The proposals call for a new strategic committee to be set up to solve problems of Bangkok’s metropolitan areas and that new “community district committees” replace the city’s existing district councils.

The recent proposals by the National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) are to partly reconstruct the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA). But, they have drawn concern from former elected representatives that they could centralise power and distance the bodies from public engagement.

The ideas are part of a proposed amendment to the BMA bill by the NRSA in an attempt to revamp the specially administrated area whose governors, unlike other provinces, had been elected since 1985, with the exception of the current governor, who was appointed by the junta last year.

The proposals recently received a green light from Cabinet and were given to the BMA for further consideration.

General Nakorn Sukprasert, a member of the NRSA’s local administration reform committee, believed the new strategic committee could efficiently integrate the BMA with other state agencies to tackle problems such as floods and loaded drainage systems.

That is why the prime minister is needed to head the strategic committee, which would also include ministers plus the Bangkok governor and the BMA permanent secretary, Nakorn said.

Bangkok’s directly elected district councils must also be eliminated, he said, giving three reasons for this.

Firstly, council members are representatives from groups for political benefit and they tend to exploit the councils for their own good rather than public interest, he said.

Secondly, they represent political groups. And, thirdly, they scrutinise district directors and deprive them of administrative independence.

The councils would be replaced by community district committees, to maintain ties between bureaucratic officials and the civil sector.

Committee members would come via an indirect election, under which experts from various professions and civil society groups would each select representatives.

Headed by a district director, the 20 members would have two-year terms and stay for no more than two consecutive terms.

The same method would also be used to acquire four fifths of the Senate, as stipulated in the new charter.

“This method would ensure that members serving at district levels come from various backgrounds,” Nakorn said. “There would be a chance that they are political nominees, but I believe that they would be scrutinised by local residents. Nothing would come easy to their hands like how it used to be.”

Establishment of the committee would be in line with Articles 78 and 253 of the charter draft, stipulating public engagement in national development and local administration, he said.

‘Anonymous rejection’

However, former representatives of Bangkok districts doubted that the ideas would really encourage the public to take part in the administration.

“At least public hearings should be held, whether people like this change to the councils,” Pipat Lappratthana, a former councillor for Bang Rak district, said. “I also wonder how members of that new committee will communicate with people, given that they are not elected by local people.”

Former Democrat Party councillor Itthichai Paisinsomboon also thought that eliminating the city councils would cut a connection with the public.

“More than 90 per cent of the council members are local people. They know local identities and livelihoods well,” he said “On the other hand, the new community committee would be steered by an appointed district director. Its members might also prioritise their communities on an agenda.”

Former Democrat MP for Bangkok Wilas Chanpitak said the city councils should stay in place, functioning like district-level forums, and authorised to take some powerful decisions, such as budget usage.

Wilas also doubted the capacity of community district committees, given their members would not be elected by the public.

Former Pheu Thai MP for Bangkok Polpoom Wipatpoomiprathet agreed that whatever selection method was used, it could not ensure that members were free from influence. Elected councils, which act merely as advisers to district directors, should continue to exist, he said.