AS PROSPECTIVE political partners spar over Cabinet portfolios even before a coalition government has been formed, an overwhelmingly large number of people surveyed for a poll recently said they saw the whole exercise as driven by personal rather than national interest.

More than 89 per cent of the poll respondents viewed the current government formation deliberations between coalition partners as just a matter of dividing the cake among themselves. Only 10.7 per cent said they felt the politicians had public well-being in mind.

Some 81.9 per cent said the political leaders were hitting the self-destruct button while only 18.1 per cent believed they were heading for something better.

An overwhelming 87.1 per cent of people surveyed also viewed the current political developments as illegitimate while only 12.9 per cent believed the new prime minister and government would be legitimate.

The poll was released yesterday amid uncertainty surrounding the coalition deal. It was conducted by Super Poll from Monday to Saturday last week on 1,122 people.

The poll also found that nearly three quarters, or 72.3 per cent of the respondents, were convinced by news reports of attempts to buy anti-junta MPs to vote for coup leader General Prayut Chan-o-cha to be the PM.

Some 16.2 per cent, however, said they believed it was a tactic to discredit political rivals and 11.5 per cent saw it as an attempt by MPs to increase their bargaining power.

Noppadon Kannika, director of the poll agency, advised the powers that be to quickly stabilise the situation in line with democratic ideals.

The public sentiment towards the current political leaders was negative, he said. Politicians should represent different interest groups to reduce conflict, and not themselves become a part of the conflict, the scholar added.

“A solution is that the powers that be keep the promise made to coalition parties before the PM vote last week,” Noppadon said. “Breaking the promise could be considered a soft coup, which is negative to begin with [for a new government].”

The poll director was referring to the Cabinet portfolio issue that was holding up the formation of government. Potential coalition parties reportedly were clashing over some key ministries such as Agriculture, Transport and Commerce.

The coalition leader, Phalang Pracharat, had promised prior to the vote that reinstalled Prayut as the premier to allocate them to the coalition partners but it has been backtracking.

On Saturday night, key coalition party Bhumjaithai leader Anutin Charnvirakul posted on his Facebook that the ministries were for work not for trade.

Many believe that the politician, who was also a construction tycoon, was expressing his displeasure as Phalang Pracharat was reallocating the portfolios and Bhumjaithai may not get the ministries of Transport, Tourism, and Public Health.

In response, Phalang Pracharat spokesman Thanakorn Wangboonkongchara posted sarcastically on Facebook yesterday that he agreed the ministries were for work. He added that it was not for businessmen to seek to benefit their own corporation.

In another survey, by Suan Dusit, on 1,128 people from Thursday to Saturday, 72.27 per cent of the people saw the parties as only seeking to serve their own interest, contending for ministries with huge budgets.

A majority of the poll respondents expressed disappointment that the Democrat and Bhumjaithai parties had decided to join the Phalang Pracharat-led coalition.

Nearly two-thirds of the respondents (63.32 per cent) said they were disappointed, as the decision was not in line with the Democrat Party’s ideology while 58.2 per cent said that Bhumjaithai had broken their promise to voters and thus disrespected the people’s voice.

Nearly three-quarters, or 73.65 per cent, expected the government to be short-lived.

The rest 26.35 per cent said they could complete the four-year term because the Constitution had been designed to favour them and they had the 250 senators’ support.

Pheu Thai secretary-general Phumtham Wechayachai posted on Facebook yesterday about future plans as leader of the opposition, a tumble in expectations given its strong showing in the March election.

Pheu Thai will be fighting both inside and outside Parliament, he said.

The veteran politician said it would be Pheu Thai’s duty, as the party with the most MPs and thus leading the opposition, to apply checks and balances as needed to the government.

The fight in Parliament will be difficult due to rules and regulations in place that he said give the government advantages.

The challenge ahead gives the party its second mission, Phumtham said, which is to ensure its support network is fully participating in efforts to reach long-term goals.

A network of pro-democracy people should have an aim to support constitutional amendments that benefit democracy and the country in the long term, he wrote.

