Tough measure introduced in draft charter to prevent abuses of budget allocation in parliament

BANGKOK: The Constitution Drafting Committee has agreed in principle with a new provision in the draft constitution which will subject members of the cabinet, senators or MPs to life ban against contesting elections if they are found to have abused their authority in shifting budgets for their political interests.

CDC spokesman Udom Rath-amarit said today that the new provision was intended to plug a legal loophole in the scrutinizing of budget bill by House or Senate budget scrutiny committees.

He explained that during the scrutinizing period, MPs or senators have the opportunities to shift budgets for projects that suit their interests instead of letting the budgets to be spent in accordance with the original projects in line with national development plan.

He said that the new provision represents a strong medicine to deal with abuses in the shifting of budgets by politicians.

The CDC spokesman said that normally there is a problem regarding the constitutionality of a bill which has passed the approval of the parliament. To tackle this problem, the drive charter will provide a five-day window during which MPs or senators can ask for a final check of the constitutionality of the bill before it is to be submitted to HM the King for endorsement by the prime minister.

Under the draft, senators have the right to demand a censure debate during which the prime minister or any minister will be allowed to make clarifications. The opposition leader will also be entitled to ask for a special parliamentary meeting in case there is a national crisis.

The next prime minister must by someone nominated by a political party before an election and the party must win at least five percent of the seats in the House. The prime minister must also gain the support of more than half of the votes in the House, said Mr Udom.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/tough-measure-introduced-in-draft-charter-to-prevent-abuses-of-budget-allocation-in-parliament

-- Thai PBS 2016-01-16

He said that the new provision represents a strong medicine to deal with abuses in the shifting of budgets by politicians.

Strong medicine is indeed required to understand Thainess.

He said that the new provision represents a strong medicine to deal with abuses in the shifting of budgets by politicians.

Strong medicine is indeed required to understand Thainess.

"Ear medicine" required, perhaps?

I cant find a big enough "yawn" icon, lets face it...none of them give shit about their county only their own pockets as do 90% of all Thais

As explained in the article, there is no basis to include a reference to the cabinet in the constitutional provision. Secondly, politicians are expected to 'deliver' for their constituents. 'Pork barrel' is the essence of any political system. These guys are trying to legislate 'politics' out of 'politics'! By this standard, there would be no reason for a person to seek political office. Any scheme or program can be judged to have a 'personal' political purpose. Herein lies the problem. The judiciary will use such provisions to oust politicians that are not in favor with the power elite or destabilize and existing government. More constitutions, more coups -- an endless cycle. I don't know any political system that has been able to legislate corruption out of politics. That is the basic problem. To rely on such lofty ideals ignores reality.

Edited January 16, 201610 yr by pookiki

"found to have abused their authority in shifting budgets for their political interests."

As an example, PM Prayut establishing a Rubber Board and ordering his ministeries to start buying rubber and rubber products in order to drive up the price for rubber in response to POLITICAL PRESSURE brought by Southern rubber farmers?

No amount of provisions, laws etc wil change anything here unless they're vigorously enforced without fear or favour and that's not likely to happen.

if they are found to have abused their authority in shifting budgets for their political interests.

S I assume shifting them for personal interests is still no issue.

Another exercise in the ' this will look and sound good and the public will think we're actually doing something ' mode but all hot air as the only people who get banned or prosecuted etc are those who have really fallen out of favour and often for reasons which have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

As explained in the article, there is no basis to include a reference to the cabinet in the constitutional provision. Secondly, politicians are expected to 'deliver' for their constituents. 'Pork barrel' is the essence of any political system. These guys are trying to legislate 'politics' out of 'politics'! By this standard, there would be no reason for a person to seek political office. Any scheme or program can be judged to have a 'personal' political purpose. Herein lies the problem. The judiciary will use such provisions to oust politicians that are not in favor with the power elite or destabilize and existing government. More constitutions, more coups -- an endless cycle. I don't know any political system that has been able to legislate corruption out of politics. That is the basic problem. To rely on such lofty ideals ignores reality.

Good analysis. I'm a bit cynical about this. The current government is dominated by non-politicians, who have diagnosed the recurring problem of failed governments in Thailand as due to "those damn politicians". Therefor, the remedies to be enshrined in a supposedly democratic form of government is to gut, strangle, and neuter the politicians.

I am imagining the ultimate goal is to put the politicians in the functional equivalent of a zoo, with a large sign that says, "Don't feed the politicians".

Because of push back, this effort will not be complete in the new Charter. The main measures toward that goal, however, have been outlined through piecemeal announcements by CDC:

1) A vetting process for approval of House candidates that is left to committees yet to be devised. (figuring out the details later after the Charter is approved may be a key feature of this iteration of the Charter)

2) Pre-announcement of PM candidates (an opportunity to mount early challenges)

3) Banning politicians for life across a broad set of transgressions (another opportunity for endless bickering and court challenges)

4) A low threshold for impeachment initiation, encouraging strife and recrimination within the House

5) An entirely appointed Senate of non-politicians, selected from Bangkok-centric interests, rather than broad constituencies (to hell with elected Senators)

6) Possibly still, an oversight/steering body with powers to intervene and override the elected government

7) And of course, failing to adequately define the accountability of the Thai armed forces, nor prohibiting them from engaging in coups

Yet the definition of the government will include the word "Democratic" in it, so all is well.

If the new charter states budgets can only be spent in line with the National Development Plan it also needs to make it clear who sets such a plan, when and how it can be amended.

One can only hope they have enough state of the art microphones in parliament to spread the message...

One can only hope they have enough state of the art microphones in parliament to spread the message...

Surely for them to work they must be inserted thru the back passage so they can really talk crap