He stacks the table against the opposition and still complains. If that isn't chutzpah, I don't know what is.
But did they really benefit?
Published on May 23, 2004
During last week's censure debate, the opposition did its best to meticulously assemble different pieces of an information jigsaw puzzle showing how Cabinet members allegedly abused their power to benefit the business empire of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's family.
According to the opposition, government ministers gave preferential treatment to the Shinawatra family's businesses, adding to its vast fortune in the process. Even though the affected ministers gave lengthy explanations, suspicions linger in minds of the public.
A partial list of questionable deals includes:
purchasing a prime plot of land in downtown Bangkok;
amending revenue-sharing contracts between Advanced Info Service and TOT Plc;
approving the merger of three banks, which benefited the PM's son, who is a major shareholder in one of the banks;
the PM's wife's housing project, which benefited from the construction of a new road
a compromise reached between Shin Corp's iPSTAR satellite company and the Chinese government that resulted in Thailand promising to buy ships from China.
"Some charges sound convincing that the PM's family really benefited from this government, while some charges lack strong evidence," said Prayad Hongtongkham, a veteran political scientist.
Prayad said the ministers' explanations about their connections to the PM's family were relatively acceptable. But certain charges seemed to hold some weight, particularly the non-transparent sale of the prime land to the PM's wife, Khunying Pojaman.
"The land was really unusually cheap considering its prime location, and when there was only one bid, it was controversial and inappropriate," Prayad said.
Government MPs prevented the opposition from questioning Deputy Prime Minister Suchart Jaovisidha about the transaction.
Protecting Suchart from facing the debate added creditability to the opposition's charges. It also helped convince the public the allegations might lead all the way to the PM's doorstep.
"Why did they have to protect Suchart, if they have nothing to fear from the debate?" Prayad asked.
"The decision by the House speaker to only let the opposition question the ministers about their duties in their present posts will set a precedent for future debates. It could also result in governments reshuffling cabinet positions just to avoid facing accusations in an upcoming debate," said Prayad, adding that the House should reconsider this measure.
"This unusual stuff has made it probable that ex-minister Suchart might have swept something under the carpet," Prayad said.
Suriyasai Katasila, secretary general of the Campaign for Popular Democracy said the ministers' responses regarding their treatment of the PM's family's business were evasive and unclear, which made it difficult for the opposition to link these charges to third parties. As a result, the public did not get the full stories.
Even though the opposition could not censure the PM, it did not mean the premier should ignore the public's suspicions, he said
"The PM should step out and clarify the charges. If not, it will negatively affect the PM's image and credibility. It's not in the PM's interest to remain silent or to be 'untouchable'.
"The public wouldn't care about the vote because the government has the House majority, but they would certainly like to hear more explanations from the PM himself," Suriyasai said.
Thanyaporn Kunakornpaiboonsiri
THE NATION
NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE: Defiant PM slams rivals' 'mud-slinging'
Published on May 23, 2004
Wan Noor, Adisai to face NCCC inquiries; angry Thaksin says he was the real target of opposition 'lies'
The ruling Thai Rak Thai Party's panel monitoring the three-day censure debate rated as best Deputy Prime Minister Wan Muhamad Noor Matha's rebuttals to the opposition's charges.
Transport Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit was rated poorly for his vague response to charges of abusing his authority for he benefit of the premier's family during the debates that ended Friday.
However, the premier said he saw himself as the real target of the censure debates against his eight ministers.
"Opposition members have made up stories in order to discredit me and my family. I am disheartened but I will not abandon my commitment to work hard for the people", Thaksin Shinawatra said in his weekly radio address yesterday.
Thaksin criticised the Democrats for attacking him and his family with "untrue stories" put together with piecemeal information, saying he was shocked at the outlandish lies they hurled at him.
"I have to explain to my wife and children. They now understand mud-slinging," he said.
He vowed to continue fighting poverty, strengthening the country and ensuring a better future for the younger generation.
The opposition members, he said, might rely on lies and innuendo to destroy their rivals, but he said he was confident his government would tomorrow overwhelmingly win the vote of confidence.
In another development, the National Counter Corruption Commission is scheduled to meet on Tuesday to launch inquiries into impeachment motions against Wan Noor and Education Minister Adisai Bodharamik.
The two inquiries, both of which will be headed by NCCC member Wichianchot Sukchotrat, will try to establish whether the two ministers should stand trial in the Senate.
Meanwhile, the Chat Pattana Party will vote against eight censured ministers in line with the decision of the opposition whips, party spokesman Supap Klikhachai said yesterday.
"Chat Pattana has endorsed the motion of no confidence against eight ministers and will abide by the opposition whips' decision," he said.
The vote on the censure debate is scheduled for tomorrow.
Supap ruled out speculation that his party's vote might derail a possible merger with the ruling Thai Rak Thai Party.
"One step at a time, if you will. The party is as yet in opposition," he said.
Two Chat Pattana MPs, Somchai Chatpattanasiri and Prateep Klithawet, said they would cast votes of no confidence on the grounds that the eight ministers had failed to rebut the charges against them.
