Yingluck and Boonsong are liable for 300 billion baht in loss from rice scheme

[webfact]

Yingluck and Boonsong are liable for 300 billion baht in loss from rice scheme

BANGKOK: -- The government may sue former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom and associates demanding over 300 billion baht in compensation for the hefty losses from her government’s rice pledging scheme.

Prime Minister’s Office Minister Panadda Diskul said Monday that he had already received the latest report of the losses from the controversial rice scheme from Mr Chirachai Moonthongroi, deputy permanent secretary for PM’s Office and head of the fact-finding committee to determine the civil liability from the rice scheme.

As far as Ms Yingluck was concerned, M.L. Panadda said the former prime minister’s share of liability for the loss in the rice scheme was estimated at 286,639 million baht whereas Mr Boonsong’s share for the loss was estimated at 18,743 million baht.

The Yingluck government bought altogether 13.53 million tonnes of rice from farmers under the rice pledging scheme but managed to export only about one million tonnes, leaving behind the rest rotting in warehouses across the country, said the PM’s Office minister.

He insisted that all the officials who had been investigating the loss from the rice scheme were not biased against the former prime minister and her associates and did their job in a straightforward manner. He said he would report the findings to the Rice Policy Committee on Wednesday.

Asked whether the 300 billion baht estimated loss would be rechecked and reassessed, Panadda said that the figures had been perused carefully. He added that the case should serve a valuable lesson for bureaucrats to perform their duties honestly.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/yingluck-boonsong-liable-300-billion-baht-loss-rice-scheme/

-- ThaiPBS 2016-08-02

[BSJ]

Crikey!   She will have to make a trip to Paris to retrieve some of those suitcases she took over there jammed full of 1000 baht notes! 

[MaxLee]

When will she pay???

[monty1412]

'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land.......secondly there is a equal  argument from this that if officials are personally liable for schemes they introduce that incur a loss for the state would they also on the reverse score be entitled to some reward should an introduced  scheme deliver fiscal rewards.... either way its a slippery slope that one enters into with this....... having said that however  the case in question i.e Rice Pledging Scheme is of a particular odorous nature .

[robblok]

34 minutes ago, monty1412 said:

'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land.......secondly there is a equal  argument from this that if officials are personally liable for schemes they introduce that incur a loss for the state would they also on the reverse score be entitled to some reward should an introduced  scheme deliver fiscal rewards.... either way its a slippery slope that one enters into with this....... having said that however  the case in question i.e Rice Pledging Scheme is of a particular odorous nature .

Good call normally id agree, but in case of the rice program (and other obvious corrupt cases) i dont. YL was warned by the world bank and several other organisations that this would not work. The democrats showed rotten rice (and were threatened with jail kinda like the junta does now and no protest then from the PTP supporters). YL did not chair any the meetings.. the losses were denied and never taken up in the national budget. It was a program that still left farmers with unpaid rice bills because no good finance was set up. The government bank now lost loads of money and is in bad way. So all in all this was a special case. It was nothing more than a vote buying scheme to get in power and abuse that power to get even more wealthy and get big brother back.

I doubt the money will ever be paid (also doubt they can pay 300 billion) a smaller but still big claim should have been made.

For the guy who said something about the fake bomb detectors.... i feel they should claim back money from all corruption cases this way it gets less profitable to be corrupt. 

[Eric Loh]

The figure may subject to change when Pannadda factored in the revenue gains from VAT, stamp duties and taxes that resulted from farmers and related companies benefiting from the scheme. Let say it is still a moving figure.

[MaxLee]

Smokescreen, nothing's gonna happen. 

[trainman34014]

In Thailand it's always 'May' do something instead of actually JUST DOING IT !

[SOTIRIOS]

...from 600 B .... to 300 B now.....???

....and 'may sue'....???

...that is insane.....

...otherwise it would have all been for naught....

...as in 'a charade'......

...wow....

