Barkar Nash (Page 51)

Continue Reading

Farmers in the Northeast have declared they are prepared to participate in the transition to sustainable agriculture with the help of related industries by refusing to use crop burning as a degradation method instead.

The USDA-funded Thailand Regional Agriculture Innovation Network ( Rain ) project has launched a campaign to encourage decomposition as a method of managing agricultural residue effectively rather than burning it in the country, which is in the grip of a PM2.5 crisis.

Rice farmers in the northeast region are encouraged to use microbial options to speed up the decomposition of post-harvest wheat stubble by the” Chi River Not Burn” campaign.

Rice farmers have long used burning as a method to create terrain for the upcoming planting season in Thailand.

The Pollution Control Department’s (PCD ) data indicates that Thailand’s majority of PM2.5 comes from fire hotspots scattered throughout the nation.

Since the beginning of this year, 10, 543 for hot spots have been reported, 3, 287 of which were detected in corn areas.

The” Chi River No Lose” campaign targets over 100, 000 ray of rice crops in the Chi River valley, the second-largest rice-growing place in Thailand, known for producing off-season corn.

About 6, 000 grain farmers in the area, which covers Khon Kaen, Kalasin, Roi Et and Maha Sarakham regions, are now participating in the plan.

On their property, participating farmers are given bacterial solutions, a mix of bacteria that can activate fast decomposition and cut the degradation time of grain residue in half.

Any program participants who encourage other farmers to enroll may receive incentives, including funds vouchers to purchase agricultural equipment and supplies.

Regional give-and-take

The Bangkok Post met with some of the participating producers in Khon Kaen’s Muang region, who claimed that they once burned crops because it was quick and inexpensive.

They claimed that burning makes for a simpler plough, either mechanically or with tractors, because it is expensive and difficult to work with machines to remove clean stubble.

Some farmers had now stopped burning before starting the campaign, including being injured by out-of-control lights and suffering from respiratory problems brought on by dust and pollutants.

They next turned to adopting practices of squeezing and breakdown.

However, according to the farmers, the decomposition process, which generally takes 30 days, does not hold the little timeframe of off-season cropping, which needs to start within 14 days of the major harvesting period ending.

After adopting the exercise introduced by Rain and adopting the use of bio-activators, they say farming has become faster, and they face fewer fees.

” The destroyed grass becomes a dietary for the ground and helps to raise grain provides”, said Chanwit Srimungkun, a farmer from Nong Tum sub-district.

However, as the microbes decompose the grass and generate more natural matter, he does not require much compost.

The particles caused by burning even affect the land value, which makes producers rely greatly upon fertilisers, which are also expensive and non-organic.

Farmer Punnarat Sitadyod of Nong Tum claims that the earth just needs to be ploughed once, compared to three or four in the past, which helps him reduce labor costs by half.

According to Ratchapak Srimueanghao, a native wheat producer, crops from participating rice fields in the Don Chang sub-district were also found to have grown more quickly and drier because of the wholesome land.

He claimed that rice grown in his field ranged from 20 to 25 cm tall while those grown outside the campaign ranged from 15-20 cm tall.

Options leading action

Sirinan Srimungkun, the village head of Ban Khok Ta in Nong Tum sub-district, said 60 % of local farmers in Khon Kaen have to shift away from burning, and the use of bio-activators is one of the innovations they will adopt.

She suggested that the authorities should provide a comprehensive support package to encourage more farmers to take part in the transition to sustainable farming. Incentives for their participation may be essential, she said.

Ms. Sirinan claimed that some rice farmers hardly ever make money from their harvests because the central rice price is relatively low.

” Farmers were told]by the authorities ] to stop burning, which is cheap, but no resources or support were provided]to help them do so ]”, she said.

What farmers really need, according to Ms. Sirinan, are options and having access to knowledge, technology, and financial assistance.

” When]the authorities ] say’ stop burning’, their sentence should be completed with’ and do this instead,'” said William Sparks, Rain’s project director.

He claimed that most farmers realized that burning was a bad thing for their lives, their property, and the environment, but they continued to do it because they had no other choice.

” So, I think instead of painting farmers as lazy and irresponsible culprits, we need to make sure they know that they have options that are accessible”, he added.

