory? I'm afraid it's not about rice it's about censored

Usual deflection.

Mr. Wattana says the scheme had strict financial and monetary controls. He also says appropriate actions were taken to deal with operational issues.

PTP now have the chance to prove this in the Supreme Court - simply produce audited accounts, which should be easy if the controls were as strict as he says; and produce the meeting minutes detailing issues, actions, follow ups and resolutions.

We await to see if PTP will do this. Or simply lie, deflect, delay and expect everyone to believe them when they say it's all a misunderstanding and everything was good really.

[LannaGuy]

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

it was supposed to be self-funding and why "deliberate" what's the conspiracy theory? I'm afraid it's not about rice it's about censored

Usual deflection.

Mr. Wattana says the scheme had strict financial and monetary controls. He also says appropriate actions were taken to deal with operational issues.

PTP now have the chance to prove this in the Supreme Court - simply produce audited accounts, which should be easy if the controls were as strict as he says; and produce the meeting minutes detailing issues, actions, follow ups and resolutions.

We await to see if PTP will do this. Or simply lie, deflect, delay and expect everyone to believe them when they say it's all a misunderstanding and everything was good really.

methinks the government are masters at deflection and you just suck it all up.

I cannot imagine anyone really believing this is about rice? now THAT is the greatest deflection since Maradona's 'Hand of God'

[wabothai]

He does not even know when to shut his mouth.

[robblok]

I have checked the budget, and the problem was that even though everone told them they should have included it in the budget they did not., That is negligence. The cost (not 800 billion i divide that by 4 as it stretches out over a few years) is equal to that of the health budget for a year (almost).

In Europe and the USA they do include those things in the countries budget, if they would forget a post equal to the health budget for a year and not include it in the budget you can be sure criminal charges would be pressed as that is gross negligence.

So the problem is not the program, (ok caused huge losses) but not including it in the budget (they had hoped to hide it with the 2 trillion baht loan from China).

A far smarter thing would have been to give small rice farmers a direct subsidy based on how much land they had with a cut-off size so only poor farmers benefited. Now the poorest of the farmers did not even benefit at all.

I have not seen the budget nor am I surprised it was implemented poorly and was a disaster. We don't know all the facts and Wattana presents some important points. Nearly everyone on here buries them without giving them a chance of a defence and that is political not about rice. I have little doubt this is not about rice and the present government will be giving billions away with it's new 'give tax back to the amply rich' scheme, but that's not 'popularist' right?

So even though it cost as much as the health budget for 1 year they did not include it. They did not do it because otherwise they could not implement other policies as the budget would be too much in deficit. So it was deliberate and they were warned. So its negligence too. So no excuses they are guilty.

Billions or 800 billion.. hmmm just a small difference.

it was supposed to be self-funding and why "deliberate" what's the conspiracy theory? I'm afraid it's not about rice it's about censored

The moment it became clear it was not self funding (and that was quite early on) they should have included it int he budget and they did not. The world bank.. IMF and others told them it was not self funding they purposely ignored it. So they could go on with their other populist policies. Had they included it in the budget the deficit would have been so huge they would have had to scrap those or the program. That would have led to angry voters so they did not.

So Yes it was on purpose, this is fraud.. gross negligence and a good thing they are finally trying to get the money back.

[tuanku]

Lets take Wattana's statements as truth and reasonable (just for argument's sake).

In which case, all the people facing charges now should still be facing charges..... for utter incompetence and stupidity.

If incompetence and stupidity were illegal, the people with arrest warrants out in their name would outnumber the people left to mismanage the country!

[jaywalker]

"The rice-pledging scheme was implemented under a strict financial and monetary discipline," Wattana said."

WOW! Even Pinocchio wasn't this bad!

is he now on the road safety committee.

I think he went to work at TAT.