“This mechanism is necessary alongside the work in the parliament,” he said. “The goal is to coordinate and create mutual understanding on not only the Constitution as legislation but also its essence – human-rights violations and inequality.”

Plan to strengthen base

He said the party also planned to broaden and strengthen its base in both rural and urban areas as well as online, and position itself as the champion of justice.

Phumtham said Pheu Thai was seeking to become an even stronger political institution.

“The party must be able to serve the public interest continuously and in the long term,” he said. “It won’t just live during the election campaign and the opening of Parliament. It will be strong and by the people’s side always.”

Future Forward, with 80 MPs the second-largest party in the opposition bloc, celebrated its first anniversary on Saturday with indications of similar moves ahead.

At the “Walk with Me, Talk with Me” event, party leaders made clear the main focus was to be much more than an opposition party. They want to strengthen it as a political institution and build massive support outside Parliament.

Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit said he was currently barred from Parliament over legal issues, but there were 79 other MPs ready to represent the public interest in the lower house.

And, although the pro-junta bloc with its solid Senate backing will dominate Parliament, Thanathorn said, Future Forward still had faith in parliamentary politics as a peaceful means to resolve conflicts and achieve national goals.

Future Forward’s plans outside Parliament, he said, entail growing stronger as a political institution and gaining more offline supporters.

“The party must be financially independent, so one day, if Thanathorn has changed [his views], Future Forward could kick him out and replace him,” the wealthy leader said, referring to himself. “This party must be bigger than Thanathorn and [other party leaders]. It must be everyone’s party.”

THE FUTURE of the country’s oldest political party, the Democrat, is gloomy, say analysts, and it’s sure to be an uphill task if it is to regain popularity after it joined the pro-junta coalition government.

The 73-year-old party suffered a humiliating setback in the March 24 election, winning only 53 seats, and not a single seat in Bangkok, a key stronghold.

Traditional Democrat support went instead to the Phalang Pracharat and Future Forward parties, while Phalang Pracharat and Bhumjaithai took command in the other Democrat base, the South.

The Democrats last week resolved to join the Phalang Pracharat-led pro-military bloc in forming a coalition government and supported junta leader Prayut Chan-o-cha’s return as prime minister.

Abhisit Vejjajiva resigns from a party-list MP last week.

Ahead of the March election, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva had declared that his party would not support Prayut’s return to power and would not ally with any “corrupt politicians”. In the wake of the trouncing at the polls, he resigned as party leader and then quit as a party-list MP when the Democrats swung to Prayut’s side.

“There is no bright future for the Democrats – the party is dying,” said Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of political science at Ubon Ratchathani University.

Its decision to join the pro-junta bloc proves that they never believed in the principles of democracy and party interest was a priority for them, he said.

Titipol said the Democrats going into the election failed to consider the more liberal outlook of the burgeoning young generation of voters.

Political observers doubt that the party can make a comeback anytime soon, a view shared by Stithorn Thananithichot, a political scientist at King Prajadhipok’s Institute.

Much depends on how well Phalang Pracharat – with which the Democrats share a support base – fares in government, Stithorn said.

“I foresee the Phalang Pracharat government hanging on until the end of their term, and that may strengthen Prayut in power. And the stronger Phalang Pracharat is, the weaker the Democrats.”

Democrat Party leader Jurin Laksanawisit announces the party will join pro-junta bloc to form a coalition government.

Yuthaporn Issarachai, a political scientist at Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, said it’s likely the Democrats will remain in disarray, but there’s scant chance of the party’s extinction.

“The road to a comeback is gloomy. It would be a tough task for them to win more seats in the next election,” he said. At best they might cling to the current 53 MPs. Dropping significantly below that figure, to say 20 seats, it would be time for a major strategy review, Yuthaporn said.

Challenges lie ahead 

Stithorn said the Democrats now face two challenges in attempting to restore their supporters’ faith.

First, if they do become a partner in the coalition government, they have to push through their own policies and do a better job of it than Phalang Pracharat. That would |foster support in the South.

