Ms Yingluck pleads for review of her civil liability over rice pledging scheme loss

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, jamesbrock said:

 

If a public official having personal assets seized as penalty for losses (spending) in a public scheme had happened before at any time in history, in any country that had ever existed, then I'd agree that the general in more progressive than thought - but as it is—a globally, historically, unprecedented move targeting a member of one political faction—it's a long way off passing the sniff test.

 

The only issue James it that this wasn't a public scheme, in the government's budget, subject to parliamentary scrutiny and audited management accounts. 

It was deliberately kept off budget, away from parliament, with no accounts ever presented. Yingluck appointed herself chair, never bothered actually turning up and chairing meetings, dismissed all warnings whatsoever and flagging of problems whilst repeatedly announcing she was in control, only her, and she made decisions. 

 

Hardly the same as the government subsidies you refer to.

[Baerboxer]

On 9/30/2016 at 9:40 AM, Eric Loh said:

For better or for worse, the scheme brought about changes to the way rice trading was done. In the past it was the rice exporters, traders and mill owners who were in control of the rice trade. This scheme has brought the farmers and government to the forefront. For the first time farmers made a profit selling their rice. It will be hard for farmers to forget this sense of empowerment for a long time. 

 

Nonsense. My family and friends who are farmers always made a profit. They made a bigger profit under the rice scheme even allowing for the increased fertilizer, milling, etc etc costs when eventually paid. 

But no one knows really who profited the most as PTP have never released accounts.

[Baerboxer]

On 9/30/2016 at 10:07 AM, Eric Loh said:

If the appeal goes to the Adminstrative Court, it will be very hard for the judge to craft a decision based on common law legal system without any precedent. There are also no precedents from other countries on this matter. I don't think this civil liability will fly and just a scare tactic by the junta. 

 

Thailand doesn't have a Common Law system.

[Baerboxer]

7 hours ago, Chris Lawrence said:

What may come out of this is Ms T could become Thailand's Aung San Suu Kyi. She is doing what her brother didn't do and still commands a lot of support. The more the General pushes this one the more he may distance himself from a lot of Thai's. His policies  serve the elite of Bangkok, but persecuting Yingluck in this way may make her a martyr or saint?  

 

No one with the slightest ounce of sense would ever compare YS to ASSK. 

 

Mother Theresa, Hilary, or Joan of Arc - or the embodiment of them all 

[jamesbrock]

12 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

The only issue James it that this wasn't a public scheme, in the government's budget, subject to parliamentary scrutiny and audited management accounts. 

It was deliberately kept off budget, away from parliament, with no accounts ever presented. Yingluck appointed herself chair, never bothered actually turning up and chairing meetings, dismissed all warnings whatsoever and flagging of problems whilst repeatedly announcing she was in control, only her, and she made decisions. 

 

Hardly the same as the government subsidies you refer to.

 

Agree to disagree. 

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Nonsense. My family and friends who are farmers always made a profit. They made a bigger profit under the rice scheme even allowing for the increased fertilizer, milling, etc etc costs when eventually paid. 

But no one knows really who profited the most as PTP have never released accounts.

 

Your conclusion is drawn from a rather small sample group and likely words suited to your own agenda. To put it rudely, BS. Try reading more from people who spent time studying the eco system of the rice industry. 

[Eric Loh]

18 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Thailand doesn't have a Common Law system.

 

Even based on civil law which is heavily influenced by common law, hard for judge to decide without any precedents. Likely the appeal will be successful. 

[JAG]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Not only the Shins, I dislike all lying, cheating, corrupt politicians. I certainly don't pretend or be fooled into believing Yingluck was ever allowed to make any decisions of any relevance other than what her brother instructed. 

 

Now, show me where I show contempt for the electorate. 

 

You should try taking off your blinkers - and see the Shins for what they are. Still your assertions regarding the keen intellect and shrewd political ability of Ms. Yingluck demonstrate your analytical ability enough.

 

 

1. You recently referred to the people who have elected successive Shinawatra led administrations as, I believe, "the cheap popular masses". Pretty contemptuous I think.

