PM asks public to back Sino-Thai deal
Arkhom denies project risks loss of territory
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has appealed for public support for the Thai-Chinese high-speed railway project to help it get off the ground, while reiterating that his Section 44 order to speed up construction is in the country’s best interests, not a special favour to China.
The prime minister’s comments came amid mounting criticism against his Section 44 order, which was issued to clear legal hurdles for Chinese operators to press ahead with the construction of the 179-billion-baht Bangkok-Nakhon Ratchasima train project after lengthy delays.
The prime minister insisted that Thai companies will be allowed to participate in the project and that the process to recruit local operators will be done in accordance with the law, including taking bids for contracts.
The prime minister stressed that the railway project is necessary in order to develop a network of interconnecting transport routes across the country.
“We have to consider lasting benefits that the project will bring, especially economic benefits that will occur in areas along the rail route, not just considering income from passengers,” Gen Prayut said.
He gave assurances that the public will not be short changed on the benefits they were promised from the project. “Just let the Thai-Sino rail project materialise,” the prime minister said.
According to Gen Prayut, details of the rail project have already been explained and discussions held to clarify matters relating to engineers and technology transfer, with the Council of Engineers and the Architect Council of Thailand giving their consent.
Gen Prayut said domestic funding for the project is still sufficient and that China has not forced Thailand to take out a loan, the prime minister said.
Transport Minister Arkhom Termpittayapaisith yesterday said the project will be divided into two parts and invested in accordingly — civil and infrastructure work, which account for 75%, and rails and trains, which includes signalling and operation systems, accounting for 25%.
The civil works will be operated by local contractors while the second part will be done by China.
The ministry will propose the contract to the cabinet for approval this month. The construction is expected to commence in August or September.
He insisted that the rail project will not result in Thailand losing its sovereignty or territory to China as claimed.
The project belongs to the Thai government, which has the country’s best interests at heart he said, while insisting that no land would be divided for China to manage.
It was reported previously that China requested the holding rights for land along the tracks for commercial purposes.
Thailand will make its own investment to protect its rights on the use of land covering station areas and areas along the rail route, which is under the supervision of the State Railway of Thailand, Mr Arkhom said.
China has also accepted a condition to transfer technology and provide details of the construction’s design to Thai personnel, he assured.
Sumet Ongkittikul, a researcher at the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), said the government should not approve the Thai-Sino rail project without thoroughly considering the impact. There is a risk of the route overlapping with the Thai-Japanese high-speed railway in the north of Thailand, he said.
He said in his commentary in Post Today yesterday, “The issue that has not been concluded is the overlapping route of the two prospective projects from Bangkok to Ayutthaya province because the two routes would share the same starting point in Bangkok.”
The Thai-Sino railway will run from Bangkok to the northeastern province of Nakhon Ratchasima, while the Thai-Japanese project will go north from Bangkok to Chiang Mai. There has not been any decision on how or whether to share the infrastructure or rail track between the two high-speed train routes, he said.
Mr Sumet said based on the signal that the government gave via the approval of Section 44, Thailand will have at least two high-speed rail systems.
“From an economic standpoint, having two different railway systems will require higher operating costs and make it more difficult to develop two networks rather than running a single system.”
He said that the government should think through the following issues before approving the construction of the Thai-Sino railway, including whether the high-speed train is necessary for Thailand.
Gen Prayut invoked Section 44 to expedite the Thai-Chinese high-speed railway line between Bangkok and Nakhon Ratchasima and enable work to begin this year.
The order instructs the State Railway of Thailand to hire a Chinese state enterprise contractor to facilitate and supervise the railway line construction. The company must be certified by China’s National Development and Reform Commission.
As Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha’s government pushes for the Thai-Sino high-speed train project by invoking special powers under Section 44, questions over transparency and possible breaches of ethics have come to the fore.
With the use of this special section under the interim charter, the regime can bypass relevant laws seen as stumbling blocks that hinder the project’s progress. Of the total nine laws that will be sidestepped, seven were promulgated to ensure transparency and fairness in state procurement and two others involve the employment of foreigners in the project.
