Somsak urges PM to be ‘respectable’ to politicians

[snoop1130]

Somsak urges PM to be ‘respectable’ to politicians

By The Nation

 

 

A veteran politician from the Chart Thai Pattana Party urged Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha on Friday to “be more respectable” to politicians as the premier’s “four questions” were viewed as an insult to politicians.

 

Somsak Prisana-nantakul, a senior adviser to the party, said: “I have no problem if General Prayut plays by the rules and gets public support to remain in power. But it’s important to respect political blocs and not generalise all politicians, giving an impression that they’re all bad.”

 

He said Prayut also should not insult people’s decision to choose their political representatives based on individuals and their proposed policies.

 

“If [Prayut] wants to stay in power, please keep in mind that General Prem Tinsulanonda was also an outsider PM but he never insulted anyone,” Somsak said. “That was why politicians gave him cooperation, enabling him to stay in power for a long time,” he said.

 

Somsak said he saw the possibility of cooperation among the four main political parties – Pheu Thai, Democrat, Chart Thai Pattana and Phum Jai Thai – to form a coalition government after the next election, as proposed by former Democrat Party leader Bhichai Rattakul.

 

However, he said such an alliance must not lead to the formation of a so-called “national government”, or one with no parliamentary opposition. 

 

“Our goal is not only to compete against one another to gain the government head’s seat,” he said. “According to the law, at least 375 from a total of 750 votes in the Upper and Lower Houses has to be gained before decisions will be made which party will lead the coalition government.

 

“If political blocs wish to drive things in a democratic way, they have to support players in the same regime,” he added.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/breakingnews/30317062

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-6-2

[yellowboat]

12 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Chart Thai Pattana Party urged Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha on Friday to “be more respectable” to politicians as the premier’s “four questions” were viewed as an insult to politicians.

He fears and respects for foreign media and Thai religious leaders.  That is all.  He will only be respectful to a degree if you can, in some way, discomfort him without he being able to inflict reprisals.  If you can hurt him without he hurting you, he will listen.     

[halloween]

Respect has to earned. That pretty much rules out most Thai politicians, and every politician willing to sell his vote.

[Smarter Than You]

And Prayuth has earned respect how?

 

 

[Eric Loh]

Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent. While Prayut hide behind guns and intimidation.....and gain no respect.

[scorecard]

46 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent. While Prayut hide behind guns and intimidation.....and gain no respect.

 

 

"Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent."

 

Big yawn, a rather silly comment.

 

In reality many Thai politicians make no effort to earn the real respect of their constituents, 99% of their effort are to please their personal salary paying paymaster and therefore line their own pockets. In fact the last point is the only reason they are politicians, nothing more. 

 

In at least one big party they are not allowed to have detailed discussions with their local people and not allowed to stand up in parliament and state their own thoughts etc.

 

Also true many of the constituents don't even know what identifies a politician as a good politician who deserves real / earned respect and the 'politicans' know that and take advantage of it.

 

. 

Edited June 3, 2017 by scorecard

[halloween]

49 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent. While Prayut hide behind guns and intimidation.....and gain no respect.

16.667% never face an electorate, appointed by party list. That would include Chalerm and the UDD scum rewarded for their crimes with parliamentary seats.

[sjaak327]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

Respect has to earned. That pretty much rules out most Thai politicians, and every politician willing to sell his vote.

Which is still much better than committing  high treason and taking power at gunpoint. 

[sjaak327]

30 minutes ago, halloween said:

16.667% never face an electorate, appointed by party list. That would include Chalerm and the UDD scum rewarded for their crimes with parliamentary seats.

Don't be silly, the party list is voted on by the electorate. a party can appoint as many as they like, if no-one votes on the party list, no one goes into parliament. 

 

You again show that you don't understand how democracy works, that's probably why you support the junta. ignorance and fear.

[halloween]

10 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Don't be silly, the party list is voted on by the electorate. a party can appoint as many as they like, if no-one votes on the party list, no one goes into parliament. 

 

You again show that you don't understand how democracy works, that's probably why you support the junta. ignorance and fear.

I understand EXACTLY how Thai democracy works, or more accurately, doesn't work. If you care to believe that Chalerm was democratically elected, that's your problem. IMHO very few Thais voted for PTP because they wanted Chalerm as their DPM, and those that did would be relatives.

 

If seizing power is high treason, what is selling your vote to a fugitive criminal so that he can enrich himself; low treason?

Edited June 3, 2017 by halloween

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent. While Prayut hide behind guns and intimidation.....and gain no respect.

