PUBLISHED: 4:00 on February 6, 2024.
The Senate has criticized the government for delaying a public debate until the second half of the following month, claiming that doing so is an attempt to avoid accountability.
According to Senator Seree Suwanpanont, president of the Senate’s social development committee, the senator informed the government of its intention to hold a public debate in accordance with Section 153.
It came after 98 senators moved past month to hold a public discussion on the performance of the government without voting. The discussion might take place after March 20th, according to Phumtham Wechayachai, deputy prime minister and minister of commerce.
But he believed that the discussion ought to start sooner. Somsak Thepsutin, the deputy prime minister, and a senator discussed moving the argument ahead before deciding on March 18.
Sen. Seree added,” That was no better,” citing Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin’s demanding work schedule, which included trips abroad because the government was unable to provide an earlier time.
Sen Seree remarked,” It sounds like a time-buying strategy.”
Members of the Senate are urged to sign up before February 13 if they want to talk during the conversation. Since the government formally presented its policies to parliament on September 10 of last year, the public debate aims to examine how well it has performed in seven areas.
They deal with fundamental issues like maintaining justice and law enforcement, halting rising energy prices, failing to utilize education reform under the fresh Education Act, neglecting to adequately protect tourists, and being unsure of the necessity of implementing a proposed charter act and its lack of dedication to carrying it out.
Sen. Seree stated that because the Senate prioritizes material over style, it will not do the debate in a ferocious or dramatic manner.
The deputy chairman of the Senate’s democratic development committee, Direkrit Jenklongtham, also charged the administration with delaying and attempting to avoid accountability.
With each passing day, people skepticism about the president’s performance, particularly in carrying out important assignments, has grown. He claimed that if the procedures are implemented without review, they run the risk of harming the nation irreparably.
He continued,” When the government is asked to respond to a general conversation, it must put everything on hold and focus solely on developing its responses.”