Comprehensive measures are necessary to assist farmers from upstream to downstream in order to ensure sustainable farming, which can be done through a network of various stakeholders.

He said that the process of sourcing, supporting, scaling, selling, and sharing is necessary.

Researchers and academics work together to help bring out innovation, which is where the process begins.

Then, a profitable business model should be in place to support farmers while protecting the environment.

After that, a network of the private and public sectors must expand the practices to ensure farmers can sell their goods.

Successful strategies and outcomes should also be shared throughout the area.

” At the end of the day, it is not the farmers ‘ job to hammer themselves to protect the environment on behalf of all of us, right?”

” We drive cars. We run factories. We all use plastic. So, it should not be purely on the shoulders of the farmers]to protect the environment],” Mr Sparks said.

Continue Reading

A person under investigation

Once more, Gen. Prawit Wongsuwon and former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra have sparked controversy over whether the latter should be called a career soldier or a politician in response to the most recent barbs exchanged.

Gen Prawit claimed victimization as the start of the conflict, and the attack started when he claimed his group was constantly being attacked. Although he did not specify where the problems were coming, it was assumed that they were coming from the ruling Pheu Thai Party.

Gen. Prawit addressed the party’s most recent annual conference in Prachuap Khiri Khan, where he claimed the nation had reverted to its previous practices of socially flawed politics plagued by bickering.

He claimed that today’s political climate is far from being a people-centric best.

He even claimed that the PPRP, after the ruling party during Prayut Chan-o-cha’s management, has been on the receiving end of an invasion, notably since it was left out of Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s partnership line-up in September last month.

An observer claimed that the PPRP’s removal is evidence that the party was not a key player in the” super deal” thought to have been struck between Pheu Thai and the conservative camp, which includes the Bhumjaithai and the United Thai Nation ( UTN) parties as its main members.

Officials have largely attributed the” very package” to Srettha Thavisin’s victory in forming the Pheu Thai-led state following the May 2023 public vote.

Given their radically different principles, the agreement involved reaching an agreement that was originally thought to be improbable between Pheu Thai and the right-wing events. The alliance had effectively prevented the now-dissolved Move Forward Party ( MFP), which has been reborn as the People’s Party, from forming a government.

The conservative bloc had to rely on Pheu Thai as its main” swing” to thwart the MFP.

The PPRP, on the other hand, became dispensable to Pheu Thai, which eventually decided to replace it with the Democrat Party as a partnership partner in the Paetongtarn management, according to the observer.

The spectator claimed that it could also be interpreted that the PPRP was perceived by the traditional functions as the weakest website.

Thaksin, who wields great influence over Pheu Thai, does not see eye to eye with Gen Prawit sometimes.

He could have been behind Pheu Thai’s choice to remove Gen Prawit’s party from the new partnership, the watcher said.

The former prime minister, who is the father of Ms. Paetongtarn, believes that Gen. Prawit orchestrated a group of former lawmakers ‘ complaint to the Constitutional Court to nominate ex-convict Pichit Chuenban as prime minister.

The judge later removed Mr. Srettha.

Pheu Thai MPs officially reacted badly to Gen Prawit’s failure to attend the election of Ms. Paetongtarn as prime minister and the previous election of Mr. Srettha.

The observer added that it would be appropriate for conservative followers to turn their backs on Gen Prawit, who has attempted to distance himself from the far right and shake off associations with the Prayut government.

Gen Prawit has repeatedly stated on numerous occasions that he did not participate in the coup that deposed the Pheu Thai-led state in 2014.

The observer claimed that his actions were intended to reshape the PPRP as a mild conservative party to facilitate joining new governments.

However, the decision has backfired because the traditional bloc’s waning aid has exposed the threat of being treated as a outcast by all tents.

The observer added that although Gen Prawit, who was army chief from Oct 1, 2004, to Sept 30, 2005, had subsequently served as deputy chairman of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO ), the 2014 coup maker, he tends to be regarded as a power-broker politician.

He also served as acting leading for a fortnight in 2022 while serving as deputy prime minister and deputy prime minister in the Abhisit Vejiva management and as defense minister under the Prayut government.

However, Thaksin was the type to harm Gen. Prawit the most. He just made a statement disparaging Gen. Prawit for being the author of the 2014 revolt, which the former prime minister claimed was the start of all social unrest since.

