Challenges from outside parliament
While it managed to survive the recent censure debate more comfortably that it had anticipated, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha’s government is now at a new crossroads. While the threat from inside parliament has subsided owing to the opposition’s disarray, challenges from outside the legislative chamber, on the streets and in the court of public opinion are likely to intensify.
As such, Gen Prayut’s upcoming cabinet reshuffle will be a critical barometer of his government’s longevity. A change to help the government refocus its economic management and policy responses toward key issues is now imperative, and he has to bring in seasoned individuals with capable hands while getting rid of ministers and politicians with lacklustre performances who operate under old-style patronage networks and quotas.
The prime minister should not draw the wrong lessons from the censure debate. The fact that six cabinet members received votes of confidence from more than 270 MPs in the 500-strong lower house — except Deputy Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Capt Thamanat Prompow, who was backed by 269 — wasn’t attributable to the government’s performance. It was more due to the opposition’s setbacks, from the systematic and controversial dissolution of Future Forward Party (FFP) and the lack of leadership from the apparently rudderless Pheu Thai Party.
Led by the FFP’s leaders, the opposition had been preparing an intense grilling of the government, focusing on what they deemed to be conflicts of interest, abuse of power, and shoddy policies. When the FFP was disbanded over a controversial loan issue, whereby its leader lent start-up funds to the party, 10 MPs on its executive board were banned from politics for 10 years and lost their MP status in the process. In addition, nine FFP MPs jumped ship to join a government party, reportedly enticed with financial terms. These events explain the outcome of the censure debate — changing what was initially a razor-thin government majority.
The Pheu Thai Party also indirectly boosted the government’s censure chances, first by lacking time management, ans then by not registering for final voting.
Overall, the censure debate showed a weakened FFP, which ended up with some 50-odd MPs from the 81 it garnered at the March poll, and a fragmented Pheu Thai, whose leadership appears contentious. As the future of these two main opposition parties are in doubt, there appear to be no clear parliamentary obstacles standing in the way of Prayut government’s completing its tenure.
Outside parliament is a different story, however. Spearheaded by a younger generation across nationwide campuses and high schools, rumblings are rife and mounting over Thailand’s sagging economic conditions and cloudy outlook, exacerbated by the crisis from the coronavirus (Covid-19).
Government agencies have lowered growth prospects this year to just 1-2%. A recession, or GDP contraction, for the whole of 2020 cannot be dismissed. The first half of this year may well face a technical recession of two consecutive quarters with GDP growth in negative territory.
To shore up growth in the likely post-Covid second half of the year and beyond, Gen Prayut needs to revamp his economic management team, which looks deflated and spent. This team is like a football squad with old, tired legs who have stayed on the pitch for too long.
It used to be led by Deputy PM Somkid Jatusripitak until Gen Prayut took over after the last election. With a career military general in charge of economic management, it is unsurprising that previously touted growth strategies, such as Thailand 4.0 and the Eastern Economic Corridor, have lost steam.
These schemes need a reboot. Thailand needs to generate business buzz and investor confidence after Covid jitters dissipate. Tackling the Covid aftermath along with the drought, smog and economic doldrums requires policy experts and economic technocrats who are insulated from the cut and thrust of coalition politics. As Thailand has plenty of talent, it is the prime minister’s duty to tap a clutch of fresh faces into cabinet to give the country a sense of forward movement.
Doing so will not only perk up growth prospects but also bode well for the government’s performance in the public eye. For example, young student protesters whose voices are now louder invariably cite Thailand’s dismal economy and their lack of attractive job prospects and decent future as the fuel for their discontent. Had economic prospects been more promising under the nearly five years of military government before polls last year, the ongoing student activism may not have taken root in the first place.
A cabinet reshuffle to get Thailand moving again is not just about bringing in new talent to government. It also requires putting the right people in the right jobs as far as elected politicians are concerned. As crises tend to test the mettle of leaders, the public health minister has not fared well. The public confusion caused by his recent vacillation about how to deal with high-risk Covid-19 countries showed ineptitude. One day the minister said arrivals from 11 high-risk countries and territories would face self-quarantine but the next day public health officials went the other way, saying no mandatory quarantine was planned.
Moving elected politicians around to get cabinet jobs done more competently is accompanied by the need to axe ministers who should not be there because they have lost public trust, such as Capt Thamanat, who has been convicted and jailed on drugsrelated charges in the past.
But like the public health minister, Capt Thamanat is in charge of a drove of MPs. These MPs are like quota chips for cabinet portfolios. A raw division of 500 MPs by 36 portfolios comes out to about 14. A patron with roughly this number of MP clients can claim a cabinet position, although coalition dynamics and other bargaining tools can also alter allocation considerations.
If Gen Prayut is a complete hostage to such patronage calculations, the cabinet reshuffle will likely be a disappointment, fanning the extra-parliamentary flames of dissent and opposition. But if the military man can insert more impartial policy experts to run the Thai economy at the expense of both generals and politicians, then the government may be able to buy much needed breathing space for the benefit of the country.
[Gen Prayut’s] team is like a football squad with old, tired players who have been on the pitch far too long.