 

2. As for blinkers, you have an obsessive hatred of the Shinawatras which at times seems to verge on paranoia! Why I don't know, it can't bes simply because they are  lying cheating corrupt politicians as you are so unreservedly supportive of the equally lying, cheating and corrupt bunch who replaced them, without the consent of the electorate - which last point seems to bother you not one jot. But then blinkers mean that you can only look in one narrow field of view - which rather fits the bill with you

 

3. As for analytical ability, well you may of course disagree with any views I may express, but your response, as ever, is so coloured by your obvious obsessive hatred as to preclude any demonstration of analytical ability on your own part.

 

I put forward a suggestion. You may disagree with it, I'm sure many do. Given the response to it others  would seem to think that there may be something in it, or at least a point to consider, even if having done so they dismiss it.  But your response, as ever, is nothing more than a bigoted rant, based on your obsession. As so often you transfer that to the personal plane, rather than argue any points. That's why few take you seriously, and that is why I have replied in much the same way.

Edited October 1, 2016 by JAG

[jayboy]

 
Are infrastructure schemes, NHS, and subsidy schemes usually touted as self financing, kept off budget, devoid of all scrutiny, accounts kept secret and controlled by meetings where the self appointed chair fails to ever turn up to chair the meetings?
 
Do democratically elected politicians normally break parliamentary rules and issue statements that they won't respect court rulings or abide by the law as it stands?
 
This, and other issues do appear to be used to remove the Shin influence on politics and the way they use that influence. But they created all the issues themselves which others can now turn against them.
 
Yinluck, her legal team and PR team have yet to make any comments that could be considered a defense, explanation or mitigation of the actual negligence charges. Just the usual crap about how all unfair, why me, others did/do it, and challenges on the process. Will she ever actually offer an explanation? Course not.

You completely miss the point.If politicians are guilty of corruption they should be investigated and if appropriate punished.The rice price support scheme had very specific objectives to support farmers and was entirely legitimate.We can agree that in practice it was wrongheaded and flawed in implementation.Obviously where corruption is identified it should be punished.

The same could be said of the fantastic incompetence and financial losses in the IT system of the British NHS.I do not believe any sane person is suggesting the hospital administrators concerned should be responsible for the financial losses.

If Yingluck was involved in corruption - and nobody has suggested she was - then she must face the music.Her defence of the policy is a matter in process though you of course have already jumped to conclusions.The whole world knows this is a politically motivated farce so don't embarrass yourself further in attempting to defend the indefensible.








Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Chris Lawrence]

4 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

No one with the slightest ounce of sense would ever compare YS to ASSK. 

 

Mother Theresa, Hilary, or Joan of Arc - or the embodiment of them all 

I just write what I see BB, but it like all of us here we all have one.

[Ace of Pop]

Nort Korea don't miss any points when it comes to stealing from the poor.Shes lucky brat she's in Honest Mistake Land


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[halloween]

14 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

You completely miss the point.If politicians are guilty of corruption they should be investigated and if appropriate punished.The rice price support scheme had very specific objectives to support farmers and was entirely legitimate.We can agree that in practice it was wrongheaded and flawed in implementation.Obviously where corruption is identified it should be punished.

The same could be said of the fantastic incompetence and financial losses in the IT system of the British NHS.I do not believe any sane person is suggesting the hospital administrators concerned should be responsible for the financial losses.

If Yingluck was involved in corruption - and nobody has suggested she was - then she must face the music.Her defence of the policy is a matter in process though you of course have already jumped to conclusions.The whole world knows this is a politically motivated farce so don't embarrass yourself further in attempting to defend the indefensible.








Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

If a policy has very specific objectives, has been tried before and miserably failed to achieve those objectives with accusations of massive corruption, and is then re-instated without change to improve its performance or legislation to prevent rent and other price rises which substantially reduce its aims, how does it become " entirely legitimate"?

If the policy is allowed to continue despite further proof it fails in its stated aim, despite huge and mounting losses kept secret from the public and parliament, and with an ever-increasing stockpile costing more in storage than its re-sale value, how does it remain " entirely legitimate"?

When government ministers are exposed as using the policy as a vehicle for corruption, and crony firms are given secret deals allowing them huge profits at the expense of the nation, are we still calling it " entirely legitimate"?

[SaintLouisBlues]

7 minutes ago, halloween said:

If a policy has very specific objectives, has been tried before and miserably failed to achieve those objectives with accusations of massive corruption, and is then re-instated without change to improve its performance or legislation to prevent rent and other price rises which substantially reduce its aims, how does it become " entirely legitimate"?

