Shinawatra legacy hanging over Pheu Thai party’s leadership choice

[webfact]

Shinawatra legacy hanging over Pheu Thai party’s leadership choice

By POLITICAL NEWS DESK 
The Nation

 

 

WHATEVER THE VERDICT in the case against former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, the Pheu Thai Party will need to find a new leader and PM candidate to contest the next election which is expected to be held next year.

Yingluck cannot do the job even if she is acquitted in the negligence case stemming from her government’s corruption-plagued rice-pledging scheme. The post-coup National Legislative Assembly in 2015 impeached her for causing a massive loss in implementing the policy, effectively banning her from politics for five years.

 

Pheu Thai’s general secretary Phumtham Wechayachai said the party had not discussed new leadership as it first had to assess the political situation and public demand. When the junta’s ban on political activities is lifted, Pheu Thai would focus on setting proper policies and party structure before finding a new leader who would fit those requirements, he added.

 

Phumtham did not confirm or rule out speculation that the party’s next leader would not come from the Shinawatra family.

 

“Our party has many capable people with experience in running the country who are qualified in many areas. It is too early to say who the party will choose to become its leader. We still have enough time, so we do not have to make hasty decisions, as the political situation is changing all the time,” he said in a Facebook message posted on August 14.

 

Without Yingluck, Pheu Thai now has two strong contenders to become the next leader – former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat and veteran politician Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan – who both have strengths and weaknesses.

 

Whoever the new Pheu Thai leader will be, the most important quality they need to have is the blessing from the Shinawatra clan’s patriarch and matriarch – former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his former wife Khunying Pojaman Na Pombejra. Viewed as the “real owners” of Pheu Thai, both have retained much influence in the party despite not holding official posts in its executive board.

 

Somchai was recently acquitted by the Supreme Court in the case stemming from the fatal 2008 crackdown on yellow-shirt protesters under his short-lived government’s tenure. 

 

Sudarat, formerly a public health minister, won the green light from Thaksin and Pojaman. And thanks to their blessing, undercurrents against her within the party subsided. However, with his acquittal, Somchai has become another strong contender.

 

A Pheu Thai source said Sudarat was not the favourite among many of her party colleagues.

 

“Not everyone in the party wants Sudarat to become the party leader. They have to stay silent because the party owners back this person. Now that Somchai has been cleared, he is capable of being another choice to become the party leader,” the source said.

 

Somchai is married to Thaksin’s younger sister Yaowapha and is considered part of the Shinawatra clan. That is why he was strongly opposed by the yellow shirts when he became prime minister in 2008 and headed a coalition led by the People Power Party, which was considered a Thaksin proxy.

 

Sudarat is not a member of the clan but she has won the blessing of “big boss” Thaksin due to her proven loyalty, good image, strong political background, and large support base in Bangkok.

 

Somchai’s status as a key Shinawatra clan member has won him more respect from other Pheu Thai colleagues compared to Sudarat. But this “quality” is more likely to attract strong opposition from people who are against the so-called Thaksin regime and view Somchai as just a Thaksin proxy.

 

While leading his short-lived administration from September to December 2008, Somchai could not enter Government House, which had been seized by yellow-shirt protesters.

 

The Shinawatras, who have influence over Pheu Thai, will need to consider carefully whether to choose Thaksin’s brother-in-law or an outsider to become the next party leader.

 

By favouring Somchai, they may revive a bitter confrontation with opponents of the “Thaksin regime”. If national reconciliation is taken into consideration, Sudarat seems to be a better choice. She has an advantage over Somchai in that she is not part of the Shinawatra clan and has no history of involvement in any political violence.

 

Sudarat may appear to be a good choice for national unity. But her rise to become Pheu Thai’s next leader may put its unity at risk as she fails to command respect from many party colleagues, particularly those from the provinces who view her as being aloof. 

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30324703

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-24

[Samui Bodoh]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

The Shinawatras, who have influence over Pheu Thai, will need to consider carefully whether to choose Thaksin’s brother-in-law or an outsider to become the next party leader.

 

While there is no doubt that the Shin family will be very influential in the party for many years to come, I truly hope that they choose an outsider, non-family member as Leader.

 

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite, and it would proceed much more smoothly without a Shin family member in charge.

 

Perhaps then the 'establishment' might actually have to come up with policies that attract supporters rather than whinge endlessly about the opposition.

[halloween]

 

2 hours ago, webfact said:

......Thaksin Shinawatra and his former wife Khunying Pojaman Na Pombejra. Viewed as the “real owners” of Pheu Thai,.......

So where does 'legacy' come into it? And why even bother with the farce that the bought and paid for members get any say in who will lead the party?

[Samui Bodoh]

14 minutes ago, halloween said:

 

So where does 'legacy' come into it? And why even bother with the farce that the bought and paid for members get any say in who will lead the party?

 

Who funds the Democrat party? Who funded Suthep and his mob?

 

They seem to have plenty of money to buy votes, hold rallies, etc. If you try to tell me that they survive on donations from grannies in Nakon Nowhere, I won't believe it.

