Pheu Thai hits out at bid to stop MPs diverting state funds

A senior Pheu Thai Party figure has criticised a decision by charter drafters to adopt a measure to prevent MPs trying to woo voters by diverting state funds for projects in their constituencies.

Former Pheu Thai MP for Chiang Rai Samart Kaewmeechai, who leads the party working group monitoring charter drafting, said yesterday he opposed the Constitution Drafting Committee’s (CDC) decision.

He accused the CDC of looking at politicians in a very negative light and of portraying them as villains looking to win office for personal gain.

The CDC must not overlook the fact that MPs are close to members of the public and their constituencies and know what people want from the government, he said.

MPs should be able to keep their right to openly debate in parliament and seek a budget allocation to fund efforts to resolve problems in their constituencies, Mr Samart said.

Money spent this way has higher chance of being monitored than funds being channelled through state agencies, some of which are known to misspend state money, according to Mr Samart.

CDC spokesman, Chartchai na Chiangmai, yesterday said charter drafters had approved a proposal to ban MPs from diverting chunks of the state budget to their constituencies during parliamentary sessions.

He said the proposed ban was aimed primarily at government MPs passing major portions of state cash to their areas.

That would be unfair to people living in constituencies controlled by the opposition, since these areas might receive less money.

Both the National Legislative Assembly and the CDC have agreed that the ban may be included in the organic law on financial discipline, he said.

“This is a new measure to improve transparency in parliament’s consideration of a budget bill,” he said.

Also, the draft charter stipulates that no money left over from adjusting the budget earmarked for state projects can be put into a central pool set aside for use for “unspecified” purposes.

If any MP is suspected of violating budget restrictions, he or she may face punitive action from the Constitutional Court if the Senate or other House of Representatives members petition the court.

The court would be required to rule on a petition within seven days after receiving it, he said.

If the court rules an MP is guilty, any related decisions reached during consideration of budget bills will automatically become invalid and the MP in question will automatically lose his or her parliamentary status. They would also face a lifetime election ban.

If the court determines that a violation was a result of dishonest intentions, such as personal gain, it may forward the case to the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office-Holders.

The court would then decide whether the MP should be subject to criminal punishment, possible asset seizure or both.

Mr Samart said he also objects to a CDC proposal requiring relatives of political position holders to declare their assets.

Such a requirement would deter good people from entering politics, he said.

People entering the political arena intending to cheat are smart enough to fool asset inspections, Mr Samart said.