If the policy is allowed to continue despite further proof it fails in its stated aim, despite huge and mounting losses kept secret from the public and parliament, and with an ever-increasing stockpile costing more in storage than its re-sale value, how does it remain " entirely legitimate"?

When government ministers are exposed as using the policy as a vehicle for corruption, and crony firms are given secret deals allowing them huge profits at the expense of the nation, are we still calling it " entirely legitimate"?

You've heard of Quantum Physics? This is Quantum Politics

[halloween]

Just now, SaintLouisBlues said:

You've heard of Quantum Physics? This is Quantum Politics

Do you have any idea what the "quantum" in quantum physics means? Defined packages.

 

What are you talking about?

[SaintLouisBlues]

Just now, halloween said:

What are you talking about?

I'm merely humoring you until the medication kicks in

[halloween]

1 minute ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

I'm merely humoring you until the medication kicks in

I hope for your sake that is soon so you stop posting rubbish.

[jayboy]

If a policy has very specific objectives, has been tried before and miserably failed to achieve those objectives with accusations of massive corruption, and is then re-instated without change to improve its performance or legislation to prevent rent and other price rises which substantially reduce its aims, how does it become " entirely legitimate"?
If the policy is allowed to continue despite further proof it fails in its stated aim, despite huge and mounting losses kept secret from the public and parliament, and with an ever-increasing stockpile costing more in storage than its re-sale value, how does it remain " entirely legitimate"?
When government ministers are exposed as using the policy as a vehicle for corruption, and crony firms are given secret deals allowing them huge profits at the expense of the nation, are we still calling it " entirely legitimate"?

Evidence please for the hysterical and unproven claims in your last paragraph.In any event you have muddled up process and objective.I'm sure there was corruption at the trading level but this is a long long way from demonstrating that the PM was "in on it".

Furthermore I have already agreed that corruption needs to be punished wherever it is found - and that includes the shenanigans in the Junta's circles.

Over and above this you fail to address the main concern which is holding politicians personally responsible for the financial implications of their policies.Is the Junta to be held financially responsible for the damage done to the country since he seized power?

[halloween]

20 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

 

Evidence please for the hysterical and unproven claims in your last paragraph.In any event you have muddled up process and objective.I'm sure there was corruption at the trading level but this is a long long way from demonstrating that the PM was "in on it".

Furthermore I have already agreed that corruption needs to be punished wherever it is found - and that includes the shenanigans in the Junta's circles.

Over and above this you fail to address the main concern which is holding politicians personally responsible for the financial implications of their policies.Is the Junta to be held financially responsible for the damage done to the country since he seized power?

Happy to oblige.

 

" The Public Warehouse Organisation (PWO) announced yesterday that it had decided to sell 300,000 tonnes of rice to Indonesia. But only two traders had an opportunity to join in the bidding, which was done secretly. They were Siam Indica, which won the bid ......"

http://www.thairiceexporters.or.th/Int news/News_2011/int_news_151211-1.html

" The company monopolised the government's rice stockpile from 2003 to 2005, distributing rice to traders through a variety of methods including bidding, ex-warehouse sales and the secret release of stockpiles to specific exporters.

Political backing allowed President Agri Trading to grow rapidly during the time that Thaksin Shinawatra was prime minister. Apichart, a former executive of President Agri and the real top manager of both President Agri Trading and Siam Indiga, has close relations with Thaksin.

Under commerce minister Wattana Muangsook in 2004, the company won the biggest lot in the rice-stockpile auction, 1.7 million tonnes. Its total winning bids with the Commerce Ministry that year amounted to 2.3 million tonnes. "

 

" On January 12, 2010, the company filed for bankruptcy, as it owed a combined debt of Bt12 billion to nine commercial banks, both Thai and foreign, including Bangkok Bank, Krung Thai Bank, and TMB Bank.
President Agri was also sued by the Public Warehouse Organisation for Bt6 billion in compensation for defaulting on bidding orders in past years. "

" After President Agri Trading ran into trouble, Siam Indiga, which had close ties to the bankrupt firm's principals, was set up and has participated in many of the ministry's rice auctions. "

 

" Siam Indiga also won part of the government stockpile under the silent-releasing method with total volume of 300,000 tonnes. The rice was set for export under a government-to-government deal to Indonesia only. The bid was Bt11-12 per kilogram compared with the government cost of Bt21-Bt23 per kilo while the market price was Bt15. With this lot alone, the government lost Bt3.3 billion. However, Siam Indiga enjoyed a profit of Bt900 million. "

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/business/Former-head-of-troubled-Agri-Trading-stands-to-gai-30192330.html

 

Which part of that lot is "entirely legitimate"? Which part of this ongoing scam should Yingluk have been aware of as chair of the Rice Policy Committeee?

