Who is kidding whom?

One thing that’s certain is there will be no hot debates in Parliament if there is a directly elected PM. Such debates were notably absent under both Shinawatra governments, capped by the nodding-dog-style voting demonstrated by the passage of the so-called amnesty bill. If you can get away with that without attending Parliament or even being in the country, a full “democratically bestowed” premiership will brook no criticism or counter argument.

The article quotes National Reform Councillor Wanchai Sornsir as saying, “There would be no voting [by the National Reform Ccouncil] on any specific topic, but rather the voting would be on the whole proposal.” Is the NRC seeking to package everything into one agreed-upon poison pill to feed to the Constitution Drafting Committee, reminiscent of that same amnesty bill that hid the Thaksin Benefit Fund under the carpet of an amnesty for the rank and file?

Is the objective of the NRC to keep things just as they were, but make it legal?

Richard Bowler

Bangkok