It’s ironic that a government that vowed to stick to accountability, transparency and good governance in all state projects from the first day it took office would ignore legislation to accommodate Chinese operators. Let’s not forget that this very government suspended several state officials and politicians from duty for failing to comply with those seven laws. If my memory serves me right, Gen Prayut always said everyone in the country falls under the same laws.
The regime claims this high-speed train project has been developed under government-to-government (G2G) initiatives, for which there is no bidding process, and China is to be granted the train system development.
But the fact is the budget for the Bangkok-Nakhon Ratchasima rail project, which accounts for some 179 billion baht, is tax money. Should tax payers not be guaranteed their money be used transparently? The bypassed laws were the tools to ensure the transparency of expenditure.
We appreciate the regime’s assurances that Thai engineers and architects will be allowed to take part in the project development for the sake of technological absorption and transfer.
But the issue of ethics and transparency is equally — if not more — important.
The invocation of Section 44 prompts some people to compare the Prayut project to the one proposed by the Yingluck Shinawatra administration.
Like it or not, it’s obvious the project proposed under the Yingluck government, which encompassed the same 256-kilometre route, seemed far better in terms of efficiency and transparency.
The Yingluck version, as handled by former transport minister Chadchart Sittipunt, would have cost 140 billion baht, against Hen Prayut’s 179 billion. Under the Yingluck administration, the rail track was included in a mega-infrastructure development package and proposed to parliament for consideration.
As the Yingluck government lost the trust of the middle class, its 2-trillionbaht loan bill to finance the package was shot down by the Constitutional Court.
Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand (ACT) director Mana Nimitmongkol questioned through a Facebook post the government’s waiving of the anti-hoarding law for this project. He said hoarding activities in state procurements, if allowed to happen, are considered severe corruption.
The difference between the train project of this government and that of Yingluck’s is that the previous administration’s project was open to all legal
examination mechanisms and underwent international bidding, which would provide the country with the best offer.
Mr Mana pointed out that major transport infrastructure projects need thorough study and careful management for the sake of transparency and longterm worthiness.
I have tried to understand why the government decided to use its special powers to overrule nine laws to push the project, and have found the move acceptable in some aspects.
Following the 2014 coup, Thailand found itself isolated by Western countries while China, in an attempt to expand its influence in Asean and fill the gap left by the United States, showed a friendlier response to the political change.
As a result, the Prayut government has become more dependent on Beijing.
The Prayut government granted the whole 615-km Bangkok-Nong Khai rail project to China in late 2014.
However, negotiating the project has not been as friendly as expected. The project was delayed by almost three years. Key hurdles included China’s demand to hold land rights along the route for commercial purposes, which was rejected by Thailand. China also turned down Thailand’s request to bring down the interest rate to help finance the project. Another issue that hindered the project is the issuing of professional licences for 300 Chinese engineers working on the project.
This project was supposed to have been scrapped due to failed negotiations. It was retained only because the regime wants to keep it as a symbol of Thai-Chinese cooperation. The government decided to finance the project using the national budget and to shorten the route to Bangkok-Nakhon Ratchasima during the first stage. China will carry out some construction works, and the selling of equipment, materials, trains and
signalling systems for the project.
What is touted as Thai-Sino cooperation exists only in name. In practice, it is tantamount to Thailand hiring Chinese operators to develop a system at a high cost, especially compared to prices international bidding would (and have) yielded.
It is believed the Prayut government has maintained this project in an effort to please China, hoping that Thailand will remain on Beijing’s radar and can benefit from China’s One Belt, One Road initiative, as well as other regional economic development schemes.
It may seem justifiable for the regime to accelerate the project. But it is necessary that the regime restores trust among citizens, particularly to ensure transparency and accountability when the laws that govern transparency are voided.
Soonruth Bunyamanee is deputy editor, Bangkok Post.