The demise of PDP, who is to blame?
Olarn Seriniyom
It now seems inevitable that the PDP will end up with only 3 to 6 MPs after
next Sunday, and thus be relagated to the sidelines of the Thai political
arena. The fall of the PDP is only a little less spectacular than its rise.
Who is to blame for the changes in the PDP's fortune? How has Bangkok's most
popular party, headed by BKK's most popular MP, sunk so low?
"Tactical voting" is often cited as the reason why Bangkokians will not vote
PDP on Sunday. Chaovalit-phobia has reached almost epidemic proportions. Yet
if I'm not mistaken, tactical voting is a new concept for Thailand, and the
PDP's popularity had declined sharply well before the dissolution of the last
government, so it seems to me improbable that tactical voting is the main
reason why Bangkokians will not be voting PDP.
Is it Chamlong's fault that his party has lost its way? I think he is at
least partly to blame, because the PDP was always Chamlong's party, and
Chamlong was the sole reason for the PDP's pass successes. Without Chamlong,
the legendary Mr Clean, many voters simply don't have a reason to vote PDP
any more. Other than Chamlong, the PDP never had any distinguished,
reputable and charismatic individuals among its members, and although great
efforts were made to promote the image of Thaksin, it is hard to classify
the man's political career thus far as anything but an abject failure.
Are other parties, particularly the Democrats, responsible for sabotaging the
PDP? I guess there are probably a number of people in SCT, well, two any way,
who might be willing to believe that by systematic lying and deceptions the
DP has brought down the PDP. Even if this was the case, for another party to
have brought the PDP crashing down so easily and effectively must mean that
the PDP's foundation was already so badly rotted away that only the slightest
push was required. Besides, other than raising the totally legitimate
question of Thaksin's business interests and their conflicts with his
political duties, the opposition never mounted much of an attack on the PDP.
Can it be then that the blame lies at Thaksin's door? Thaksin entered
politics as a non-elected minister for foreign affairs, and as such he
accomplished very little of substance, but he may be forgiven for this
because he was a new boy, his tenure was only a few months, and most Thais
see that particular ministry as relatively unimportant any way. Thaksin's
election campaign at the last election was a great personal success, the
question why a hugely successful multimillionaire would really want to
become an influential political figure overnight never seemed to cross most
people's mind. Many people probably gave him the vote because they admired
Thaksin's spectacular business success, and perhaps hoped that he would do
the same for his country. Does it not seem now more than a little naive to
think that someone like Thaksin would actually put Thailand's national
interest above his own financial interests? After all, this is _not_ how he
got where he is today in the business world surely? By being selfless?
Thaksin disappointed Bangkokians from day 1 of the last government by
allying with Chart Thai rather than joining the Democrats, the PDP's previous
political partner, in the Opposition. Perhaps Thaksin's motivation was to
fix things "from the inside" but if so, he gave little sign that he was
going to fix anything. He went around Bangkok looking at a few roads, express-
ways and bridges, then sat on his hands with his thumb seemingly up his
proverbial for as long as he could until the government lost any little
credibility or respectability it ever had, then he bailed out, but too late
to salvage his party's popular standing. The PDP is now "advertising" that
it wants to get in to the next government to "truad sob" or monitor
it on behalf of the people. If the PDP sees this as its role, why did it
not do so in the last government? It should have been the PDP who stood up
at the last no-confidence debate to give evidence _against_ the Banharn
administration. As an ex-member of the government coalition, the PDP was in
a position to help expose the misdeeds of Chart Thai, or if Banharn was
innocent, the PDP should have presented any evidence it had in support of
Banharn. If the PDP stood for the truth, why did it just sit quietly during
the censure debate?
The fact that PDP were too slow to quit the government, had nothing to say
during the crucially important debate, and were even reluctant to vote
against Banharn is to my mind evidence that either Thaksin had completely
lost touch with the electorate, or never had any intention of working for
the electorate in the first place.
Instead of the PDP, it was left to the Democrats to do what Bangkokians wanted
done in parliament: to get rid of the Banharn administration. Can there be
any surprises then that Bangkokians have switched their allegiance to the
Democrats? The PDP, representing the majority of Bangkokians, had failed in
their duty to work the will of the voters; the Democrats had achieved in
parliament what Bangkokians wanted to see happen, and that's how and why the
Democrats deserve the votes of Bangkok.
