MFP says PT policy statement lacks core promises to voters

MFP says PT policy statement lacks core promises to voters

The opposition Move Forward Party ( MFP) has vowed to review the Pheu Thai-led coalition’s policy statement, which is scheduled to be presented in parliament on Monday, alleging that the party appears to have broken important promises, such as electing a new charter-drafting assembly.

The MFP urged the government to add it in scrutinizing the new government’s plan speech in a see posted on its consideration on X, previously known as Twitter.

A website to a 52-page government speech was also provided by the group as proof of its existence.

According to the MFP, this suggests that the government has neglected to fulfill three promises it made to electors: to choose a new constitution-drafting forum, increase the minimum regular income, and reduce the cost of the electric rail transportation to 20 baht per trip.

There are several unfulfilled claims. Please keep a close eye on the government’s statement of policy and the upcoming MFP conversation on it, the minister pleaded.

The MFP’s deputy spokeswoman Phakamon Noonanan criticized the new administration for reducing the political discussion of the policy statement to just one day, claiming that this would be even worse than the previous administration, which permitted a similar discussion to last two days in 2019.

Prasert Chanthararuangthong, pastor of digital economy and society, insisted that the debate may take place on Monday and that a three-party meeting of the government, Senate, and opposition whips will decide the precise time.

The Senate has received a version of the president’s policy speech and is studying it in readiness for the conversation on Monday, according to Senator Kamnoon Sidhisamarn in his power as the Senate whip spokesman.

The Senate’s discussion, in which it may ask where the cash is intended to come from, appears to center on the 10, 000-baht digital wallet policy, he said.

The state stated that the book pertaining to the King will not be changed in relation to any constitutional amendments.