[baboon]

1 hour ago, monty1412 said:

'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land.......secondly there is a equal  argument from this that if officials are personally liable for schemes they introduce that incur a loss for the state would they also on the reverse score be entitled to some reward should an introduced  scheme deliver fiscal rewards.... either way its a slippery slope that one enters into with this....... having said that however  the case in question i.e Rice Pledging Scheme is of a particular odorous nature .

"'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land...."

Should that occur, the people can always look to their heroic military to ever so reluctantly step in and manage the situation. Being held to account is not a major worry of theirs...

Edited August 2, 2016 by baboon

[MZurf]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Good call normally id agree, but in case of the rice program (and other obvious corrupt cases) i dont. YL was warned by the world bank and several other organisations that this would not work. The democrats showed rotten rice (and were threatened with jail kinda like the junta does now and no protest then from the PTP supporters). YL did not chair any the meetings.. the losses were denied and never taken up in the national budget. It was a program that still left farmers with unpaid rice bills because no good finance was set up. The government bank now lost loads of money and is in bad way. So all in all this was a special case. It was nothing more than a vote buying scheme to get in power and abuse that power to get even more wealthy and get big brother back.

I doubt the money will ever be paid (also doubt they can pay 300 billion) a smaller but still big claim should have been made.

For the guy who said something about the fake bomb detectors.... i feel they should claim back money from all corruption cases this way it gets less profitable to be corrupt. 

" YL was warned by the world bank and several other organisations that this would not work."

The fact that the World Bank and other organizations said that this would not work is no ground for making YL fiscally responsible.

"It was nothing more than a vote buying scheme...."

Common the world over, even in thoroughly democratic countries. I'm not saying that this was a well thought out scheme - it wasn't. It was a vote buying scheme of epic proportions, but when you start charging politicians for this then (as has been pointed out before) you're on a slippery slope. Where, e.g., do you draw the line? Losses of 1 billion Bath, 10 billion, 100 billion? The sum which they want YL to pay changes constantly (they started with 600+ billion and are now down to 286 billion) so how can they even charge her if they don't yet know how much they will claim her for?

 

"...to get in power and abuse that power to get even more wealthy and get big brother back."

Who got more wealthy, YL? Has she been convicted of corruption?

[Alive]

Just shows how this regime and their cronies are all out for Yingluck and her family. This isn't about the rice program it's just a way to get them. They went after them before for other things. Too bad the regime and its cronies are hypocrites. If they went after all the abusive elite in Thailand, the people might support them but too many members of the regime are a part of that group. This makes me think to the past when the regime first took over and there was rampant cronyism and nepotism in their process of filling positions. Nothing was done to those abusers. Nothing. They stole opportunity from other Thais by using their positions and connections.

[williamgeorgeallen]

36 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

What will Prayut do with the submarines he will approve and which will be useless?

After paying for them, can he have them for himself or will they stay government property?

they will turn out too expensive to maintain and operate. will end up left rusting like the rice left rotting in the warehouses. have to wonder where the money comes from for all these crazy purchases.

[robblok]

14 minutes ago, MZurf said:

" YL was warned by the world bank and several other organisations that this would not work."

The fact that the World Bank and other organizations said that this would not work is no ground for making YL fiscally responsible.

"It was nothing more than a vote buying scheme...."

Common the world over, even in thoroughly democratic countries. I'm not saying that this was a well thought out scheme - it wasn't. It was a vote buying scheme of epic proportions, but when you start charging politicians for this then (as has been pointed out before) you're on a slippery slope. Where, e.g., do you draw the line? Losses of 1 billion Bath, 10 billion, 100 billion? The sum which they want YL to pay changes constantly (they started with 600+ billion and are now down to 286 billion) so how can they even charge her if they don't yet know how much they will claim her for?

 

"...to get in power and abuse that power to get even more wealthy and get big brother back."

Who got more wealthy, YL? Has she been convicted of corruption?

