Ex-Democrat MP doubts transport minister tells the truth about Thai-Chinese train project

[webfact]

Ex-Democrat MP doubts transport minister tells the truth about Thai-Chinese train project

 

 

BANGKOK: -- Former Democrat MP Samart Ratpolasit questioned the claim by Transport Minister Arkhom Termpittayapaisit that China was reluctant to invest in the Thai-Chinese high-speed train project between Bangkok and Nakhon Ratchasima, saying he didn’t think the minister told the truth.

 

Samart’s Facebook post on Sunday was in response to Mr Arkhom’s remarks during his interview in Thai PBS’s Tob Jote programme on Thurday night during which the minister claimed China would not co-invest in the high-speed train project, forcing the Thai government to go it alone.

 

The ex-Democrat said he doubted Mr Arkhom was speaking the truth.

 

Samart said the two sides had talked in nine meetings since January 2015 that they would co-invest in the train system, train operations and maintenance; in electrical distribution, ticketing, signaling and communication systems, with the Chinese side agreeing to 40 percent of the investment and 60 percent by the Thai side. The Thai side will solely invest in public works – that is the construction of the rail system.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/ex-democrat-mp-doubts-transport-minister-tells-truth-thai-chinese-train-project/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2017-06-26

[trogers]

The previous government had their rice scam. And this government is having a rail scam?

[Dave67]

51 minutes ago, trogers said:

The previous government had their rice scam. And this government is having a rail scam?

Agreed they have found a new way of binning tax payers money

[Dave67]

Full article tells of Thailand shooting itself in the foot , Sounds like China didnt pull out .Some C+Ps and my take on it

 

The plan was 40% China 60% Thailand.for train system, train operations and maintenance; in electrical distribution, ticketing, signaling and communication . Basically the expensive bit

 

After 9 meetings Thailand decided to ask China to pay for 70% of the above

 

Chinese confused by late request and agree to 60% of above a 20% increase

 

Prayut announces after meeting Thailand will build the project without Chinas participation

 

Apparently Thailand were  always doing the Track itself without China

 

I wonder how much the 10% China refused to pay on top was and how much more does doing the whole project cost Thailand

[alant]

I wonder if it will ever get past the discussion phase???

[halloween]

1 minute ago, alant said:

I wonder if it will ever get past the discussion phase???

construction is scheduled to start in september.

[alant]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

construction is scheduled to start in september.

Was it not scheduled to be completed in 2017 originally?

[halloween]

3 minutes ago, alant said:

Was it not scheduled to be completed in 2017 originally?

That would depend on whose proposal you are talking about.

[Smarter Than You]

 

1 hour ago, halloween said:

construction is scheduled to start in september.

So is the Transport Minister telling the truth or not?

If not, what to do?

 

[spidermike007]

At 700,000,000 baht per kilometer, I seriously doubt they were reluctant to accept the contract to build this railway. That is the lovely aspect of non-competitive bidding. You can always be assured you are paying the highest price possible, and that the people are getting fleeced. Hopefully, long after this administration is gone, the leaders will be brought to trail. 

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

 

So is the Transport Minister telling the truth or not?

If not, what to do?

 

He has to keep up with his leader consistent lying. A cabinet full of the same kind. 

[mtls2005]

I smell a defamation suit, or seven, in the offing.

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Hopefully, long after this administration is gone, the leaders will be brought to trail. 

Likely not as Prayut invoked Article 44 as NCPO Chief that bypassed all laws and regulations related to government procurement. Article 44 has constitutional authority. As such neither Prayut nor any government official involved in the dual rail project procurement process can be prosecuted.

[YetAnother]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

The ex-Democrat said he doubted Mr Arkhom was speaking the truth.

that means he lied; sounds like classic defamation to me

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, Dave67 said:

The plan was 40% China 60% Thailand

The financing for this project since the military coup has been confusing. Not surprising considering that 11 negotiation meetings failed to finalize project costs and loan conditions.

 

In the 3rd meeting between the Chinese and Thai officials in March 2015 the State Railway of Thailand would have a 30% stake, private Thai firms would have another 30% stake and the Chinese state enterprises would have a 40% stake in the in the project. It was expected that this investment ratio would be done through a shared equity agreement through a joint venture.

 

But further reference was made by Thailand that it expected to ask for a repayment period of 25-30 years with a 7-10-year grace period from China. This suggests that the SRT would actually borrow its 30% equity from China and not use Thai treasury bonds. This type of borrowing is called off-budget financing.