And second, they should lead the drive to amend the current Constitution so that it no longer favours the military junta so overtly.

The Democrats could also take advantage of the fact that former leader Chuan Leekpai has been chosen as president of Parliament and can thus play a significant role in facilitating the amendment process, Stithorn said.

Most importantly, he added, the Democrats have to be “sincere” about the amendment, conducting the process fairly and transparently, with ample room for citizen input.

Even though the amendment would ultimately fail, lacking the support of the junta-appointed Senate, the Democrats would stand to garner public favour, having led the attempt, Stithorn said. “They need to prove that the public can rely on them.”

But Titipol was dubious that Democrats can regain support by being a government coalition partner in the hope of having a chance to make good on campaign pledges.

“This is especially likely if the Prayut government-to-be stands for a full term, because Phalang Pracharat would eventually take all the credit. They would not allow anyone to overshadow them,” he said.

A better strategy would be to withdraw from the coalition, a bold move that might be regarded as noble and enable the Democrats to survive for the long term.

Hope for change 

The younger generation of politicians have always represented hope that Thai politics can change, but this might not work in long-established parties like the Democrats.

Parit Wacharasindhu, the leader of “New Dem” group, quits the party last week.

A major concern now is how the party can move on after some members of its “New Dem” faction quit the party in disappointment over the decision to back Prayut as PM.

“I wonder who will inherit the party, because one day all the middle-aged and veteran politicians remaining will wilt away,” said Yuthaporn.

The academics agreed that its timeworn structure and conservative ideology make it too difficult to implement serious change, so they suggested that the younger members who have now left form an entirely new party.

“History has proved that new generation is unable to change the party,” Stithorn said.

“It would be easier to have the New Dem found a new party rather than fighting for change in the old one.”

Yuthaporn suggested that Abhisit join the younger faction as chief adviser to the new party.

“Politics these days is in disruption,” he said. “If old political parties won’t adapt or adjust, it’s likely they’ll face the same fate as the Democrats.”

Thailand is aiming to have one of the world’s largest state administrative centres, almost as big as the gargantuan US Pentagon outside Washington.

But the 424,000-square-metre parliament building under construction at the edge of the Chao Phraya River is over budget at Bt23 billion and years behind schedule, with the current completion date leaning towards the end of 2020.

In the meantime legislators will continue meeting at various large venues around Bangkok as needs dictate.

Once it is finished, however, the edifice known as Sappaya-Sapasathan will indeed be a sight to see.

Designed by a team led by noted architect Theeraphon Niyom, a National Artist, the building embraces elements of Buddhist and Hindu cosmology.

Its name translates as “a place to carry out good deeds” and its centrepiece golden pagoda is intended to strengthen the moral character of the politicians gathered beneath.

That noble if somewhat whimsical ambition has its roots in the political turmoil that’s divided Thai society in recent times. The need for the new building was acknowledged in mid-2008 during the short-lived Samak Sundaravej administration, an incarnation of the Thaksin Shinawatra political machine.

Its conception preceded the 2014 coup by years, but political morality is to this day widely seen in need of shoring up. Theeraphon says the spiritually uplifting aspect of the plan was overt.

“We designed the building,” he says, “with four main objectives – to salvage the spirituality of a society now in moral crisis, to represent the Thai identity, to facilitate learning and to improve relations between the state and the people.”

The idea of a “Buddhism-inspired” parliament building proved controversial among both architects and politicians when the National Assembly approved the design a decade ago. And Thai politics has only become more complex since, and perhaps even more divisive, with democracy challenged at every turn.

How then is a structural design to imbue the new parliament with “morality”?

Chatri Prakitnonthakarn, an architect and lecturer on the subject at Silpakorn University, told The Nation Weekend that he regards Parliament as one facet of democracy, but it serves no “moral function”.

“The design should reflect the principles of democracy – equality, rights and freedoms. Instead, the new parliament is being portrayed as religious architecture, which pushes the idea of Thai democracy far behind,” adds Charti, an expert on architecture of the era following the 1932 revolution.