If Chamlong was still at the helm of the PDP during the last government can
any one imagine him sitting idly the way Thaksin did while Banharn and co
plundered the national coffers? Can you imagine Chamlong sitting quietly
at the back like a coward while the opposition tore into the government with
damning evidence of fraud and corruption?
Thaksin did not have the will, and he did not have the guts. He should have
given clear signs to the voters that he was firmly on the side of the people
against a corrupt government. Had he done so like a true statesman and
helped the Democrats bring down Banharn in no uncertain fashion, him and his
party would not find themselves in the position they are in today. Many
Bangkokians want to vote PDP, Thaksin made the PDP unelectable.
Perhaps
realising that he would be rejected should he try again in Bangkok, Thaksin
does not even have the courage to run for MP. Yes, he claims that politics
is too dirty for his fair hands and he would only come back when things have
improved, but please, who is he trying to kid? Has anybody actually fallen
for this line?
I am sorry to see the end of the PDP, once the hope of Bangkok, as a serious
political party. Someone is to blame for dragging them down, and please, if
you know who is to blame, share it with us.
Olarn
PS. The Democrats have been accused (here in SCT) of using false evidence and
lies in the last censure debate to bring down Banharn. Agreed there is room
for doubt in the authenticity of some of the evidence, but at least the
Democrat speakers had the courage to risk legal prosecutions and even personal
safeties in the performance of their duty as the opposition, unlike the PDP
who didn't even know where they themselves stood, and could only sat there
quietly like the miserable cowards that they are.
Varodom Toochinda
Olarn Seriniyom (ol...@mozart.inet.co.th) wrote:
: It now seems inevitable that the PDP will end up with only 3 to 6 MPs after
: next Sunday, and thus be relagated to the sidelines of the Thai political
: arena. The fall of the PDP is only a little less spectacular than its rise.
: Who is to blame for the changes in the PDP's fortune? How has Bangkok's most
: popular party, headed by BKK's most popular MP, sunk so low?
As before you've made a through analysis about Thai political system
which I believe the majority (esp. Bangkokians) would agree. Firstly I
would say this incident is not new for a party that only has MPs mainly
in BKK. Samak would now say "It's your turn."
It's worth to say a little bit about Chamlong. He often stated he would
like to see PDP as a good party without attaching it to any particular
person, something he seemed to have never achieved. He himself even
experienced the defeat in his last struggle. Nevertheless, I am always
indebt to him for many things he did in the past; the tip of a spear is
the most likely part to be broken.
The PDP party : Yes, my sincere sympathy to them. Compared to other
long-established and experienced parties they simply cannot compete. It
is interesting, though, to note that this party were often caught in the
situation where any direction of their moves will cause some loss of support.
It's somehow difficult to make a good decision in that kind of deadlock.
They are troublemakers if they precipitously vote against the coalition's
decision in every seemingly-inappropriate issue. On the contrary, giving
support only results in more severe impact.
My opinion differs in one aspect that quiet MPs aren't necessarily the
ones who *do* nothing. There are a few fellows out there I believe who
allow their work to speak for themselves (is this too optimistic?), as
opposed to those who spend most of their effort on "airtime." (This is
not too pessimistic.)
Democrats, *IMO*, they are really,really good in talking and are skillful
in taking advantages of others' deficiencies. Their performance as doers
are still doubtful to me, unfortunately, and like some other people here
I wish to see some improvements in their upcoming term. (Surprisingly, we
give someone chance after chance while strongly prohibit some another.:))
I repeat this is just my opinion and apologize for those who feel offended.
Thaksin: I am unable to judge him correctly with my watching from a
distance and with that short period of his political career. He is a
successful businessman, and I think that 's the main reason he arrogantly
came up with that promise about the traffic. Now he may have already
learnt his lesson. If God gave a decent politician a magic wand with
three wishes, he/she should ask for some dozens more (or a refillable
one) to make a dramatic change in Thai politics.
