Chiang Mai dyke and the patronage that still floods Thai society
Thai social media is abuzz with photos of the opening ceremony for a new floodwall in Chiang Mai. The photos show locals gathered beneath a large signboard depicting a smiling face and captioned “Mae Pongphan Pattana” (Mother Pongphan Development). The “s
The surname will be familiar to readers. The “face” of the project happens to be the wife of Defence Ministry permanent secretary General Preecha Chan-o-cha, who is the younger brother of Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha.
The floodwall was built with public money from the Defence Ministry, but the credit went to Pongphan, who heads an Army wives’ club.
Social-media users were scathing in their responses. Many pointed out that Prayut has himself castigated such banners as examples of inappropriate publicity-seeking among politicians and senior bureaucrats.
In fact, politicians have routinely attached their names and images to state-funded projects as if they had paid for them. Critics, in turn, point out that the practice amounts to corruption, with officeholders using state funds to boost their popularity and entrench their power.
It was just such political corruption that Prayut used as justification for his coup in May 2014, vowing to eradicate it with widespread reforms.
But that justification and vow are plainly empty, critics said, if even his sister-in-law can still indulge in such publicity-seeking stunts.
Amid the growing controversy, a Defence Ministry source stepped in to explain that the floodwall was not officially named after Pongphan. Local villagers had coined the name “Mae Pongphan Pattana” merely to welcome her and reflect the fact that she had pushed the idea forward on their behalf. The dyke was built by soldiers and villagers with funding from the Defence Ministry’s Defence Energy Department.
To be fair, Prayut’s sister-in-law might not have known about the welcoming banner beforehand. It was likely prepared by local officials working under directions from subordinates of her husband at the Defence Ministry.
But even if Pongphan herself is blameless, her case reveals a longstanding and problematic culture of local bureaucrats desperate to please bosses who have the power to reward or punish them.
The rewards include benefits such as promotion and raises.
This culture of patronage has deep roots that flourish even beyond the spheres of politics, the bureaucracy, military and business. Those roots choke faith in democracy and public life by channelling power away from legitimate institutions to individuals. However, in order to solve this problem we must first acknowledge its existence.
RELATED