 

Fast forward to this month wherein Prayut said that the government would not obtain a loan from China - that "the government has never planned to borrow funds from China as Thailand already has sufficient monetary reserves for the project." https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/988808-pm-no-loan-to-be-sought-from-china-for-high-speed-rail-project/?utm_source=newsletter-20170621-1218&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news

 

That would seem to still retain the joint venture with China having a 40% stake in the project. But then the next day the NCPO stated, "The project will be 100-per-cent funded by the Thai government." http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30318843

 

Several days later now we are told by former Democrat MP Samart that the Chinese side agrees to 40% of the investment and 60% by the Thai side. So the joint venture is on again with no Thai borrowing from China? And also appears that there will be no investment by the Thai private sector - that's a bell weather indication as to the economics of the project.

[Dave67]

13 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

The financing for this project since the military coup has been confusing. Not surprising considering that 11 negotiation meetings failed to finalize project costs and loan conditions.

 

In the 3rd meeting between the Chinese and Thai officials in March 2015 the State Railway of Thailand would have a 30% stake, private Thai firms would have another 30% stake and the Chinese state enterprises would have a 40% stake in the in the project. It was expected that this investment ratio would be done through a shared equity agreement through a joint venture.

 

But further reference was made by Thailand that it expected to ask for a repayment period of 25-30 years with a 7-10-year grace period from China. This suggests that the SRT would actually borrow its 30% equity from China and not use Thai treasury bonds. This type of borrowing is called off-budget financing.

 

Fast forward to this month wherein Prayut said that the government would not obtain a loan from China - that "the government has never planned to borrow funds from China as Thailand already has sufficient monetary reserves for the project." https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/988808-pm-no-loan-to-be-sought-from-china-for-high-speed-rail-project/?utm_source=newsletter-20170621-1218&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news

 

That would seem to still retain the joint venture with China having a 40% stake in the project. But then the next day the NCPO stated, "The project will be 100-per-cent funded by the Thai government." http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30318843

 

Several days later now we are told by former Democrat MP Samart that the Chinese side agrees to 40% of the investment and 60% by the Thai side. So the joint venture is on again with no Thai borrowing from China? And also appears that there will be no investment by the Thai private sector - that's a bell weather indication as to the economics of the project.

 

 

Does the 60% 40% include Thailands 100% of trackwork which the article mentions 

[Retiredandhappyhere]

 

"The ex-Democrat said he doubted Mr Arkhom was speaking the truth."

 

I am just surprised that the ex-democrat had any doubts about his doubt.

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

The financing for this project since the military coup has been confusing. Not surprising considering that 11 negotiation meetings failed to finalize project costs and loan conditions.

 

The borrowing method is still a work in progress and we can expect another twist to the loan story. While not a banker or an economist, I would think the loan could be financed by local bank syndicate, PPP , domestic infrastructure bond or an external loan. However I doubt local banks have the muscle to finance such a big risky project. The biggest banks only have around a total capitalization of 84B USD each. I will ruled loan from local banks. They tried to invite PPP and sent out invitations. None replied. Infrastructure projects seldom make any profit and the gestation period to breaking even is long. I will ruled that out too. Infrastructure bond likely to be the only route besides external borrowing. However in this time of economic distress, I don't see much appetite for this unless they raise the coupon rate which may attract international investors. That will put the country into much hardship for years to come. Maybe external loans from Asia Infrastructure Investment banks (AIIB), headquarters in Beijing. This is a China conceived investment plan and will mean that Thailand will still advance China's national interest while lowering environmental and human rights standard. Besides an external loan will be dominated in USD and that will again out Thailand at risk. If the infrastructure projects don't complete at the shortest of time and be operational and start earning money, Thailand will be vulnerable to years of economic distress. 

[halloween]

5 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The borrowing method is still a work in progress and we can expect another twist to the loan story. While not a banker or an economist, I would think the loan could be financed by local bank syndicate, PPP , domestic infrastructure bond or an external loan. However I doubt local banks have the muscle to finance such a big risky project. The biggest banks only have around a total capitalization of 84B USD each. I will ruled loan from local banks. They tried to invite PPP and sent out invitations. None replied. Infrastructure projects seldom make any profit and the gestation period to breaking even is long. I will ruled that out too. Infrastructure bond likely to be the only route besides external borrowing. However in this time of economic distress, I don't see much appetite for this unless they raise the coupon rate which may attract international investors. That will put the country into much hardship for years to come. Maybe external loans from Asia Infrastructure Investment banks (AIIB), headquarters in Beijing. This is a China conceived investment plan and will mean that Thailand will still advance China's national interest while lowering environmental and human rights standard. Besides an external loan will be dominated in USD and that will again out Thailand at risk. If the infrastructure projects don't complete at the shortest of time and be operational and start earning money, Thailand will be vulnerable to years of economic distress. 

