Following criticism that she failed to properly respond to the most devastating natural disaster Bangkok has seen in years, Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s status has been affected by the recent disaster.
Paetongtarn: Caught on the fly
Critics claim that Ms. Paetongtarn’s authority has been harmed by natural disasters. Shortly after being elected as Chiang Rai’s prime minister on August 16 of last year, she experienced a storm crisis.
The top stood accused of making excuses to avoid visiting the flood-ravaged territory. She insisted that she had no choice but to wait for her visit to get formalized before going to work directing national interests, insisting that her championship was pending royal support.
At the time, opponents who questioned the new government’s emergency response, or lack thereof, needed to address disaster-fighting challenges, which necessitated a sizable national-scale resources, manpower, and logistics.
Despite the despair felt by storm sufferers, Ms Paetontarn was spared a severe censure on account of her becoming “new” to the best job. According to an observer, her wedding as head of the government was her keeping joy.
But, the critics warned her to take lessons from the worst flood in Chiang Rai in 30 years, which resulted in 16 fatalities and more than 14, 000 acres of farmland damage across nine towns between September 9 and December 2015.
After this crisis she was expected to assume a dominant part, been equipped with a well-formulated behavior plan ready for immediate application in the event of another disaster, according to the reviewers.
The 7.7-magnitude earthquake that struck Myanmar and Thailand on March 28 shook high-rises and toppled one of the State Audit Office ( SAO ) buildings in Bangkok.
Calls were made for the government to intervene as the money sprang into conflict as panic-stricken staff and residents poured onto the roads to flee the shaking buildings for protection.
Bangkok government Chadchart Sittipunt announced that open gardens may be available around the clock to provide protection to people with no property to fall back on.
However, reviewers claimed that City Hall did not designate any huts or temporary shelters for the displaced. Just individuals were present to set up wireless restaurants and distribute free lunches to those employed at the collapsed building site.
The president’s announcement came on the heels of the authorities declaring Bangkok a disaster area, which permitted the area to tap into crisis funds to listen to the crisis. For the search and rescue operations at the fell SAO tower, resources and personnel were essential.
The spectator claimed that the earthquakes had left behind a path of destruction. Some residents and residents admitted they did not know whether the plan their apartments juristic people had taken out on their behalf fully or partially covered the injury caused.
Some people were forced to rent an apartment while their flats were being repaired.
At the time of the collapsed building site, it was vague who was in charge of the search and rescue operations being conducted by the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration and the state disaster elimination and prevention officials.
As a result the government found itself the goal of large condemnation.
The Senate has criticized the government for what it claimed was its delayed response to the earthquake.
Senator Romsit Wiriyasan made an immediate action, urging the government and important organizations to hold an Upper House discussion on the subject and making recommendations.
He said that evacuees from buildings, customers conflict which hindered liberate workers ‘ exposure to quake damaged areas, and text message warnings that took too long to approach people, reflected badly on the government’s ability to manage emergency situations.
No one saw the government’s leader step up and take over the helm of crisis management immediately after the earthquake, according to Pol Gen Maj Romsit.
Another senator, Lt. Cdr. Wutthipong Pongsuwan, demanded that the government accelerate the implementation of the so-called “cell broadcast service ( CBS ) system,” which enables the dissemination of emergency weather and natural disaster warnings via mobile phone messages.
Senator Nantana Nantavaropas said that two previous natural disasters that hit Thailand– the 2004 tsunami and the 2011 deluge– should have served as lessons.
However, in a crisis, the government appeared unprofessional and had trouble communicating effectively. She claimed that state agencies “were too slow to respond.”
Ms Paetongtarn chaired a meeting with state agencies to address the text message delays warning people about the earthquake. Attendees also included mobile phone providers like True Corporation and Advanced Info Service.
The premier inquired about sending SMS alerts as soon as a quake.
However, this was too little too late. Critics claim that the prime minister made errors frequently.
The prime minister learned of some state agencies evacuating staff from office buildings after announcing on March 31 that structural cracks and tremors had been felt and that earthquake-related situations had been managed.
The critics took Ms Paetongtarn to task for trying to explain away the scare. She argued that aftershocks in Myanmar had no bearing on the March 31 tremors.
She claimed that it had nothing to do with aftershocks or additional quakes.
The critics were also baffled by what they said was the premier’s suggestion that individual building managers were on their own in conducting quake-induced damage assessments.