 

The only difference between political parties in Thailand is that we know where the money comes from in one case, but not any others.

 

[hansnl]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

While there is no doubt that the Shin family will be very influential in the party for many years to come, I truly hope that they choose an outsider, non-family member as Leader.

 

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite, and it would proceed much more smoothly without a Shin family member in charge.

 

Perhaps then the 'establishment' might actually have to come up with policies that attract supporters rather than whinge endlessly about the opposition.

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite?

With a party owned by a clan hellbent on making the country a private playground for personal gain and using the state's money to bind the poor?

You really think that is a good thing?

[melvinmelvin]

Read an interview with one of the PT strategic thinkers last week.

She advocated the view that maybe PT should not participate in the next election.

 

Whatever the result of the election any cabinet/government would be too heavily influenced by the military,

was her view.

 

[JAG]

 

While there is no doubt that the Shin family will be very influential in the party for many years to come, I truly hope that they choose an outsider, non-family member as Leader.

 

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite, and it would proceed much more smoothly without a Shin family member in charge.

 

Perhaps then the 'establishment' might actually have to come up with policies that attract supporters rather than whinge endlessly about the opposition.

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite?

With a party owned by a clan hellbent on making the country a private playground for personal gain and using the state's money to bind the poor?

You really think that is a good thing?

If you had read 'Samui Bodohs" post before your knees jerked and you launched forth, you would have seen that he was NOT suggesting a Shinawatra...

 

As for "making the country a private playground for personal gain and using the state's money", that sounds like a pretty accurate description of things under the current regime.

 

[YetAnother]

27 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

Whatever the result of the election any cabinet/government would be too heavily influenced by the military,

was her view.

then we can begin the sham democracy;interesting at that time that the govt here will not think that the rest of the world will see right thru it

[halloween]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

Who funds the Democrat party? Who funded Suthep and his mob?

 

They seem to have plenty of money to buy votes, hold rallies, etc. If you try to tell me that they survive on donations from grannies in Nakon Nowhere, I won't believe it.

 

The only difference between political parties in Thailand is that we know where the money comes from in one case, but not any others.

 

For starters, Democrat MPs pay a regular levy of their salary to the party. You may remember Tarit tried to prosecute them for doing so by auto payment. Different to accepting what in most democracies would be considered illegal and a bribe. Then, I would assume they are supported by various businesses and private individuals, none of whom insist on taking the top seat and dictating policy, or even be allowed illegal access to cabinet meetings.

 

It appears that you can't see the Democrats follow a familiar funding model, or just won't see the problems with buying a political party.

[smutcakes]

3 minutes ago, halloween said:

For starters, Democrat MPs pay a regular levy of their salary to the party. You may remember Tarit tried to prosecute them for doing so by auto payment. Different to accepting what in most democracies would be considered illegal and a bribe. Then, I would assume they are supported by various businesses and private individuals, none of whom insist on taking the top seat and dictating policy, or even be allowed illegal access to cabinet meetings.

 

It appears that you can't see the Democrats follow a familiar funding model, or just won't see the problems with buying a political party.

Whats the difference between various businesses and private individuals funding a party, i presume for future benefits for themselves, than another private individual funding a party?

[halloween]

13 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

Whats the difference between various businesses and private individuals funding a party, i presume for future benefits for themselves, than another private individual funding a party?

Do you have trouble with reading or comprehension? The difference was right there in front of you.

"..... none of whom insist on taking the top seat and dictating policy, or even be allowed illegal access to cabinet meetings."

 

Edited August 24, 2017 by halloween

[smutcakes]

Just now, halloween said:

Do you have trouble with reading or comprehension? The difference was right there in front of you.

 

 

Wow big difference. One openly being front a center of the party for everyone to see, the others hiding in the shadows. Yeah great example lol

[wvavin]

There is really no genuine qualified people in this country to lead anything base on past record. Leaders in this country regardless of the level of organisation are measured by the level of wealth rather than capability that is why this country can never achieve in any development.

[halloween]

Just now, smutcakes said:

Wow big difference. One openly being front a center of the party for everyone to see, the others hiding in the shadows. Yeah great example lol

Is that how they do it in your country?  the biggest donor gets to be PM and dictate policy.

[Ricardo]

17 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

Whats the difference between various businesses and private individuals funding a party, i presume for future benefits for themselves, than another private individual funding a party?

 

Perhaps different if that one private individual is a convicted-fugitive who remains overseas to avoid a prison-sentence, and several other cases requiring his presence-in-court to get started ? 

 

There are however other small regional political-parties here, who are identified with one particular power-figure, although I'm not sure that they fund their parties themselves.

[Eric Loh]

10 minutes ago, halloween said:

Is that how they do it in your country?  the biggest donor gets to be PM and dictate policy.

Stick to Thailand Halloween. It is what it is and not against the law and the people still get the majority vote. 

[smutcakes]

11 minutes ago, halloween said:

Is that how they do it in your country?  the biggest donor gets to be PM and dictate policy.