Fascinating stuff. Tell me, how does that compare to this plan, when the country was already looking at B600 billion in losses from her rice scam.

"The big idea is to spend 2 trillion baht ($64 billion) by 2020 towards upgrading the country’s creaking infrastructure. Another 3 trillion baht will come due as interest on the loans, accumulating over the next 50 years. " http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2013/10/infrastructure-spending-thailand

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

Fascinating stuff. Tell me, how does that compare to this plan, when the country was already looking at B600 billion in losses from her rice scam.

"The big idea is to spend 2 trillion baht ($64 billion) by 2020 towards upgrading the country’s creaking infrastructure. Another 3 trillion baht will come due as interest on the loans, accumulating over the next 50 years. " http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2013/10/infrastructure-spending-thailand

Maybe you conveniently avoid the fact that the budget deficit for previous government was much less than the junta budget. So what is you comment on the military hardware purchases which caused a outflow of money and no benefit to the local economy. The rice scheme circulated internally, generated consumption and improve the revenue collection.

 

What about the infrastructure project which was hijacked by the junta and is their keeper now. All this hush-hush, secrecy and non transparent smells of serious corruption. Anyway you cool with this kind of behavior, General. 

[halloween]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

Maybe you conveniently avoid the fact that the budget deficit for previous government was much less than the junta budget. So what is you comment on the military hardware purchases which caused a outflow of money and no benefit to the local economy. The rice scheme circulated internally, generated consumption and improve the revenue collection.

 

What about the infrastructure project which was hijacked by the junta and is their keeper now. All this hush-hush, secrecy and non transparent smells of serious corruption. Anyway you cool with this kind of behavior, General. 

Yes, avoid the question again. The Yingluk government was so short that they were up to 6 months behind in rice payments. Tell me how paying back B3 trillion over 50 years wouldn't cause as much distress as you claim this plan would.

[Eric Loh]

Just now, halloween said:

Yes, avoid the question again. The Yingluk government was so short that they were up to 6 months behind in rice payments. Tell me how paying back B3 trillion over 50 years wouldn't cause as much distress as you claim this plan would.

Well you need to ask Suthep why? 

Here you go again trying to bs your way. Has the details of the B3 T loan out? 

[halloween]

51 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Well you need to ask Suthep why? 

Here you go again trying to bs your way. Has the details of the B3 T loan out? 

 The Yingluk proposed loan was for B2.2 trillion repayable over 50 years with B3 trillion in interest. Yet you claim a plan involving less than 10% of that sum will cause "years of economic distress." The question was which would cause the greater?

[Smarter Than You]

26 minutes ago, halloween said:

 The Yingluk proposed loan was for B2.2 trillion repayable over 50 years with B3 trillion in interest. Yet you claim a plan involving less than 10% of that sum will cause "years of economic distress." The question was which would cause the greater?

You (and Korn) don't know what the Juntas plan will cost!

 

"Korn Chatikavanij, a former finance minister who initiated the bullet train concept under the Democrat government, believes the junta has misplayed its hand."

 

"Korn says that if the junta could raise capital domestically at the same 2 percent offered by China (he estimates the government’s cost of funds is closer to 4 percent), the high-speed line would still require “tens of billions” of baht worth of annual subsidies to cover costs even under the rosiest of passenger load estimates."

 

"It’s not clear that Prayut’s shortened line, viewed already by some independent financial analysts as a “face-saving exercise” aimed at sustaining Chinese interest in co-investing in the remaining 400-kilometer segment to the Thai-Lao border, will necessarily be either."

 

And lets not forget to add the cost of the land along the rail line the Junta is handing over to the Chinese to profit from commercial developments.

Edited June 26, 2017 by Smarter Than You

[halloween]

49 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

You (and Korn) don't know what the Juntas plan will cost!

 

"Korn Chatikavanij, a former finance minister who initiated the bullet train concept under the Democrat government, believes the junta has misplayed its hand."

 

"Korn says that if the junta could raise capital domestically at the same 2 percent offered by China (he estimates the government’s cost of funds is closer to 4 percent), the high-speed line would still require “tens of billions” of baht worth of annual subsidies to cover costs even under the rosiest of passenger load estimates."