I have no idea how to act when an earthquake strikes, according to Ms. Paetongtarn, to be honest.
We don’t reside in a place where earthquakes are frequent and destructive. Some people might mistakenly think they experience low blood sugar when a quake hits. We need to be taught more [about earthquakes],” she said.
Casinos are not a guaranteed bet.
Chaichanok: Catches all off guard
Chaichanok Chidchob, the secretary-general of the Bhumjaithai Party, caught everyone off guard when he objected to legalizing casinos at a House meeting.
His unflinching rejection came shortly after the Pheu Thai-led government resisted trying to quicken the investigation into the casino-entertainment complex bill.
The legislation, which was initially scheduled for a first reading on April 9, was deferred to the next parliamentary session, due to begin in two months.
Observers believe that Mr. Chaichanok’s action has put the Pheu Thai Party, which initiated the policy, in a awkward position.
Opponents of the bill have been vehemently opposed, saying that it needs to be completely abandoned and not just delayed. It involves the legalization of casinos and allowing them to be a part of an entertainment complex.
” Our intention is to prevent the legalisation of casinos, not just see the bill’s deliberation delayed,” Pichit Chaimongkol, leader of the Network of Students and People for Reform of Thailand ( NSPRT), said during a recent protest.
Additionally, the government’s claim that the bill received overwhelmingly public support during its public input gathering process was met with skepticism.
The government may now be forced to consider holding a referendum on the casino proposal due to the strong opposition from the opposition in parliament and Mr. Chaichanok’s leadership, according to observers.
Stithorn Thananithichot, director of the Office of Innovation for Democracy at King Prajadhipok’s Institute, said Pheu Thai appears to be hitting roadblocks in its casino-entertainment complex bill push.
Given that Bhumjaithai is the coalition’s second-largest party and reportedly has the backing of the majority in the Senate, Mr. Chaichanok’s position should not be disregarded.
Even if the government successfully pushes the bill for House consideration in the upcoming parliamentary session, he said, passage is not guaranteed.
The bill is considered finance-related legislation, so it requires two-thirds support in the House, or at least 330 votes.
The government is currently unlikely to achieve that number, and he said that critics are expected to demand that the cabinet take responsibility if the bill fails in its first reading.
Even if the bill passes the House, the Senate poses a significant challenge and is highly likely to reject it, according to Mr. Stithorn.
” The government must have evaluated the situation and decided to back down for the time being. He said that Mr. Chaichanok’s action is a new problem.
The Bhumjaithai Secretary-General may be attempting to capitalize on the political slack of his father, Newin Chidchob, the party’s founder and de facto leader, to capitalize on the opportunity while Pheu Thai appears to be losing them, according to the analyst.
” The only thing was that he]Mr Chaichanok ] became overly emotional]during the House meeting], breaking into tears after the speech and ending up being mocked by several media outlets, “he said.
Because no political party other than the main opposition People’s Party ( PP ) is prepared for a snap election, Mr. Stithorn argued that Mr. Chaichanok’s decision won’t cause a House to dissolve.
Pheu Thai, which finished second in the most recent general election, is also aware that achieving that result will not be easy, he continued.
For the government, the best course of action is to put the casino-entertainment complex bill up for a referendum and push for the passage of the pending referendum bill after its 180-day cooling-off period has lapsed.
The government claims that 80 % of the 71,300 polled in an online public hearing conducted from February 28 to March 14 expressed support for the bill, but the general public is skeptical.
There are questions after the hearing about what the questions were, how accurately these questions were framed, and how the findings were analyzed, he said.
Former election commissioner, Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, pointed out the results of the survey showed almost identical levels of support for every aspect of the scheme, with 80.6 % to 80.75 % of people voting in favour of each of the eight topics.
According to Mr. Somchai, it was statistically assumed that 57, 500 out of 71, 303 respondents would give the same answers.
The outcome appears improbable even from Mars. Yet the cabinet believes it,” the former commissioner was quoted as saying.
According to Mr. Stithorn, the ruling party may need to negotiate with the PP to secure its support for the bill and be willing to return the favor by holding a charter rewrite referendum at the same time.
It can stifle critical voices if a referendum is conducted fairly and the bill receives majority support. If scepticism remains, the government will face resistance and Pheu Thai will continue to suffer politically, “he said.