Not yet not yet but they are busy with it. Anyway I do agree that its a slippery slope. But letting government officials get away with everything is not good either. The fact that she was warned by many international organisations and local ones. Plus that they threatened everyone that came out with figures of loss shows that they knew about losses but did not put it in the budget or be open about it. That just makes it criminal and I understand that they want to claim damages. I don't think they can ever get the money back that was lost. I think the claim is too high to ever be expected to be paid. 

 

And in most democratic countries vote buying schemes are done on the books.. not off books without oversight. (that is what makes it so wrong)

[Krataiboy]

Just part of the elite's strategy to ensure Thaksin does not make a comeback, particularly since he has a very close friend in the highest of places.

[The Old Bull]

The Thai bhatt is still doing good against other currencies, why?

[snowgard]

This case stink so much!!!!

1. How long Yinluck was prime minister? 2.5 or 3 years?

2. How can rice rotten so fast in in a warehouse in this time???

3. Where the money gone?

No one proof it und want catch the real black sheeps.

[mesterm]

Guess they didn't like her latest music video.

[Eric Loh]

13 minutes ago, snowgard said:

This case stink so much!!!!

1. How long Yinluck was prime minister? 2.5 or 3 years?

2. How can rice rotten so fast in in a warehouse in this time???

3. Where the money gone?

No one proof it und want catch the real black sheeps.

 

Both trials are still on-going. The junta is moving at a speed of light ahead of the trial verdict to nail their opponents. All part of the rid Thaksin regime plan right from the beginning with Suthep. By the way, the investigators of the rice scheme have been given immunty from future lawsuits by the junta.

 

[ScotBkk]

2 hours ago, MaxLee said:

Smokescreen, nothing's gonna happen. 

A lot of money for rice !!

Personally, I prefer French fries !!

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Alive said:

Just shows how this regime and their cronies are all out for Yingluck and her family. This isn't about the rice program it's just a way to get them. They went after them before for other things. Too bad the regime and its cronies are hypocrites. If they went after all the abusive elite in Thailand, the people might support them but too many members of the regime are a part of that group. This makes me think to the past when the regime first took over and there was rampant cronyism and nepotism in their process of filling positions. Nothing was done to those abusers. Nothing. They stole opportunity from other Thais by using their positions and connections.

You could say exactly the same about most of the governments over the last 20 or 30 years but it still wouldn't make it right for any of them.

Thinking about nepotism, why would anybody put a person with zero political experience into the position of PM? The same applies when any member of a political family does the same thing such as making your brother in law the PM also, though to be fair, he was a politician when he was selected from the family short list.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, snowgard said:

This case stink so much!!!!

1. How long Yinluck was prime minister? 2.5 or 3 years?

2. How can rice rotten so fast in in a warehouse in this time???

3. Where the money gone?

No one proof it und want catch the real black sheeps.

If you want the answers to your questions do a Google search first.

However

1.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_Thailand

2.   How many warehouses met these standards?   https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-precautions-to-be-taken-while-storing-Paddy

3.   Nobody really knows but many people make guesses that perhaps are not far from the truth.

4.   Proof is what is in the court in the last few weeks.

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, monty1412 said:

'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land.......secondly there is a equal  argument from this that if officials are personally liable for schemes they introduce that incur a loss for the state would they also on the reverse score be entitled to some reward should an introduced  scheme deliver fiscal rewards.... either way its a slippery slope that one enters into with this....... having said that however  the case in question i.e Rice Pledging Scheme is of a particular odorous nature .

"Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land....... "

It might also make a lot of politicians and their hangers on realize that should work with sincerity, honesty and ethics... and it might make many of the scaly folks we currently call politicians think twice about their actions to just rape the country and it might also encourage the 'good guys' (who do exist) to get more involved.

Reward politicians for good projects....  people / employees / officers getting a reward for just doing their job from the public purse, and open another door for massive corruption. No comment needed.  