No, but don't pretend there is a big difference. In most cases Companies, individuals finance political parties as they feel the policies are beneficial for them or they can influence future policies to be beneficial to them. I presume in most cases these doners want to remain behind the scenes and have no wish to be the face of the party or be involved on a day to day level. I don't really see what a big difference it makes. Both are being funded with the aim of having influence and benefit in the future.

 

I am sure many of the big doners have a say in who will lead the party, and if the threat of funding being stopped was raised i am equally sure they could have a say in a change of leadership.

[halloween]

2 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

No, but don't pretend there is a big difference. In most cases Companies, individuals finance political parties as they feel the policies are beneficial for them or they can influence future policies to be beneficial to them. I presume in most cases these doners want to remain behind the scenes and have no wish to be the face of the party or be involved on a day to day level. I don't really see what a big difference it makes. Both are being funded with the aim of having influence and benefit in the future.

 

I am sure many of the big doners have a say in who will lead the party, and if the threat of funding being stopped was raised i am equally sure they could have a say in a change of leadership.

The difference is in degree. Donor influence is one thing, but no donor would have the final say as here. They would not expect or get access to cabinet meetings or blatantly corrupt and illegal laws to be passed for their benefit.

[halloween]

11 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Stick to Thailand Halloween. It is what it is and not against the law and the people still get the majority vote. 

The sooner it is made illegal for MPs to accept outside payment/gifts, the sooner we will have something approaching a real democracy. I don't expect you to support the move.

[smutcakes]

Just now, halloween said:

The difference is in degree. Donor influence is one thing, but no donor would have the final say as here. They would not expect or get access to cabinet meetings or blatantly corrupt and illegal laws to be passed for their benefit.

If they wanted i am sure they could get access to the cabinet meeting if they were bored. Or have their proxy sit in... Have you ever been to Thailand... do you know how much power these large corporations have?

 

Last time i checked coups were illegal, so yes they do have corrupt and illegal acts taken for their benefit.

[Eric Loh]

43 minutes ago, halloween said:

Then, I would assume they are supported by various businesses and private individuals, none of whom insist on taking the top seat and dictating policy, or even be allowed illegal access to cabinet meetings.

Have to agree with you that the Dem have a different funding method. These wealthy individuals and companies don't take seats but they benefit from having their party in the government. You forgot the big Sor Phor Kor land projects and land rights distribution in Phuket that went to their cronies and brought down Chuan's tenure. How convenient. 

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, halloween said:

The sooner it is made illegal for MPs to accept outside payment/gifts, the sooner we will have something approaching a real democracy. I don't expect you to support the move.

You ask for real democracy and you support the junta. What hypocrisy. 

[MarkusAUST]

What is required is a person with integrity, honesty, intelligence, a cool head and who is capable of making decisions and choosing policies that are not based on face or helping corrupt folk financially rape the country. In short they are going to have to issue whoever that person is, with a work permit.

[marko kok prong]

I doubt there will be any election ,the General seems to be enjoying himself,what impact has the lack of a elected party had on the lives of ordinary Thai's or expats,none i would say.

[renaissanc]

The choice of the new leader is simple. It will be the person who can be guaranteed to get Thaksin an amnesty; who will enrich his cronies and family; and carry out his will in all matters without question. I doubt, if Sudarat is that person.

[stephen tracy]

3 hours ago, hansnl said:

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite?

With a party owned by a clan hellbent on making the country a private playground for personal gain and using the state's money to bind the poor?

You really think that is a good thing?

You mean the Shins or the Junta?

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

While there is no doubt that the Shin family will be very influential in the party for many years to come, I truly hope that they choose an outsider, non-family member as Leader.

 

Thailand needs a party to challenge the Bangkok elite, and it would proceed much more smoothly without a Shin family member in charge.

 

Perhaps then the 'establishment' might actually have to come up with policies that attract supporters rather than whinge endlessly about the opposition.

"

Thaksin Shinawatra and his former wife Khunying Pojaman Na Pombejra. Viewed as the “real owners” of Pheu Thai, both have retained much influence in the party despite not holding official posts in its executive board."

 

Whilst the Shins pay PTP MP's a salary to do as told, appoint, promote and demote ministers, dictate policy, then the party will always be under total Shin control. 

If a non Shin is appointed, it will yet again, be another puppet figure. 

 

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

You ask for real democracy and you support the junta. What hypocrisy. 

 

Being against corrupt MP's and a system that allows a criminal to pay MP's a salary to do his bidding doesn't make him a Junta supporter.

 

Just the same as being anti non democratic governments doesn't make someone a Shin supporter. 

[halloween]

2 hours ago, smutcakes said:

If they wanted i am sure they could get access to the cabinet meeting if they were bored. Or have their proxy sit in... Have you ever been to Thailand... do you know how much power these large corporations have?

 

Last time i checked coups were illegal, so yes they do have corrupt and illegal acts taken for their benefit.

How does a coup benefit a political party?   What you're sure of without proof is irrelevant, when you have some let us know.

[smutcakes]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

How does a coup benefit a political party?   What you're sure of without proof is irrelevant, when you have some let us know.

You dont think previous coups have benefited political parties? Namely the Democrats who cannot win and election, and even more so Bhujumthai.