“In politics you need checks and balances as well as good governance to control politicians’ morality.”

Chatri regards the new structure as backwards with its pre-modern design, embodying “the traditionalist revival”, rather than being a masterpiece of 21st-century Thai architecture.

The design embraces the traditional “five ideals” – nation, morality, wisdom, monarchy and the people.

The pagoda-like structure at its focus is meant to evoke Mount Phra Sumeru, home of the gods in Hindu cosmology. Generous exterior landscaping will add to the effect, and the public can visit a museum and a park with easy access from the river and the MRT.

Chatri argues, though, that turning Parliament into “a sacred place” will more likely discourage visitors.

Within the pagoda structure, the upper house (the Senate) and lower house (the House of Representatives) will deliberate.

A hall for royal functions will occupy the centre of the building and a statue of Phra Siam Thevathiraj, the country’s guardian deity, will sit on top.

Chatri compares the Bangkok design to that of the German Reichstag in Berlin, “one of the world’s best parliament buildings”.

“They kept in mind both environmental concerns and public needs,” he says. “The glass dome on top has solar panels that generate enough electricity for the building with some to spare to sell to the neighbouring community. And tourists can visit and enjoy the views of the city.”

If Thailand’s new parliament is to truly relate to the people and represent democracy, he suggests replacing the “conservative, sacred” pagoda with a more contemporary structure.

“Sacred pagodas belong in temples. The National Assembly should run another design competition with new terms of reference that promote democratic principles – equality, rights and freedoms.

“The building should elevate the power of the people. State architecture on this scale should adopt a modern style because it will become a landmark and historical evidence of Thai democracy.”

Sappaya-Sapasathan will be Thailand’s third seat of government. It replaces the 44-year-old parliament building near the Dusit Zoo, whose site has reverted to the control of the Royal Household Bureau.

The country’s first elected legislature met in the Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall at Dusit Palace in 1933, at the invitation of His Majesty King Prajadhipok (Rama VII).

But the National Assembly soon outgrew the premises. New buildings were thrice planned, but each time the government of the day was unseated before funds could be allocated.

The new government will likely be in place by next Thursday, according to sources within the Phalang Pracharat Party who spoke amid continuing uncertainty over the distribution of Cabinet portfolios.

The timeline was chosen to ensure the government is established before Thailand hosts the Asean Summit from June 20 to 23.

More than two months after the election, and days after the election of a prime minister that saw the junta leader return to office, the parties within the pro-military bloc have yet to reach agreement over ministerial positions.

Phalang Pracharat, which will lead the coalition, has reportedly insisted on controlling economy-related ministries – Agriculture, Commerce and Transport – that it had earlier agreed to allocate to key partners, the Democrat and Bhumjaithai parties.

The backtracking came after both parties announced their support for the bloc and voted for junta leader General Prayut Chan-o-cha to return as premier.

One source, a core leader in Phalang Pracharat, confirmed the previous deals had been revoked. If the Democrats and Bhumjaithai refused to accept the new arrangement, the source said, Prayut would have final say on the issue.

Phalang Pracharat leader Uttama Savanayana said in a press conference yesterday that as the prime minister, it was traditional that Prayut would make the final decision on the Cabinet.

The party yesterday also appointed its secretary-general Sontirat Sontijirawong as a broker to coordinate with partner parties on the portfolio allocation.

Sources also said the disagreement stemmed from the election of the prime minister on Wednesday, in which an absent Prayut was criticised for 12 hours before finally being approved in the vote.

In charge of the session was the Democrats’ Chuan Leekpai, who was elected House Speaker with support from the pro-junta bloc.

Phalang Pracharat decided it could not lose the crucial economic positions to its partners without suffering disadvantage, the sources said. It would also make it difficult for Phalang Pracharat to play the leading role in administration, they added.

It has been reported that if Phalang Pracharat does not gain control over the key ministries, economist Somkid Jatusripitak would withdraw from the bloc.