 

 The last PTP PM never faced the electorate and stood for a constituency and neither did many of their ministers. They were party list MPs and a lot were not even politicians.

 

I would have far more respect for Yingluck if she were more like Sudarat Keyuraphan who was an MP from 1993 to 2005. She worked to become an MP and was a founding member of the TRT along with Thaksin and several others.

[sjaak327]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

I understand EXACTLY how Thai democracy works, or more accurately, doesn't work. If you care to believe that Chalerm was democratically elected, that's your problem. IMHO very few Thais voted for PTP because they wanted Chalerm as their DPM, and those that did would be relatives.

 

If seizing power is high treason, what is selling your vote to a fugitive criminal so that he can enrich himself; low treason?

No that is called being a member of parliament. backed up by the electorate. how many percent of the NLA faced the electorate I wonder ? And none of them can be voted out of office or even impeached. oh well, what an improvement...

[halloween]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

No that is called being a member of parliament. backed up by the electorate. how many percent of the NLA faced the electorate I wonder ? And none of them can be voted out of office or even impeached. oh well, what an improvement...

MPs where I come from do face an electorate, none get a free pass, and those that accept payment, such as PTP's stipend, are jailed. And that is the case on nearly all REAL democracies. Of course, it's not illegal in Thailand, why would paid MP's suggest such a thing, let alone vote for it? Thaksin wouldn't like it.

[sjaak327]

5 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

 The last PTP PM never faced the electorate and stood for a constituency and neither did many of their ministers. They were party list MPs and a lot were not even politicians.

 

I would have far more respect for Yingluck if she were more like Sudarat Keyuraphan who was an MP from 1993 to 2005. She worked to become an MP and was a founding member of the TRT along with Thaksin and several others.

So obtaining 15,744,190 votes on the party list means one did not face the electorate ? Care to explain this to me ? What do you think these 15 million people voted for, Yingluck of course. 

[SABloke]

I gues he meant "respectful". Being respectable is an extrinsic trait...and Big P is about as respectable as a turd in the road: most people avoid all interactions with the turd (stepping around or over it) and the unlucky few that have an interaction (stepping in the turd) curse the turd and wish the turd was never there in the first place.

[sjaak327]

4 minutes ago, halloween said:

MPs where I come from do face an electorate, none get a free pass, and those that accept payment, such as PTP's stipend, are jailed. And that is the case on nearly all REAL democracies. Of course, it's not illegal in Thailand, why would paid MP's suggest such a thing, let alone vote for it? Thaksin wouldn't like it.

Well were I come from, there is only party list. People vote for a party,  they CAN vote for individual politicians, as long as their party put them on that list. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that setup, in fact, I prefer it over what Thailand has, Thailand should get rid of the constituency and have party list only. 

 

In my country, ministers indeed don't have to be on that party list, they can be outsiders, and again I see nothing wrong with that. Parliament elects the government, the electorate elects Parliament.

 

Edited June 3, 2017 by sjaak327

[halloween]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

Well were I come from, there is only party list. People vote for a party,  they CAN vote for individual politicians, as long as their party put them on that list. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that setup, in fact, I perfer it over what Thailand has, Thailand should get rid of the constituency and have party list only. 

Are they allowed to accept 3rd party payments? Or would they be fired and jailed for that?

[billd766]

21 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

So obtaining 15,744,190 votes on the party list means one did not face the electorate ? Care to explain this to me ? What do you think these 15 million people voted for, Yingluck of course. 

 

Most of them voted for Thaksin.

[scorecard]

41 minutes ago, SABloke said:

I gues he meant "respectful". Being respectable is an extrinsic trait...and Big P is about as respectable as a turd in the road: most people avoid all interactions with the turd (stepping around or over it) and the unlucky few that have an interaction (stepping in the turd) curse the turd and wish the turd was never there in the first place.

 

just your opinion.

[Smarter Than You]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

16.667% never face an electorate, appointed by party list. That would include Chalerm and the UDD scum rewarded for their crimes with parliamentary seats.

1. How is the number of party list seats each party gets decided?

Could it be elections?

Why yes I think it is.

Out of curiosity, under the new constitution, how many appointed Senators will never face an electorate?

Could it be all of them?

Why yes, I think it is.

[Smarter Than You]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

I understand EXACTLY how Thai democracy works, or more accurately, doesn't work. If you care to believe that Chalerm was democratically elected, that's your problem. IMHO very few Thais voted for PTP because they wanted Chalerm as their DPM, and those that did would be relatives.

 

If seizing power is high treason, what is selling your vote to a fugitive criminal so that he can enrich himself; low treason?