Finally, I would like to encourage anyone who initially decides to to go
for PDP but are somehow wavered by teemingly DP supporters. They are still a
good one. I myself would definitely be an outliner and vote for PDP if I
were there. And it is not necessary that they have to win (so no need for me
to reserve a hospital :) ). Why bother to waste time and money in an
election anyway if we have to surrender to the so-called "tactical voting"?
Just dare to be different.
Cheers,
Dew.
Peter Srisavasdi
Khun Olarn:
You gave a good analysis of what went wrong with the PDP after
Jamlong left and that Taksin was an "abject failure" in politics
at the expense of the popularity of the PDP as well.
I couldn't agree more with your analysis, and it goes to show
that "moral authority" was the true underpinning of the PDP's
strength during Jamlong's days. Taksin does not have this
"moral credibility" and "moral leadership" as far as the
Bangkokians can see. Look at the way he promised to fix Bangkok
traffic problem in no time and then left under the pretense
that he didn't like joining Bunharn's coalition government.
After few days, he must have had second thoughts as a good
businessman who does not want to make enemies, and then gave
a bottle of expensive wine to Bunharn and a fancy car to
another Chart Thai's party boss -- a deep insult to all the
poor Thais who were watching the political scenes.
What about the extra bonuses that Taksin made himself a hero
among low-salaried and hard-working traffic policemen?
Anybody knows if the bonus that Taksin promised to the traffice
police ever came true?
Peter
--
1
Varodom Toochinda
Peter Srisavasdi (as...@lafn.org) wrote:
:
: What about the extra bonuses that Taksin made himself a hero
: among low-salaried and hard-working traffic policemen?
:
: Anybody knows if the bonus that Taksin promised to the traffice
: police ever came true?
Khun Peter,
I do not attempt to defend Thaksin or discuss about his previous life;
only have a comment about how "poor" this millionaire perform in politics.
We may have to accept one fact in our system comprising many factions
(and so often that in one faction thare are groups/subgroups etc.) It is
unlikely that a party leader with members of 30-40 or so can do any good
in there.
Why? I think I don't have to elaborate. Chamlong knew this very well. In
his first term as BKK governor he could do almost nothing because those
Sor Gor and Sor Kor (don't know the words in Eng.) were from their
competitors. Until his next term that he had more power and support to do
what he intended.
This is why I blame neither Chamlong nor Thaksin for their role in
the government. We have never allowed them to perform in their full
capacity.Worse, among, say, 40 PDPs at a period of time, how many
that they can manage and have total support and how many that 're in
recalcitrant mode? So better criticize them for their failure to build a
strong and dependable party. For their achievements there are more
factors to take into consideration. That is, to apply the weight properly.
If Thaksin or Chamlong is a PM and has 100+ PDPs in the paliament but
still cannot do what they promise, however insane it appears, I will rush
to be the first one to blame them, in fact much more severly than any
other party on earth.
I am not prejudiced in criticizing DPs more than PDPs in the past. Last
time Democrats government had around 80 MPs. What did they achieve? (except
the deforestation that seemed outstanding). I am watching Mr.Leekpai very
closely this time ...
Regards,
Dew.
Sanpawat Kantabutra
Palang Dharma is no longer the power of Dharma. Without Khun Chumlong,
this party turned ugly. -sanpawat
Suthi Sirinarrin
On Sat, 16 Nov 1996 03:07:01 GMT, as...@lafn.org (Peter Srisavasdi)
wrote:
>that he didn't like joining Bunharn's coalition government.
>After few days, he must have had second thoughts as a good
>businessman who does not want to make enemies, and then gave
>a bottle of expensive wine to Bunharn and a fancy car to
>another Chart Thai's party boss -- a deep insult to all the
>poor Thais who were watching the political scenes.
>
>What about the extra bonuses that Taksin made himself a hero
>among low-salaried and hard-working traffic policemen?
>
>Anybody knows if the bonus that Taksin promised to the traffice
>police ever came true?
>
>Peter
Taksin is nothing but one more shewd businessman who made it big
through bribes, slick talks and more bribes to governmental officials
and crooked politicians when he started his business and during the
time he worked for the Police Department. With that kind of
experience, I am not surprised to see the downfall of PDP under his
leadership. Chamlong and the rest of the Bangkokians simply were
illusioned by this seemingly capable and a self-made billionnaire.