Crackdown on illegal waterway structures ‘too harsh, conflicts with Thai way of life’

[webfact]

Crackdown on illegal waterway structures ‘too harsh, conflicts with Thai way of life’
By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM
THE NATION

 

File Photo

 

BANGKOK: -- A MARINE Department crackdown on illegal structures built over waterways across the country is too harsh and conflicts with the traditional Thai way of life, according to a leading figure in the fisheries business and an academic.

 

The department announced recently that all structures deemed illegal would be dismantled and removed, unless the owners obtain retrospective permission by June 22.

 

The move follows the passing of the latest edition of the Navigation in Thai Waters Act, which includes provision of jail terms of up to three years for offenders.

 

In cases where permission is granted, owners will have to pay fines at rates of between Bt1,000 and Bt20,000 per square metre. They will also have to pay annual rent based on the area covered.

 

If permission is refused, the |owners will be fined and ordered to demolish their structure. If they fail to comply with this, the Marine Department will remove the structure at the owner’s expense.

 

Thai Fisheries Association chairman Mongkol Sukchareonkana said such “fierce” law enforcement would have a great impact on the people across the country and harm the fisheries business. 

 

He said Thai culture and way of life have a strong bond with water, with many traditional houses and businesses built over the waterways.

 

“All kind of structures over the water will be considered illegal in the eyes of the Marine Department, such as the traditional houses built over the water, piers, fish cages, fishing equipment, or waterside walkways. Many of these structures are built over public land, so the owners cannot ask for permission from the Marine Department and will be forced to dismantle them,” Mongkol said.

 

“The impact will be so great that, at a minimum, the damage to the economy and people’s way of life will be over Bt10 billion in each province.”

 

He said that in Samut Songkram alone, thousands of houses in more than 200 canals would be deemed illegal. This includes the Amphawa Floating Market, which under this law will have to be removed too.

 

He stressed that enforcement of the law in this issue was too harsh and did not consider the way of life and culture of Thai people. He urged the department to reconsider how the law is enforced and extend the timeframe to one year.

 

“I agree that construction over the waterways must be regulated, but the law should not apply |retrospectively. 

 

The Marine Department should strictly enforce the law to prevent current encroachment on waterways,” he said.

 

Marine Department director-general Sorasak Saensombat said the legislation had been in effect for a long time, but currently the government had a policy to strictly enforce the measure.

 

Sorasak said that if the department found violations of the act, courts could order the owners to pay retrospective fines covering six years from when the crime was discovered. 

 

A jail term of up to three years had been included in the new version of the law. However, Sorasak stressed that the department would not |prosecute all those in violation of |the Navigation in Thai Waters Act, as there were not enough officers to enforce it. 

 

It would focus on structures that have a great impact on navigation and people’s movement.

 

“We have to consider the public benefit first and everyone has to comply with the law. 

 

If people suffer difficulties from enforcement of this law, there are related agencies that ready to assist them. There are many solutions to the problems from implementation of this law,” he said.

 

Chulalongkorn University Urban and Regional Planning Department lecturer Nattapong Punnoi said that while he agreed that management of waterfront areas and structures over waterways was important, implementation of the policy should not be the same across the country.

 

“The restriction of structures over waterways is necessary in an urban area such as Bangkok, so as to improve the environment and prevent floods. But in rural areas, where people still have a strong bond with the river, they should be allowed to keep their traditional way of life on the water,” Nattapong said. He said the government should have a plan to assist people who have to move away from their homes on the water and provide them with proper housing. 

 

He also cautioned that it would be unacceptable if the government used the reclaimed areas on the water to build new structures that do not fit with good urban planning, such as roads or promenades.

 

Sorasak said that all structures over waterways including the Chao Phraya Riverside promenade would have to ask the department for |permission first, as official agencies also have to comply with this law.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30315198

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-05-15

[canuckamuck]

These are peoples homes, you have to give them a reasonable time frame the relocate.  Oh, but that would require a plan.

I expect this is like so many other extreme directives recently. There will be a social media backlash, and then someone will suggest a study or something and then there will be a watered down version of the law which will never be enforced.

[anon4637435435]

Its time to develop and evolve? No way! I dont believe it. Cleaning up for the good of others not just a greedy lazy few that live for free. Perhaps, the more foceful effort is desired. If they were given longer to relocate, etc they would just take a nap. Im all for it.