Any Thai who felt strongly enough that Charlem shouldn't be elected could simply vote for another party.

 

Whether Charlem was elected is not open to opinion.

He was elected.

Facts are facts, whether you like them or not.

 

Do you think your humble opinion may be slightly biased or not?

You have zero facts as to who did or didn't vote for Charlem and their reasons why.

You do however have ample facts regarding how many people voted in Prayuth - zero.

What does this fact not bother you at all?

 

There is no "if" about military coups being treason, they are - the world over.

Your vote buying rantings are a nonsense.

 

Vote buying 'not decisive factor in an election' - The Nation - Thailand's

 

[sjaak327]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

Most of them voted for Thaksin.

They couldn't as he wasn't on the party list. Even if they did (which is impossible to prove) that would imply implicit approval, so the convicted criminal on the run excuse is right out of the window. 

 

The difference between a criminal and a convicted criminal in Thailand is one received justice and the other one is let off the hook, depending on several factors, including self proclaimed amnesties, which the current bunch of criminals running this country hide behind...

[Smarter Than You]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

 The last PTP PM never faced the electorate and stood for a constituency and neither did many of their ministers. They were party list MPs and a lot were not even politicians.

 

I would have far more respect for Yingluck if she were more like Sudarat Keyuraphan who was an MP from 1993 to 2005. She worked to become an MP and was a founding member of the TRT along with Thaksin and several others.

And was Abhisit on the party list???

It's how the system works.

The PM candidate holds the number 1 spot on the party list.

 

Has the current PM ever faced the electorate?

Has the entire membership of the current cabinet faced the electorate?

No he hasn't.

No they haven't.

Why aren't you bleating about these facts?

 

[Smarter Than You]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

MPs where I come from do face an electorate, none get a free pass, and those that accept payment, such as PTP's stipend, are jailed. And that is the case on nearly all REAL democracies. Of course, it's not illegal in Thailand, why would paid MP's suggest such a thing, let alone vote for it? Thaksin wouldn't like it.

All PTP politicians were elected.

None of the current Junta were elected.

 

Why does the origins of PTP politicians bother you so much but the origins of Prayuth and co. bother you so little?

 

Where you come from what is the penalty for overthrowing an elected government?

I bet you its a little different than the punishment meted out in Thailand (which just happens to be full amnesty)

[sjaak327]

2 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

And was Abhisit on the party list???

It's how the system works.

The PM candidate holds the number 1 spot on the party list.

 

Has the current PM ever faced the electorate?

Has the entire membership of the current cabinet faced the electorate?

No he hasn't.

No they haven't.

Why aren't you bleating about these facts?

 

As I already said, some posters have absolutely no idea how democracy works. claiming people on the party list haven't faced the electorate is utter <deleted>. it displays a glaring incomprehension of the subject at hand. they probably missed the relevant lessons in high school. Often the very same people claiming the Thai electorate is too stupid to vote, oh the irony !

[Eric Loh]

3 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

 

"Politician dare to face the electorate to earn their respect and decision to represent."

 

Big yawn, a rather silly comment.

 

In reality many Thai politicians make no effort to earn the real respect of their constituents, 99% of their effort are to please their personal salary paying paymaster and therefore line their own pockets. In fact the last point is the only reason they are politicians, nothing more. 

 

In at least one big party they are not allowed to have detailed discussions with their local people and not allowed to stand up in parliament and state their own thoughts etc.

 

Also true many of the constituents don't even know what identifies a politician as a good politician who deserves real / earned respect and the 'politicans' know that and take advantage of it.

 

. 

Every word spoken as if from Prayut's mouth. You deserve a medal from him for being such a dedicated and loyal servant. 

[fish monger]

'Respectful' is the word he's looking for.....Not 'respectable'...

[Eric Loh]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

 The last PTP PM never faced the electorate and stood for a constituency and neither did many of their ministers. They were party list MPs and a lot were not even politicians.

 

I would have far more respect for Yingluck if she were more like Sudarat Keyuraphan who was an MP from 1993 to 2005. She worked to become an MP and was a founding member of the TRT along with Thaksin and several others.

PTP just follow the electoral rules which allow single and party list election. The reason for party list is also due to the fact that these participants are chosen to be ministers and they don't have to resign from their constituency as MP to take the positions. Holding by-election is a waste of time and tax payer money. Party list also need voters endorsement and Yingluck got hers.

 

I am glad you respect Sudarat for being elected as MP as against this present appointed non elected bunch in the NLA and government.