[jayboy]

Halloween, You don't provide any evidence at all of Yingluck's complicity.Is it really too difficult a concept for you to grasp that while the scheme may have been flawed in many respects, the original objective was to improve the lot of rice farmers? Since you seem to be confused let me remind you again that this redistributive element was the entirely legitimate objective.

You do not advance your case by identifying corruption or maladministration in the scheme - not least because I have repeatedly agreed with you.My point was that subsidies of this kind are not uncommon (Japan,US etc) and it is absurd to suggest that politicians should be held personally financially responsible when they fail.If corruption can be attributed to the politicians involved, that is a different matter.

Still this one will run and run - and for the fanatical Thaksin haters no doubt provides a pleasant diversion from the daily corruption horror stories emerging from the Junta.

[Ace of Pop]

A generalization admittedly ,but fact amongst my Circle of Ferangs.Those with Issan/Bar Girl companions are Pro Thaksins Sister ,Those without are Happy the Clans been caught out .


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[jayboy]

18 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

A generalization admittedly ,but fact amongst my Circle of Ferangs.Those with Issan/Bar Girl companions are Pro Thaksins Sister ,Those without are Happy the Clans been caught out .


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

I used to think that without reservation and it's true that the Shins have an emotional lock on many in the North and North East - but that applies surprisingly across class divisions not just those at the bottom of the pile - the group from which most bar girls come.

 

My days of chatting to bar girls are sadly long past but I'm guessing that what you suggest holds true.

 

However - and this is the point of my post - there is a curious phenomenon I've noticed in the last couple of years, namely the more sophisticated type of girl formerly in the "business" (one never inquires too deeply) and often married to a middle class foreigner tends to be a fervent royalist supporter of the yellow connection/PAD etc.I suppose this is part of rising socially.

 

There are few more adaptable creatures than a low born pretty girl with charm on the way to the top.Often the hapless farang who "finds" her is discarded for a better model.Such a girl can often transcend the class system in a way that a male rarely can.

 

 

[Ace of Pop]

Seems our observations are much the same. Im not much of a follower of Thai daily life, exception being when a Ferang bursts into a tirade about Junta when im enjoying my Sunday Beer with Ferangs!!.... Again when tracing his track record here, up pops a N.East or Bar Girl connection. Either that, or he is some Lefty Teacher/Union Man type from Europe. Cant say much cause most of us were Lefty when Students weren't we.

[halloween]

21 hours ago, jayboy said:

Halloween, You don't provide any evidence at all of Yingluck's complicity.Is it really too difficult a concept for you to grasp that while the scheme may have been flawed in many respects, the original objective was to improve the lot of rice farmers? Since you seem to be confused let me remind you again that this redistributive element was the entirely legitimate objective.

You do not advance your case by identifying corruption or maladministration in the scheme - not least because I have repeatedly agreed with you.My point was that subsidies of this kind are not uncommon (Japan,US etc) and it is absurd to suggest that politicians should be held personally financially responsible when they fail.If corruption can be attributed to the politicians involved, that is a different matter.

Still this one will run and run - and for the fanatical Thaksin haters no doubt provides a pleasant diversion from the daily corruption horror stories emerging from the Junta.

And you do not advance your argument by posting rather than replying, hoping to avoid contradiction. Subsidies of this kind are common? Off budget, hugely expensive and without parliamentary oversight or reporting? Where and when?

While I can't prove she was complicit, there is no doubt there was a huge amount of corruption, but you claim as PM and chair of the rice Policy committee she has no responsibility? Why not, where should the buck stop, nowhere?

Her brother self-reported a huge increase in wealth while he was the de facto PM giving orders to his "clone" - but the clone is perfectly innocent? Well there a lot of corruption enquiries still to report.