 

 

Edited August 2, 2016 by scorecard

[than]

1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

 

that's what elections are for - removing politicians 

 

But when these politicians paid voter for stay power.....  

[elgordo38]

4 hours ago, monty1412 said:

'be careful what you wish for" comes to mind here. Making elected officials personally fiscally accountable for decisions  they make in office might sound like a good idea  but implementation of it  would lead to governments / officials making no decisions whatsover and essentially a governmental dystrophy would extend over the land.......secondly there is a equal  argument from this that if officials are personally liable for schemes they introduce that incur a loss for the state would they also on the reverse score be entitled to some reward should an introduced  scheme deliver fiscal rewards.... either way its a slippery slope that one enters into with this....... having said that however  the case in question i.e Rice Pledging Scheme is of a particular odorous nature .

Yes the outcome of this could have a big impact on getting prime candidates to run in the next election. This could be a double edge sword. 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, MZurf said:

" YL was warned by the world bank and several other organisations that this would not work."

The fact that the World Bank and other organizations said that this would not work is no ground for making YL fiscally responsible.

"It was nothing more than a vote buying scheme...."

Common the world over, even in thoroughly democratic countries. I'm not saying that this was a well thought out scheme - it wasn't. It was a vote buying scheme of epic proportions, but when you start charging politicians for this then (as has been pointed out before) you're on a slippery slope. Where, e.g., do you draw the line? Losses of 1 billion Bath, 10 billion, 100 billion? The sum which they want YL to pay changes constantly (they started with 600+ billion and are now down to 286 billion) so how can they even charge her if they don't yet know how much they will claim her for?

 

"...to get in power and abuse that power to get even more wealthy and get big brother back."

Who got more wealthy, YL? Has she been convicted of corruption?

Well her big brother, you know the one, did proudly boast to Forbes Magazine that the Shin family staggering wealth grew by some 450% during the years of the PTP regime. So I guess that family for one got more wealthy. Didn't say how they split it between family members but would be surprised if he didn't give his adoring little sister something.

Doesn't seem to have commented about their fortune increases under the current government.

No, Yingluck hasn't been convicted of corruption. Her brother, sisters, niece and various assorted relatives and in-laws have, but not sweet innocent Yingluck. So far. She did have a lucky escape when good old Tarit invented his own definition of perjury, but hey ho, she's still young.

[Songlaw]

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

 

Both trials are still on-going. The junta is moving at a speed of light ahead of the trial verdict to nail their opponents. All part of the rid Thaksin regime plan right from the beginning with Suthep. By the way, the investigators of the rice scheme have been given immunty from future lawsuits by the junta.

 

Ah, essentially, 'blanket immunity.' The weapon of choice for any government, but especially a military 'government.' Can't put the two (military + government) together in the same phrase without knowingly forming an oxymoronic statement. Blanket immunity always fosters an 'ethical' environment, eh?

[monty1412]

3 hours ago, The Old Bull said:

The Thai bhatt is still doing good against other currencies, why?

One thing about  currency values Old Bull... no matter how bad your doing there are alwys  those that are doing worse.. Thai Baht  is relatively stable as their is such chaos elsewhere with major currencies and no one in international monetary circles gives a fig about the Thai Baht ........its " doing good" beaches other currencies  are " doing bad"...

 

[LannaGuy]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

No that is not what elections are for elections are for to check who the people want to rule the country. Not for punishing misdeeds of a government otherwise a popular government would be able to kill people and get voted in again. The law applies to governments too. 

Doing things offbook and not putting them in the budget.. is not legal. There was no oversight because it was offbook so normal control mechanisms were not there. There are rules governments play by.

I am not surprised by this attitude because its the PTP attitude we got voted in so laws dont apply to us we can do what we want. Guess what.. they cant.

Wow elections are not for voting out politicians you don't agree with???  thats a first even for you!  you show your continued ignorance  "off book"  LOL

[metisdead]

Off topic troll posts have been removed.