PM’s questions are on a journey to nowhere
In May, Prime Minister Prayut Chano-cha posed four questions to the public and invited them to leave written replies at Damrongtham centres throughout the country. His questions were: 1. Do you think the next election will usher in a government that has good governance? 2. If not, what to do? 3. Elections are an important element of democratic rule, but is it right if an election does not take into consideration the future of the country and other issues such as reforms and national strategies? 4. Do you think politicians who misbehave should be allowed to contest the election?
Months down the track, we still don’t know the results of the survey. The government has not released a report on the outcome. Are the Damrongtham centres unable to sum up the report? But nobody seems to care, even the prime minister himself.
Well, we may have a clue as to why no report has emerged. A survey from Suan Dusit Poll of more than 1,000 respondents about the PM’s questions found 84% of them said they didn’t visit the Damrongtham centres to answer the questionnaire.
Now, the prime minister has posed six new questions to the public which have provoked criticism from politicians of both the Pheu Thai and Democrat parties that the government is trying to extend its hold on power
It is not very often that the two political rivals share a common disdain on anything, but the PM’s politically motivated move has prompted just that.
Assuming that readers are already aware of the prime minister’s six questions, I will not go into detail about what he asked. What I would like to raise here is: What’s the point of this survey if the results, like the last ones, are never announced?
The Damrongtham centres still stick to the impractical method of inviting respondents to go to the centres to answer the questions despite the fact only a small fraction of people, about 16%, are expected to participate in this exercise, judging by the result of the Suan Dusit
Poll. Suffice to say the opinion survey looks doomed.
So, the prime minister must make sure the outcome of this survey will be released for public acknowledgement — and not swept under the rug.
Now, the six questions themselves are too many. They can be summed up as just two simple questions. 1. Do you want Prime Minister Prayut and his “band of brothers” to stay on after the election? If not, why? 2. Are you satisfied with the performance of his administration for the past three years? If not, why?
After three years in the corridors of political power, it is not unusual for the ex-generals or other people to be consumed by the trappings that come
with that power. No need to hide political ambition as it is not a bad thing as long as you play by the fair rules.
The ex-generals can set up their own party or bring the small and mid- sized parties under one umbrella to contest the next election.
There is no law against such a thing. But if they care to look back at history, concerning the formation of the Seri Manangkhasila Party by Field Marshal Pibulsonggram, the Saha Prachathai Party by Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn, the Samakkhitham Party by Gen Suchinda Kraprayoon, they will learn a lesson about why military parties or military-supported parties have tended to be rejected by Thais.
Only Gen Prem Tinsulanonda succeeded in a political career and was prime minister for eight years, without a party of his own, because he was widely accepted and respected. But none of the ex-generals in the government or the National Council for Peace and Order enjoy Gen Prem’s high status although Prime Minister Prayut has enjoyed periods when he was widely accepted. Unfortunately, the “bad apples” in his inner circle erode public trust and confidence in his leadership as evident in the latest opinion survey which shows a plunge in the popular rating of his administration.
In the meantime, the prime minister will have to deal with an increasing outcry from parties over the ongoing ban on political activities. They are not to blame for making noise because the prime minister has not honoured his promise to lift the ban after the end of the royal cremation ceremony on Oct 26 and the mourning period on Oct 30. His excuse that there are still two organic laws which are yet to be finished rings hollow.
The question is how long can he keep the lid on such political pressures, given his own government’s declining popularity and the public’s evident desire to try something new?