[jayboy]

14 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

Seems our observations are much the same. Im not much of a follower of Thai daily life, exception being when a Ferang bursts into a tirade about Junta when im enjoying my Sunday Beer with Ferangs!!.... Again when tracing his track record here, up pops a N.East or Bar Girl connection. Either that, or he is some Lefty Teacher/Union Man type from Europe. Cant say much cause most of us were Lefty when Students weren't we.

 

I think you will find the concern among expatriates about the current deplorable government extends far beyond those who are connected in some way to the N.E.It is primarily a matter of class and education.Foreigners with limited education and of broadly proletarian origin tend to be quite happy with the status quo.But as I suspect in your case they don't really understand what's going on and have neither the will and/or capacity to research it.

[MZurf]

Seems our observations are much the same. Im not much of a follower of Thai daily life, exception being when a Ferang bursts into a tirade about Junta when im enjoying my Sunday Beer with Ferangs!!.... Again when tracing his track record here, up pops a N.East or Bar Girl connection. Either that, or he is some Lefty Teacher/Union Man type from Europe. Cant say much cause most of us were Lefty when Students weren't we.

So people who oppose military rule are "lefties"???
Wow! What an astonishingly simplistic world view. Sounds like you're quite young (to put it kindly).
Tell me; would you call The Economist a "lefty" publication?

[jayboy]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

And you do not advance your argument by posting rather than replying, hoping to avoid contradiction. Subsidies of this kind are common? Off budget, hugely expensive and without parliamentary oversight or reporting? Where and when?

While I can't prove she was complicit, there is no doubt there was a huge amount of corruption, but you claim as PM and chair of the rice Policy committee she has no responsibility? Why not, where should the buck stop, nowhere?

Her brother self-reported a huge increase in wealth while he was the de facto PM giving orders to his "clone" - but the clone is perfectly innocent? Well there a lot of corruption enquiries still to report.

 

Your post is all over the place.

 

1.Yes, subsidies of this kind are common - corn and soya bean farmers in the US, rice farmers in Japan etc.In the US subsidies are at least $ 20 billion p.a.

 

2.You have no proof whatsoever Yingluck is complicit in corruption.In fact you have been lying despite your back pedaling now.

 

3.Corruption should be punished wherever it's found (though you of course remain completely silent about the pervasive corruption now taking place).If Yingluck is fairly determined to have been insufficiently attentive to the administration of the scheme, she would need to be publicly rebuked and Thai voters would draw their own conclusions.However in the politically motivated witch hunt now under way, most reasonable people would doubt whether a fair decision could be made in the current climate.

 

4.Your comment on her brother's increase in wealth is not only dishonest, but also inaccurate.His wealth certainly increased greatly as did that of everybody else invested in international equity markets during that time.

[Ace of Pop]

So people who oppose military rule are "lefties"???
Wow! What an astonishingly simplistic world view. Sounds like you're quite young (to put it kindly).
Tell me; would you call The Economist a "lefty" publication?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[MZurf]

38 minutes ago, Ace of Pop said:

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Maybe you can spell out what you mean because that didn't make any sense. And maybe answer my question as well?

[Ace of Pop]

No there is no point you are fixed to your ideasi


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[halloween]

6 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

Your post is all over the place.

 

1.Yes, subsidies of this kind are common - corn and soya bean farmers in the US, rice farmers in Japan etc.In the US subsidies are at least $ 20 billion p.a.

 

2.You have no proof whatsoever Yingluck is complicit in corruption.In fact you have been lying despite your back pedaling now.

 

3.Corruption should be punished wherever it's found (though you of course remain completely silent about the pervasive corruption now taking place).If Yingluck is fairly determined to have been insufficiently attentive to the administration of the scheme, she would need to be publicly rebuked and Thai voters would draw their own conclusions.However in the politically motivated witch hunt now under way, most reasonable people would doubt whether a fair decision could be made in the current climate.

 

4.Your comment on her brother's increase in wealth is not only dishonest, but also inaccurate.His wealth certainly increased greatly as did that of everybody else invested in international equity markets during that time.

Give me an example of a subsidy that meets the criteria I gave - Off budget, hugely expensive and without parliamentary oversight or reporting?

" The wealth of the Shinawatra family increased 4.25 times between 2011 and 2014, outstripping the growth of the top 10." https://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/tag/forbes/

Lets have a few others doing that well.