SIDELINES: Gutter politics triumph as cronyism reigns supreme
Published on May 23, 2004
The Nation
The three-day no-confidence grilling of eight Cabinet members, which ended late on Friday night, marred by senseless protests from House hecklers, confirmed once again that our style of gutter politics remains unchanged. After three years of so-called reform, the new politics proclaimed by Thai Rak Thai party are hardly evident.
On the contrary, Thai Rak Thai MPs have become audacious in their attempts to interrupt Democrat MPs looking to take their targeted Cabinet members to task ? for misdeeds and mischief-making, systematic conflict of interest and patterns of crony capitalism designed to benefit the businesses owned by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra?s family.
Most of the accusations were directed at our CEO and his multi-billion-baht business empire. The Democrats have exposed how Cabinet members had devised the ways and means, at times not too subtly, to hand sweetheart deals to their boss?s family businesses.
Were our politics not stuck in the gutter and the majority of the populace not addled by a desire for the handouts and freebies distributed through the government?s populist schemes, our CEO and his pals would have found it difficult to survive the social and moral outrage.
Our CEO appeared only briefly during the three-day debate. He always shuns the House chamber, regarding it as the venue for routine sparring between two factions of verbal gladiators. Of course, he was attentive in the back room, sizing up the extent of the damage inflicted upon him and his family members.
The Democrats did not disappoint. They took turns telling the public how our CEO?s business interests had benefited greatly from the efforts of his friends in the Cabinet.
They described how his wife had won a land auction with two other bidders present just to dispel suspicion. The sweetheart deals, already familiar to the people who chart how our CEO?s business empire has been expanding, are truly embarrassing.
They are evidence of ugly crony capitalism. Marcos must have turned in his grave with envy. Suharto must have given a big thumbs-up for such a spectacular achievement in such a short time despite the public outrage, which was feeble compared with the naive support emanating from the gullible, rural grassroots.
The debate was no smooth sailing for the Democrats. House hecklers from the government camp were effective with their noisy protests, making the people wonder whether these Thai Rak Thai MPs, paid by taxpayers, work for the public interest or for the family of their political boss. There were reports that hecklers who rescued their patrons from tight spots could earn rewards of Bt50,000 to Bt80,000.
That?s why there were hundreds of examples of disdainful protests and heckling during the censure, even during the conclusion presented by Jurin Laksavisit, a key Democrat member, who rubbed more salt into the wounds of the censure targets and our CEO. Actually, his wrap-up did very severe damage to Thaksin and his family. It was far more effective and convincing than the charges made by other Democrats.
Thaksin did not show up to defend himself or to deny that the mentioned lucrative sweetheart deals took place. Doing so would certainly have led to a free-for-all debate about his role in such deals and how crony capitalism benefits his business empire, notably the prosperity of Air Asia and the decline of Thai Airways International and the lower revenue of the Telephone Organisation of Thailand compared with the rapid and profitable growth of his mobile phone business.
He chose his own venue to hit back at the opposition ? yesterday?s radio talk show, during which he lambasted his adversaries for distortions without saying what they were.
He did not bother to deny the accusations, or defend his honour with a point-by-point argument. Instead he sought sympathy from his supporters, telling them that the whole exercise in the House was politics as usual, with him and his family members as prime targets.
Sure the debate was a painful reality that Thaksin had to endure, despite his best efforts to dodge a censure motion against him by taking advantage of a Constitutional provision requiring at least 200 MPs to support a move against the PM.
Still, the Democrats got more than they had originally bargained for from their strategic forays behind the protective wall of hecklers. The reward was handsome after such a long wait.
What can we deduce from these three days? They were a real eye opener for many people, who now understand how crony capitalism benefits politicians in power. If they remain indifferent, it is easy to see what kind of future this country will face.
What?s more, we also see, with misery and outrage, that shamelessness and hypocrisy remain the ultimate weapons for politicians to use against adversity.
