Regime makes hay while sun shines
Critics see new govt-led campaign as veiled populism, write Aekarach Sattaburuth and Wassana Nanuam
As the general election approaches, critics say a government-led plan to stimulate the economy from the grassroots level is being used as a vehicle to canvass support for the regime while political parties are still straitjacketed by a blanket ban on most political activities.
Launched this February, the Thai Niyom Yangyuen (sustainable Thainess) campaign aims to deliver up to 200,000 baht in cash to each of 82,371 villages across the country to develop local businesses and improve living conditions in a sustainable way.
The campaign will run for four months and was initially budgeted at 16.4 billion baht, before the government opted earlier this month to raise the total cap to 100 billion baht.
Inspired by the Chinese Communist Party’s grassroots development campaigns, state officials have been sent to gather opinions from villagers. They in turn will be invited to sit on community-level committees to oversee the execution of the various projects.
But despite the do-good sounding nature of the scheme, it has increasingly drawn opposition.
Among its critics is Nipit Intarasombat, a deputy leader of the Democrat Party who has blasted Prime Minister Prayut Chan-ocha for exploiting his wide-ranging powers under Section 44 of the charter to prevent politicians from conducting electoral campaigns of their own while the regime has freely used Thai Niyom Yangyuen to advance its own popularity.
Despite the perceived unfair advantage this hands the government, Mr Nipit said the scheme may not end up delivering to the regime the popularity it seeks.
“Only a small budget of 200,000 baht is being allocated per village. This is useless. It can’t win local people over because local politicians are too deeply entrenched in their communities already,” he said.
Even parties seen as being supportive of the military government, such as Chartthaipattana, say the campaign cannot guarantee the regime will see an overnight surge in popularity.
Varawut Silpa-archa, a key figure in the party, said the programme may have a slight impact on how villagers vote during the election, which is now expected next February.
“Building popularity and trust among the public takes time but this scheme has only just been implemented,” he said, adding that veteran politicians spend years or even decades to connect with their constituencies. His father, late prime minister Banharn Silpa-archa, is a case in point.
“My dad was a firm believer in the saying that trust cannot be given, it must be earned. It took him three or four decades to gain the support of the people of Suphan Buri,” he said.
Asked whether he saw the latest move as a political campaign, Mr Varawut said it was more important to judge it according to how much it improves the livelihoods of local people after four years of enduring a sluggish economy.
He said state officials will have to make door-to-door inquiries, thus giving them a chance to become more familiar with local villagers while getting better acquainted with their needs.
Meanwhile, politicians from the Pheu Thai Party said it smacked of double standards as the government has been quite outspoken in the past in vilifying such attempts at populism.
“Now it is following that same path, just under a different name,” said Kittirat NaRanong, deputy leader of the Pheu Thai.
He said the government had been quite shrewd in adding the word yangyuen (sustainable) to a truncated form of pracha niyom (populism) to suggest it was not a fly-by-night scheme but one that would have a lasting impact.
However, he was not convinced it will deliver on its promises and answer the true needs of people in remote provincial areas. He said many of the projects will require a bevy of regulations and some of these may prove overly complicated for villagers to observe.
“Some villagers have complained and asked why the authorities don’t just tell them what they want. This raises the question of whether officials are paying enough attention,” he said.
Choosak Sirinin, a core member of Pheu Thai, said the campaign violate the charter.
The constitution prevents a caretaker government from dipping into the budget outside of what is provided from government revenue, especially taxes, as that could affect the next elected government or even impact the election.
National Legislative Assembly (NLA) vice-chairman Peerasak Porjit said it is the government’s duty to satisfy the needs of the public.
“The scheme is acceptable if it enhances people’s livelihood, regardless of whether it’s viewed as a political campaign,” he said.
“Some of the district chiefs said they have never seen state-funded projects that position local residents as project committee members who sign off on budget receipts,” said Mr Peerasak.
Villagers in the programme are not just waiting for cash to land on them, he said.
The more than 82,000 villages go through a strict process before they can lay claim to the 200,000-baht fund. Each village can propose up to four projects but only the best two will be considered for financial assistance under the programme. The other two will be be eligible for state funding.
The government ran a month-long public hearing to gather opinions from communities, then spent another month meeting communities to draft social contracts for various projects, Mr Peerasak said.
Villagers i nvolved i n the projects attended workshops in April so there were no misunderstandings and were taught about national security, democracy, how to consume media content wisely and other social and political issues, he added.
Internal Security Operations Command spokesman Peerawat Sangthong said statelevel committees and community-level committees would keep track of how the funds were being spent.