Fresh talks among the partners would be based on the political party system by which party executives lead the negotiations and decisions are made at party meetings, the sources said.

Prayut and deputy junta leader General Prawit Wongsuwan left their offices yesterday at about the same time midday.

Neither had official appointments for the day and it was suspected they would attend further meetings about Cabinet portfolios. Prayut does not normally leave Government House unless he has appointments scheduled elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the anti-junta bloc was preparing to form a united opposition to confront the Prayut administration in Parliament.

The Pheu Thai Party could replace its leader, Viroj Pao-in, with Chiang Mai MP Sompong Amornvivat, as it prepares for parliamentary skirmishes as the leading opposition party.

Its secretary-general, Phumtham Wechayachai, admitted on Friday that Pheu Thai began considering the leadership change after political developments landed it in opposition.

Phumtham said Sompong would be an appropriate choice for the job as an experienced parliamentarian, a good organiser and a respected figure able to lead the seven-party opposition.

But the decision would have to be made at a party meeting in July or August, he said.

The anti-junta bloc will next week meet to collaboration and effectiveness in opposition, Phumtham said.

The party’s secretary-general Phumtham Wechayachai admitted on Friday that Pheu Thai was considering the move after current political developments had put it in opposition.

Phumtham said Sompong could be an appropriate candidate.

He was a senior and had experience in the parliament, Phumtham said, adding that he was also a coordinator and a respected figure who could lead the seven-party opposition. But the decision would have to be made in the party meeting in July or August.

Next week, the anti-junta bloc will also meet to debrief and discuss how to collaborate and become an effective opposition, the Pheu Thai secretary-general said.

The timeline is to ensure that the government is set up before the country hosts the Asean Summit meeting from June 20 to 23.

More than two months after the election, and days after the successful election of the prime minister that saw the return of the junta leader, the pro-military bloc has yet to reach agreement over ministerial positions.

The Phalang Pracharat Party that will lead the coalition, reportedly insisted on keeping economy-related ministries that it had earlier agreed to allocate to key partners in the Democrat and Bhumjaithai parties. These ministries were agriculture, commerce, and transport.

The change came after both parties announced their stance to support the bloc and had voted Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha to be the PM for a second term.

A source, who was a core leader in Phalang Pracharat, said the previous deals had been cancelled. If the Democrats and Bhumjaithai would not accept the new agreement, Prayut – who was now the legitimate PM – would have the final say on the issue.

Sources also said the disagreement had stemmed from the election of the PM on Wednesday, where Prayut was grilled for 12 hours before the vote.

The house was controlled by Democrat’s Chuan Leekpai who had been elected the House Speaker with the support from the pro-junta bloc.

Phalang Pracharat decided it could not lose crucial positions to the partners or it would be at a bigger disadvantage, the sources said. It would also make the administration difficult, they added.

If Phalang Pracharat does not have control over these key ministries, economist Somkid Jatusripitak would also withdraw from bloc, it has been reported.

The new talks with the partner parties would be based on the political party system, where party executives lead the negotiations and the decisions are made in party meetings, the sources said.

On Friday, junta leaders Prayut and Gen Prawit Wongsuwan also left their offices around the same time in the middle of the day. Both did not have any planned appointments on the day and it was suspected they might have gone out to discuss Cabinet portfolios.

Prayut does not normally leave Government House unless he has scheduled appointments.

Somboon Uthaiwienkul, Chuan’s designated secretary, said the Speaker discussed the issue with Sorasak Pienvej, secretary general of the Lower House.

“The training will be held for two groups of MPs, first time MPs and veteran ones. Those for the first group will be [trained for] about two days. The training is aimed at making them learn the rules and regulations of the Parliamentary meetings, so that they can know their rights and duties so that meetings can go smoothly,” Somboon said.

MPs will learn about their duties as representatives of the people, he said, while details of the training, including when and where, are still under discussion.

Chuan’s moves come after unruly meetings of MPs and Senators on Wednesday that were widely criticised in social media.