 

"It’s not clear that Prayut’s shortened line, viewed already by some independent financial analysts as a “face-saving exercise” aimed at sustaining Chinese interest in co-investing in the remaining 400-kilometer segment to the Thai-Lao border, will necessarily be either."

 

And lets not forget to add the cost of the land along the rail line the Junta is handing over to the Chinese to profit from commercial developments.

The price is hardly likely to blow out to 10 times is it? Which was the subject of my post, Yingluk's proposed loan was for B2.2 trillion repayable over 50 years with B3 trillion in interest. but you don't want to talk about that, just throw in more BS and lies. The Chinese claim for trackside land was rejected. Keep the red rag lying.

 

BTW I agree with Korn, a passenger only system will be a financial disaster. All indications are that this will be a passenger and freight line, and I support a dual usage track, as ever.

[Reigntax]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Likely not as Prayut invoked Article 44 as NCPO Chief that bypassed all laws and regulations related to government procurement. Article 44 has constitutional authority. As such neither Prayut nor any government official involved in the dual rail project procurement process can be prosecuted.

 

Retrospective revoking Article 44 and the amnesty would create an interesting situation

[Smarter Than You]

34 minutes ago, halloween said:

The price is hardly likely to blow out to 10 times is it? Which was the subject of my post, Yingluk's proposed loan was for B2.2 trillion repayable over 50 years with B3 trillion in interest. but you don't want to talk about that, just throw in more BS and lies. The Chinese claim for trackside land was rejected. Keep the red rag lying.

 

BTW I agree with Korn, a passenger only system will be a financial disaster. All indications are that this will be a passenger and freight line, and I support a dual usage track, as ever.

Why do you persist with defining everything the Junta does in terms of PTP and the Shinawatras?

Whether Yinglucks proposal was good or bad doesn't matter now - it will never happen, it is in history's trash bin.

 

Judge the Junta and its actions on their merits.

 

Has the Junta's process been sufficiently transparent?

Have the Chinese outplayed the Junta and got the best of the deal?

Who is going to own the value added land along the rail line?

Will this deal give the Chinese even more leverage for the remaining 400km rail to be built costing Thailand even more money?

Is the use of Section 44 to annul laws regarding transparency in government procurement a good thing?

Why was there no international bidding?

Was the Juntas primary goal getting the best deal for Thailand or currying favour with China?

What interest rate is the Junta paying for its loans?

What are the loan terms?

Is it a good thing that there are so many questions that the public don't have answers fore and the project is already approved?

 

Because you think Yinglucks proposal was no good the Junta gets a free pass?

Drop the obsession with the Reds wrongdoings of the past and start making sense by thinking and typing rationally and coherently.

 

Has the Junta negotiated a good deal for the nation?

 

 

 

Edited June 26, 2017 by Smarter Than You

[Eric Loh]

We can safely say that Thailand after a coup and governed by military generals with serious human rights issues are not going to find many friendly countries to borrow. All roads will lead back to China. 

[surangw]

maybe some of the rail cars can be converted into subs

 

[halloween]

19 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Why do you persist with defining everything the Junta does in terms of PTP and the Shinawatras?

Whether Yinglucks proposal was good or bad doesn't matter now - it will never happen, it is in history's trash bin.

 

Judge the Junta and its actions on their merits.

 

Has the Junta's process been sufficiently transparent?

Have the Chinese outplayed the Junta and got the best of the deal?

Who is going to own the value added land along the rail line?

Will this deal give the Chinese even more leverage for the remaining 400km rail to be built costing Thailand even more money?

Is the use of Section 44 to annul laws regarding transparency in government procurement a good thing?

Why was there no international bidding?

Was the Juntas primary goal getting the best deal for Thailand or currying favour with China?

What interest rate is the Junta paying for its loans?

What are the loan terms?

Is it a good thing that there are so many questions that the public don't have answers fore and the project is already approved?

 

Because you think Yinglucks proposal was no good the Junta gets a free pass?

Drop the obsession with the Reds wrongdoings of the past and start making sense by thinking and typing rationally and coherently.

 

Has the Junta negotiated a good deal for the nation?

 

 

 

Due to your apparent inability to answer any questions put to you, I have  decided to adopt a similar attitude, with the generous proviso of reciprocity.

 

BTW my question to EL was a response to a claim that the junta's proposal will cause "years of economic distress". There is nothing unreasonable about a comparison with a proposal for a much larger loan for a similar proposal from those he, and you, endorse.

 

At least your barrage of questions don't include any new false claims.