 

[halloween]

42 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Any Thai who felt strongly enough that Charlem shouldn't be elected could simply vote for another party.

 

Whether Charlem was elected is not open to opinion.

He was elected.

Facts are facts, whether you like them or not.

 

Do you think your humble opinion may be slightly biased or not?

You have zero facts as to who did or didn't vote for Charlem and their reasons why.

You do however have ample facts regarding how many people voted in Prayuth - zero.

What does this fact not bother you at all?

 

There is no "if" about military coups being treason, they are - the world over.

Your vote buying rantings are a nonsense.

 

Vote buying 'not decisive factor in an election' - The Nation - Thailand's

 

This may be news for you, Thaksin pays MPs to be members of PTP, they receive regular payments from the party which he owns and funds. Your repudiation is of a completely different issue, otherwise known as a straw man argument, but in your case probably based on pure ignorance. MPs accepting payments from any 3rd party is a criminal offence in most democracies. As a party they vote for laws which clearly favour him in a clear conflict of interest. Not declaring a conflict of interest and recusing yourself is also a criminal offence in most democracies, as is allowing a wealthy criminal knowledge of secret cabinet deliberations. Thaksin is given access to those deliberations and actively participates.

Thaksin is a wealthy fugitive criminal; you may have heard of him. He owns PTP, and through the party list nominates his cronies and criminal associates to be MPs based on the vote for the party. None of those thus elected is subject to the individual scrutiny of an electorate, not one gets a single dedicated vote. Some people think this is acceptable, to me it is an abuse of the democratic system. Nominating persons of unsuitable character is an offence under the electoral act, as it should be, and the EC has stated that they considered disbanding PTP for this, as well as Thaksin's involvement in the last election, but they were deterred by the perceived high risk of political violence. That's how you win an election, break electoral law as you wish and threaten violence if you are called out for it. 

When a military coup throws out such a criminal conspiracy robbing the country, I am quite happy to acknowledge their government.

Edited June 3, 2017 by halloween

[sjaak327]

13 minutes ago, halloween said:

This may be news for you, Thaksin pays MPs to be members of PTP, they receive regular payments from the party which he owns and funds. Your repudiation is of a completely different issue, otherwise known as a straw man argument, but in your case probably based on pure ignorance. MPs accepting payments from any 3rd party is a criminal offence in most democracies. As a party they vote for laws which clearly favour him in a clear conflict of interest. Not declaring a conflict of interest and recusing yourself is also a criminal offence in most democracies, as is allowing a wealthy criminal knowledge of secret cabinet deliberations. Thaksin is given access to those deliberations and actively participates.

Thaksin is a wealthy fugitive criminal; you may have heard of him. He owns PTP, and through the party list nominates his cronies and criminal associates to be MPs based on the vote for the party. None of those thus elected is subject to the individual scrutiny of an electorate, not one gets a single dedicated vote. Some people think this is acceptable, to me it is an abuse of the democratic system. Nominating persons of unsuitable character is an offence under the electoral act, as it should be, and the EC has stated that they considered disbanding PTP for this, as well as Thaksin's involvement in the last election, but they were deterred by the perceived high risk of political violence. That's how you win an election, break electoral law as you wish and threaten violence if you are called out for it. 

When a military coup throws out such a criminal conspiracy robbing the country, I am quite happy to acknowledge their government.

Hmm, Thaksin isn't a third party of course. He leads the party for many years, and everyone knows it. These MP's don't really get there on their own merites, they get their because people vote for PT . Thaksin might be a criminal, so are the current lot (and they have not been convicted under dubious circumstances for some land deal, he wasn't even a benificiary off). 

 

All of your text, doesn't explain away that PT did receive a solid landslide mandate from the electorate. And it doesn't explain away that the current bunch of criminals (only not convicted because they granted themselves amnesy for their past and future crimes, hmm now amnesty IS ok right ? ) have no right to be where they are, they should be in jail, along with Thaksin. Thaksin for two years, and they for a few decades. 

 

But alas, the term convicted criminal in Thailand isn't worth the paper it is written on, again ignorance quite clearly shows in your case. I wonder, why do you know so little about the country you supposedly live in ? 

 

Oh, do you have any proof the current rulers aren't robbing the country blind. It seems their deficit makes the rice scheme look like child's play, follow the money I would say. Again utter ignorance on your part, live in Thailand, and doesn't know the military is the most corrupt organization in Thailand. 

 

I have to say, your postings are highly amusing just because reality hasn't sinked in yet. Welcome to Thailand 

Edited June 3, 2017 by sjaak327