The Lower and Upper Houses met for the first time after the March 24 general election to vote for the prime minister and their debates on who should be the next prime minister were televised nationwide.

Some first-time MPs were seen refusing to follow instructions of Chuan, a veteran MP and former premier.

One new MP asked Chuan for permission to talk when another MP was speaking in the chamber. Chuan told that MP to wait for Chuan to allow him to speak first instead of interrupting.

JUNTA CHIEF General Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday thanked parliamentarians and the general public for making him prime minister for a second term after a controversial voting session in Parliament on Wednesday night.

The general showed up at Government House as usual yesterday and appeared to be in a good mood. He even folded his hands in a wai upon meeting reporters and thanked them for support.

“Thank you, everyone,” Prayut said as he walked into the building for a meeting. “Everything stays the same.”

In a press statement, the re-appointed premier thanked the heads and members of both Houses for attending Wednesday’s vote and thanked the public for support in the March election.

Responding to critics who point out that the general’s victory was due to the support from his hand-picked 250 senators, Prayut said he had also won a majority vote in the lower house. Of the 500 votes he got, 251 came from MPs and 249 from the Senate.

Prayut insisted the Wednesday night vote had followed all the regulations, adding that he would do his best for the nation, religion, monarchy and the people.

He also thanked the 244 MPs who had voted for his opponent Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, saying they had done their job to serve the people. However, he added, it was time for everybody to unite and work together for the nation and the people.

Once Prayut was reinstalled as premier, horse-trading among political parties within the bloc picked up speed. Agreements have yet to be made, even though key partners Democrat and Bhumjaithai have already voted Prayut in as prime minister.

Questions over portfolio allocation

Apparently, portfolios offered previously have been withdrawn, and the A-list ministries of Agriculture, Commerce and Transport are still going to the pro-junta Phalang Pracharat Party, sources said.

Other positions such as deputy prime ministers and deputy ministers will also be reconsidered, sources said, adding that influential figures in the bloc would become brokers of new deals.

Democrat leader Jurin Laksanawisit said yesterday that he believes Phalang Pracharat will follow the agreement that had been reached earlier.

When asked how the Democrats would proceed if Phalang Pracharat changed the plans, Jurin said he preferred not to say anything about that at this stage, reiterating that he believes everything should follow the initial deals.

With disagreements over the portfolio and the PM election showing that the pro-junta camp had only won by a slim majority, it is expected that a Phalang Pracharat-led coalition would have a short lifespan in Parliament.

Defection is a major threat facing the new government, and with only a few MPs changing their stance, the coalition could be severely impaired.

However, political scientist Wanwichit Boonprong said the pro-junta bloc was quite united and would not swing their votes.

Like the Democrats, the expert also believes Phalang Pracharat will give contentious ministerial positions to the partner parties to keep the bloc intact. The parties will also want to stay banded together and deliver what they have promised to voters in order to maintain public trust and their political image, Wanwichit added.

The political scientist also sees a slim chance of the Parliament getting dissolved. He said the latest developments have upset a lot of voters, adding that Phalang Pracharat will possibly not want another election and will try to drag on for as long as possible.

Siripong Angkasakulkiat was the only MP of Bhumjaithai’s 51 MPs who did not follow the party’s decision to support Prayut to remain as the premier.

Siripong told reporters that he was keeping an earlier pledge to support Anutin as the prime minister.

“I could not go back to what I promised when deciding to contest in the March 24 general election,” he said.

The current Constitution says each political party competing in a general election has to reveal its candidates for the premiership.

Anutin said Siripong gave no warning that he intended to abstain.

The abstention will not have any impact on Siripong as it was his right despite the fact that he went against the party’s decision. “We would respect his decision and it was only one vote that did not affect the results of the election,” Anutin said.

When his name was called out to cast the vote, Siripong said he abstained before watching his fellow MPs and weeping.

Anutin said the party could not force its MPs to act but could only ask for their cooperation.

He already discussed the matter with Siripong who apologised for what he had done, Anutin said. His only criticism was that Siripong could have informed the party beforehand.