[scotchonrocks]

The fault is not of the people who have just followed the culture and the Thai way of not confronting issues and letting things ride which has seen these kinds of ramshackle developments proliferate.  To suddenly make a switch will cause chaos and not allow the residents to adapt. It's typical of heartless/brain dead authorities to not thinking through the consequence and carefully planning a better way forward. What about transitional housing arrangements for residents progressed on a region by region basis over a period of years and a moratorium on new constructions of this kind? This would see changes made while upgrading the life of the residents. It's called progress and development. They need to use their grey matter to think this out properly instead of all these rash reactionary laws without thought.

Edited May 15, 2017 by scotchonrocks

[PremiumLane]

14 minutes ago, bsdthai said:

Its time to develop and evolve? No way! I dont believe it. Cleaning up for the good of others not just a greedy lazy few that live for free. Perhaps, the more foceful effort is desired. If they were given longer to relocate, etc they would just take a nap. Im all for it.

different tune if they decided your house or condo needed to be demolished for the good of others - can we call you greedy and lazy then?

[canopy]

Where does the waste water go in houses like these?

 

[dcnx]

11 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

different tune if they decided your house or condo needed to be demolished for the good of others - can we call you greedy and lazy then?

Most are squatters. While I don't care if they go or stay, if they had a land title that changes everything. But I don't think many of them will be able to produce a chanote.

 

Question is, where do they go once they are chased out? 

[Classic Ray]

I'm not sure we can expect any kind of democratic planning whilst a military junta is ruling the country. They only understand their way of enforcement, and consideration of the good of the whole population is low on their agenda.

[Cadbury]

38 minutes ago, canopy said:

Where does the waste water go in houses like these?

 

If the photo is anything to go by then I'm guessing the waste water and solids goes in the same place as all the other garbage generated in these hovels. These waterways must be alive with blind trout.

[quadperfect]

It needs to be done.its going to hurt a lot of people. But these places are mostly slums.

And sewers.

If the junts dont do it no one will.

It will be good for thailand,cause right now i think the entire island of phuket smells like a toilet and rotten trash and its comming from places just like this in the picture.

[anon4637435435]

1 hour ago, PremiumLane said:

different tune if they decided your house or condo needed to be demolished for the good of others - can we call you greedy and lazy then?

Actually, i purchased illegally changed document land and am currently having a similar situation but in my case im building my own house and its neighbours jealousy and racism that instigated proceedings to kick us out. It maywell happen to my family depending on what the mayor decides to do. He sold it to me...

It is what it is. People can readjust. Change isnt a bad thing. Makes life interesting. 

[Prbkk]

Of course they must go. Everyone knows that illegal encroachment and occupation of public, waterfront land is a hiso preserve. These pesky poor people must get the boot, at once.

[klauskunkel]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

A MARINE Department crackdown on illegal structures built over waterways across the country is too harsh and conflicts with the traditional Thai way of life

Nothing to worry about, crackdowns are also part of traditional Thai way of life... and don't mean a thing

[robblok]

I can understand if they enforce this in important drainage canals that are vital for draining. Then I have absolutely no problems with people being evicted from illigal structures. But for other reasons there should be some flexibility though if they cause trouble to others with blocking it all (river full of fish traps ect) then do something about it. 

[YetAnother]

'thai way of life' ?  then why have laws ? with this attitude, 3rd world forever

[manarak]

1 hour ago, YetAnother said:

'thai way of life' ?  then why have laws ? with this attitude, 3rd world forever

Thai way is often better than what is done in Western Europe for example, where soon you will need a permit for farting.

[TKDfella]

1 hour ago, klauskunkel said:

Nothing to worry about, crackdowns are also part of traditional Thai way of life... and don't mean a thing

Yep! In soi close to where I lived 'squatters' moved in on waste land and began to collect refuse in the search for plastic items etc. Situated by a local 'stream' pollution of the water soon took place. After one year, the ramshackle homesteads spread along the bank where the people began growing 'something' behind bamboo fencing. The authority then put up notice that they must vacate within 30 days...that was 5 years ago and the people are still there.

[fforest1]

1 hour ago, YetAnother said:

'thai way of life' ?  then why have laws ? with this attitude, 3rd world forever

If Thailand was a 1st world Singapore or Tokyo or London or

Hong Kong.....

I will bet my last dollar that almost everyone on this forum 

would have close to zero interest in Thailand...

 

Its the beautiful mess most expats like about Thailand,

like the houses on the canals..

 

Edited May 15, 2017 by fforest1

[George Bowman]

Our place borders the Nan River in Phitsanuluk province. The locals whose homes are on the wrong side of the white government land marker have been told to move. Sometime in June they have to say either yes to moving or no they will fight the eviction. If they have a Chanote older than 1991, they may have a chance of staying put.  For those that can't afford tearing down the structure, the process will take about a year for the gov't to demolish the houses. The officials also said that planting crops or floating wooden docks are ok. 