Sopon Onkgara
Published on May 23, 2004
The Nation
The three-day no-confidence grilling of eight Cabinet members, which ended late on Friday night, marred by senseless protests from House hecklers, confirmed once again that our style of gutter politics remains unchanged. After three years of so-called reform, the new politics proclaimed by Thai Rak Thai party are hardly evident.
On the contrary, Thai Rak Thai MPs have become audacious in their attempts to interrupt Democrat MPs looking to take their targeted Cabinet members to task ? for misdeeds and mischief-making, systematic conflict of interest and patterns of crony capitalism designed to benefit the businesses owned by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra?s family.
Most of the accusations were directed at our CEO and his multi-billion-baht business empire. The Democrats have exposed how Cabinet members had devised the ways and means, at times not too subtly, to hand sweetheart deals to their boss?s family businesses.
Were our politics not stuck in the gutter and the majority of the populace not addled by a desire for the handouts and freebies distributed through the government?s populist schemes, our CEO and his pals would have found it difficult to survive the social and moral outrage.
Our CEO appeared only briefly during the three-day debate. He always shuns the House chamber, regarding it as the venue for routine sparring between two factions of verbal gladiators. Of course, he was attentive in the back room, sizing up the extent of the damage inflicted upon him and his family members.
The Democrats did not disappoint. They took turns telling the public how our CEO?s business interests had benefited greatly from the efforts of his friends in the Cabinet.
They described how his wife had won a land auction with two other bidders present just to dispel suspicion. The sweetheart deals, already familiar to the people who chart how our CEO?s business empire has been expanding, are truly embarrassing.
They are evidence of ugly crony capitalism. Marcos must have turned in his grave with envy. Suharto must have given a big thumbs-up for such a spectacular achievement in such a short time despite the public outrage, which was feeble compared with the naive support emanating from the gullible, rural grassroots.
The debate was no smooth sailing for the Democrats. House hecklers from the government camp were effective with their noisy protests, making the people wonder whether these Thai Rak Thai MPs, paid by taxpayers, work for the public interest or for the family of their political boss. There were reports that hecklers who rescued their patrons from tight spots could earn rewards of Bt50,000 to Bt80,000.
That?s why there were hundreds of examples of disdainful protests and heckling during the censure, even during the conclusion presented by Jurin Laksavisit, a key Democrat member, who rubbed more salt into the wounds of the censure targets and our CEO. Actually, his wrap-up did very severe damage to Thaksin and his family. It was far more effective and convincing than the charges made by other Democrats.
Thaksin did not show up to defend himself or to deny that the mentioned lucrative sweetheart deals took place. Doing so would certainly have led to a free-for-all debate about his role in such deals and how crony capitalism benefits his business empire, notably the prosperity of Air Asia and the decline of Thai Airways International and the lower revenue of the Telephone Organisation of Thailand compared with the rapid and profitable growth of his mobile phone business.
He chose his own venue to hit back at the opposition ? yesterday?s radio talk show, during which he lambasted his adversaries for distortions without saying what they were.
He did not bother to deny the accusations, or defend his honour with a point-by-point argument. Instead he sought sympathy from his supporters, telling them that the whole exercise in the House was politics as usual, with him and his family members as prime targets.
Sure the debate was a painful reality that Thaksin had to endure, despite his best efforts to dodge a censure motion against him by taking advantage of a Constitutional provision requiring at least 200 MPs to support a move against the PM.
Still, the Democrats got more than they had originally bargained for from their strategic forays behind the protective wall of hecklers. The reward was handsome after such a long wait.
What can we deduce from these three days? They were a real eye opener for many people, who now understand how crony capitalism benefits politicians in power. If they remain indifferent, it is easy to see what kind of future this country will face.
What?s more, we also see, with misery and outrage, that shamelessness and hypocrisy remain the ultimate weapons for politicians to use against adversity.
Sopon Onkgara
posted by Bob Boonhod @ 1:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home