|
Dear
friends,
An
analysis
of this
year’s
economy
shows
more
stagnancy
than
should
be
expected
due to
the
effect
of
economic
and
political
factors
in 2006
so far.
Yet the
government
attempts
to
create a
positive
image,
saying
that
there
are no
economic
problems.
The
Minister
of
Finance
was the
first to
make a
misleading
assertion
that the
use of
the
constitutional
law on
the 2007
budget
would
not
affect
the Thai
economy
that
much
after a
delay of
at least
four
months.
This
attempt
to twist
the
truth
and
create
wrong
understanding
is
inappropriate
for any
economy.
After
analyzing
the
government’s
2007
budget
of 1.476
billion
baht
with a
delay of
at least
four
months
on the
upcoming
budget
deliberation
for the
year,
its sure
effect
on
investment
payment
withdrawal
are
obvious.
The
effect,
in the
first
quarter
of the
2007
budget
or the
final
quarter
of 2006,
would be
the
extraction
of
746,000
million
baht
from the
economic
system,
causing
economic
expansion
to
decrease
by at
least
0.5 from
the
original
budget.
This is
even
without
considering
the
impact
of
rising
oil
price.
Next,
the
government
expects
that its
budget
for 2006
will
eventually
balance.
Considered
only on
the
basis of
the
government’s
targeted
income
collection,
a
misunderstanding
may be
perpetrated
that the
2006
budget
is
balanced.
But,
truly
looking
down
deep at
the
situation,
in March
2006,
the
government
claimed
that
0.248
billion
baht in
Treasury
bonds
had
increased
from
September,
2005 by
780,000
baht, or
merely
up to
ceiling
point,
but
fiscal
reserves
had, in
turn,
decreased
from
880,000
million
baht on
August
2005 to
only
400,000
million
baht in
reserve
on March
2006.
Moreover,
an
increase
in
government
income
for
April
2006 has
brought
up an
interesting
point
about
the
collection
of
income
from
state
owned
enterprises,
(SOEs),
which
rose to
22,812
million
baht, an
increase
from the
previous
year of
13,735
million
baht.
The
point in
question
concerns
the
effort
made by
the
government
to pull
profit
from
SOEs in
order to
solve
the
problem
of
fiscal
bankruptcy.
But,
should
effort
be
poured
into
profit
making
through
SOEs for
the
generation
of
increased
financial
returns
to the
Finance
Ministry,
at the
expense
of
caring
for
people
and
their
problems
in
having
to use
these
services
and
facilities?
Apart
from
such
issues,
which
have
been
moving
in line
with
previous
government
behavior,
there
are more
besides.
There is
the
borrowing
of money
from
citizens
to
invest
in the
building
of
government
projects
so as
not to
be in
public
debt, or
the
forcing
of
government
banks to
sustain
the
interest
rate,
claiming
this as
not
burdensome
to the
budget.
These
moves
reflect
government
attempts
to twist
the
truth
about
the
nation’s
finances
and the
economy
and
attempts
to solve
problems
by
concealing
true
figures.
However,
these
problem-solving
attempts
merely
throw
existing
problems
into the
future.
While
there is
no
offence
in using
the
budget
to help
cure
people’s
hardship,
I think
that for
transparent
economics
to
occur,
the
government
should
instead
speak
the
truth
and
reveal
its
hidden
budget.
This
will
enhance
the
participation
of
scholars
and
people
for
sharing
ideas
and
sorting
problems
out
together.
It will
also
enable
us
to have
a
precise
forecast
of our
national
economic
circumstances.
|