He claimed that the NCPO was rewriting or revising rules to keep him out of elections while consolidating its own influence.

Don’t rely your animals…

The Provincial Administrative Organization ( PAO ) chief elections may have been won by the ruling Pheu Thai Party, but observers believe there has been a shift in momentum as a result of the number of provinces secured.

The elections took place on Feb 1 in 47 out of 77 regions. The politicians had resigned before their conditions ended, which made it necessary for earlier elections to fill the PAO captain articles in the other 29 provinces.

Former prime minister Thaksin traveled to these provinces next Saturday to drum up support for its candidates. Pheu Thai fielded individuals in 14 regions in the elections next Saturday.

Victory was secured in 10 regions– Chiang Mai, Lampang, Phrae, Nan, Nakhon Ratchasima, Sakon Nakhon, Nong Khai, Maha Sarakham, Nakhon Phanom and Prachin Buri– while its channel won four.

According to spectators, Pheu Thai’s poll gets should not be taken at face value.

In Chiang Mai, regarded as the ruling group’s homeland and Thaksin’s home, Pheu Thai won by a narrow margin, and its member in neighbouring Chiang Rai, which had long been a Pheu Thai stronghold, failed to win despite Thaksin’s work to judge voters it.

Victories obtained by other parties should not be overlooked, particularly Bhumjaithai’s network, which captured 14 PAO chief seats in provinces that included Buri Ram, Si Sa Ket, Amnat Charoen, Bung Kan, Lop Buri, Phichit, Krabi, Satun and Chiang Rai.

The United Thai Nation ( UTN) Party won PAO elections in Phuket, Samut Songkhram, Surat Thani and Phatthalung. In three provinces, independent candidates won, while the Democratic Party won three: Songkhla, Trang, and Prachuap Khiri Khan.

The Palang Pracharath Party ( PPRP ) and the Kla Dharma Party each won one, while the Chartthaipattana and Prachachat parties each won two.

Looking at the overall results in 76 provinces, Bhumjaithai, the third-largest party, has expanded its support bases beyond those of Pheu Thai and possibly its expense, according to observers.

Pheu Thai may still be ahead, but Bhumjaithai is right on its heels, according to Thanaporn Sriyakul, director of the Political and Public Policy Analysis Institue.

Out of 76 provinces, Pheu Thai and its network captured 24, accounting for 32 % of the popular vote.

Bhumjaithai and its “blue” affiliations won in 23 provinces or 31.5 % of the vote. These wins show that the coalition partner, which only won 70 seats, or about half of Pheu Thai’s total, in the last general election, will not be easy to defeat in the next one in 2027.

It suggests that Thaksin has lost his political sway in the grand scheme of things.

Pheu Thai and Thaksin will need a more effective strategy to win votes in the upcoming general election. Unlike the 2023 polls, Bhumjaithai is expected to be a much stronger opponent,” Mr Thanaporn said.

He also made the point that the ruling party might no longer be able to wield bargaining power on a variety of issues by cooperating with Bhumjaithai in the coalition from now on.

The analyst said the main opposition People’s Party ( PP ) fared spectacularly poorly in the Feb 1 polls, having only won in the small northern province of Lamphun, despite fielding candidates in 17 provinces.

PP leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut had the opportunity to address voters and present his vision in each province he contested, but the party only managed to win one.

According to Mr. Thanaporn, it is probably time for the PP to change its leadership because Mr. Natthaphong has obviously failed to impress voters.

Following the dissolution of the Move Forward Party ( MFP), Mr. Natthaphong was elected as party leader in August of last year. The MFP’s former deputy secretary-general edged out former deputy MFP leader Sirikanya Tansakun.

The orange camp may need to take the situation seriously and determine whether its current leader has what it takes to help the party win the next general election, said Mr. Thanaporn.

Moreover, some observers also questioned whether the PP’s sole winner, Weeradej Pupisit, secured his victory due to the party’s popularity or his family’s connections.

Mr Weeradej’s father, Prasert, is a former president of the Lamphun PAO and former president of the Lamphun chamber of commerce, which hardly made the PP candidate an unknown figure.

Anusorn Wongwan of the Pheu Thai Party was defeated by Mr. Weeradej.

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Continue Reading