But did they really benefit?
Published on May 23, 2004
During last week's censure debate, the opposition did its best to meticulously assemble different pieces of an information jigsaw puzzle showing how Cabinet members allegedly abused their power to benefit the business empire of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's family.
According to the opposition, government ministers gave preferential treatment to the Shinawatra family's businesses, adding to its vast fortune in the process. Even though the affected ministers gave lengthy explanations, suspicions linger in minds of the public.
A partial list of questionable deals includes:
purchasing a prime plot of land in downtown Bangkok;
amending revenue-sharing contracts between Advanced Info Service and TOT Plc;
approving the merger of three banks, which benefited the PM's son, who is a major shareholder in one of the banks;
the PM's wife's housing project, which benefited from the construction of a new road
a compromise reached between Shin Corp's iPSTAR satellite company and the Chinese government that resulted in Thailand promising to buy ships from China.
"Some charges sound convincing that the PM's family really benefited from this government, while some charges lack strong evidence," said Prayad Hongtongkham, a veteran political scientist.
Prayad said the ministers' explanations about their connections to the PM's family were relatively acceptable. But certain charges seemed to hold some weight, particularly the non-transparent sale of the prime land to the PM's wife, Khunying Pojaman.
"The land was really unusually cheap considering its prime location, and when there was only one bid, it was controversial and inappropriate," Prayad said.
Government MPs prevented the opposition from questioning Deputy Prime Minister Suchart Jaovisidha about the transaction.
Protecting Suchart from facing the debate added creditability to the opposition's charges. It also helped convince the public the allegations might lead all the way to the PM's doorstep.
"Why did they have to protect Suchart, if they have nothing to fear from the debate?" Prayad asked.
"The decision by the House speaker to only let the opposition question the ministers about their duties in their present posts will set a precedent for future debates. It could also result in governments reshuffling cabinet positions just to avoid facing accusations in an upcoming debate," said Prayad, adding that the House should reconsider this measure.
"This unusual stuff has made it probable that ex-minister Suchart might have swept something under the carpet," Prayad said.
Suriyasai Katasila, secretary general of the Campaign for Popular Democracy said the ministers' responses regarding their treatment of the PM's family's business were evasive and unclear, which made it difficult for the opposition to link these charges to third parties. As a result, the public did not get the full stories.
Even though the opposition could not censure the PM, it did not mean the premier should ignore the public's suspicions, he said
"The PM should step out and clarify the charges. If not, it will negatively affect the PM's image and credibility. It's not in the PM's interest to remain silent or to be 'untouchable'.
"The public wouldn't care about the vote because the government has the House majority, but they would certainly like to hear more explanations from the PM himself," Suriyasai said.
Thanyaporn Kunakornpaiboonsiri
THE NATION
NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE: Defiant PM slams rivals' 'mud-slinging'
Published on May 23, 2004
Wan Noor, Adisai to face NCCC inquiries; angry Thaksin says he was the real target of opposition 'lies'
The ruling Thai Rak Thai Party's panel monitoring the three-day censure debate rated as best Deputy Prime Minister Wan Muhamad Noor Matha's rebuttals to the opposition's charges.
Transport Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit was rated poorly for his vague response to charges of abusing his authority for he benefit of the premier's family during the debates that ended Friday.
However, the premier said he saw himself as the real target of the censure debates against his eight ministers.
"Opposition members have made up stories in order to discredit me and my family. I am disheartened but I will not abandon my commitment to work hard for the people", Thaksin Shinawatra said in his weekly radio address yesterday.
Thaksin criticised the Democrats for attacking him and his family with "untrue stories" put together with piecemeal information, saying he was shocked at the outlandish lies they hurled at him.
"I have to explain to my wife and children. They now understand mud-slinging," he said.
He vowed to continue fighting poverty, strengthening the country and ensuring a better future for the younger generation.
The opposition members, he said, might rely on lies and innuendo to destroy their rivals, but he said he was confident his government would tomorrow overwhelmingly win the vote of confidence.
In another development, the National Counter Corruption Commission is scheduled to meet on Tuesday to launch inquiries into impeachment motions against Wan Noor and Education Minister Adisai Bodharamik.
The two inquiries, both of which will be headed by NCCC member Wichianchot Sukchotrat, will try to establish whether the two ministers should stand trial in the Senate.
Meanwhile, the Chat Pattana Party will vote against eight censured ministers in line with the decision of the opposition whips, party spokesman Supap Klikhachai said yesterday.
"Chat Pattana has endorsed the motion of no confidence against eight ministers and will abide by the opposition whips' decision," he said.
The vote on the censure debate is scheduled for tomorrow.
Supap ruled out speculation that his party's vote might derail a possible merger with the ruling Thai Rak Thai Party.
"One step at a time, if you will. The party is as yet in opposition," he said.
Two Chat Pattana MPs, Somchai Chatpattanasiri and Prateep Klithawet, said they would cast votes of no confidence on the grounds that the eight ministers had failed to rebut the charges against them.
posted by Bob Boonhod @ 1:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home