 

Many of the Thai landowners on the correct side of the marker are in favor of this action. They have either built a home or are wanting to for a scenic view of the Nan River.  The legal residents get upset when Somchai (rich or poor) slaps up an illegal  abode on the riverbank directly in front of their home.

 

Edited May 15, 2017 by missoura

[digger70]

4 hours ago, canopy said:

Where does the waste water go in houses like these?

 

Down,,,,fish food,,,

[digger70]

Why ,Why have they allowed the people to build them Shacks/Huts in the first place? Same as with everything else.The people have been doing everything Illegal since the year Dot and now all of an sudden they expect the people to adhere to the Law,Guess what,,That ain't gonna happen they will protest/fight.We seen it happen ,the beach chairs/illegal jet ski  rental/Taxi  mafia problems /Tuk Tuk mafia /people in the back of utes/encroaching government land/illegal fishing/Corruption  from the low end of society up to the Highest level,just to name a few.What a mess they have to Clean.This will take a few lifetimes just to put a dent in this.

Edited May 15, 2017 by digger70

[elgordo38]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

In cases where permission is granted, owners will have to pay fines at rates of between Bt1,000 and Bt20,000 per square metre. They will also have to pay annual rent based on the area covered.

I guess they can kiss their homes goodbye. 

[anotheruser]

3 hours ago, robblok said:

I can understand if they enforce this in important drainage canals that are vital for draining. Then I have absolutely no problems with people being evicted from illigal structures. But for other reasons there should be some flexibility though if they cause trouble to others with blocking it all (river full of fish traps ect) then do something about it. 

 

I would think that polluting waterways with raw sewage would probably qualify as being harmful to everybody. 

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, missoura said:

Our place borders the Nan River in Phitsanuluk province. The locals whose homes are on the wrong side of the white government land marker have been told to move. Sometime in June they have to say either yes to moving or no they will fight the eviction. If they have a Chanote older than 1991, they may have a chance of staying put.  For those that can't afford tearing down the structure, the process will take about a year for the gov't to demolish the houses. The officials also said that planting crops or floating wooden docks are ok. 

 

Many of the Thai landowners on the correct side of the marker are in favor of this action. They have either built a home or are wanting to for a scenic view of the Nan River.  The legal residents get upset when Somchai (rich or poor) slaps up an illegal  abode on the riverbank directly in front of their home.

 

" If they have a Chanote older than 1991" then the corrupt government official who issued it may well be alive, so could be investigated, hopefully have all there assets confiscated and imprisoned. 

[Gandtee]

More reports like this seems to indicate that the powers that be are making war on the Thai people. The poor and working class anyway. No riding on the back of pickups. Banning street food vendors. Now this. Are those responsible for these orders hell bent on alienating the people they profess to bring happiness to? But then maybe this latest bombshell will go the same way as the others. A retraction "You misunderstood" then disappear.

[anotheruser]

6 minutes ago, Gandtee said:

More reports like this seems to indicate that the powers that be are making war on the Thai people. The poor and working class anyway. No riding on the back of pickups. Banning street food vendors. Now this. Are those responsible for these orders hell bent on alienating the people they profess to bring happiness to? But then maybe this latest bombshell will go the same way as the others. A retraction "You misunderstood" then disappear.

 

Cleaning the countries water ways is a good thing for all people. The pain of those being displaced is a short term obstacle to a  goal that is a long term benefit to the entire nation.

[Gandtee]

1 minute ago, anotheruser said:

 

Cleaning the countries water ways is a good thing for all people. The pain of those being displaced is a short term obstacle to a  goal that is a long term benefit to the entire nation.

I agree with the cleaning but the order is about clearing! 

[anotheruser]

2 minutes ago, Gandtee said:

I agree with the cleaning but the order is about clearing! 

One leads to the other. Hopefully once the banks are cleared of shanty towns and open pit sewage they can recover. TIT so you never know but the concept seems pretty obvious.

 

This is why most normal countries have laws that define set backs from bodies of water. 

Edited May 15, 2017 by anotheruser

[DLang]

If it is illegal, but inconvenient, it shouldn't be enforced because it might upset the people breaking the law.

 

[fforest1]

1 hour ago, Gandtee said:

I agree with the cleaning but the order is about clearing! 

Agreed..I dont think they care Jack about cleaning..