A federal system for Thailand?
1 post
• Page 1 of 1
A federal system for Thailand?
by pquinlan on Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:49 am
Just a suggestion - a federal system of government seems to me to be worth considering for Thailand. What do others think? Many other countries use a form of federal government: Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Germany, Australia, Canada, India, USA, Russia - some of these even successfully have a Monarch as head of state.
One proposal for Thailand might look like this:
* 12 to 15 states, loosely based on groupings of up to 6 to 8 of the existing provinces
* All Governors and Representatives elected
* Each state provides 10 Senators, all elected, to the national government
* States control at least 50% of funding for health, welfare, education, roads and have their own tax base to do so (perhaps a slice of the national VAT or similar)
* States control land ownership, agriculture, local roads, local authorities, police, compliance to national standards (eg building)
* National government remains responsible for defense/border/immigration services, telecoms/broadcasting, foreign affairs, trade, power and water resources/systems
* Fixed terms of 4 years for both national and state governments (but not all on the same day!)
Pros:
* The people will receive the government they want/deserve
* States more able and willing to respond to local needs (if they want to be re-elected), eg the south gets its autonomy, but so does every body else, the north east can provide the right focus on farming communities needs at last, the north can have a degree of separateness from Bangkok they obviously yearn for etc You get the picture
* Will address regional needs far better than a central government
* Will provide local elected officials answerable to local electors
* Competition between states for investment and in many other areas of government services
Cons:-
* Need to break Bangkok's stranglehold on power, which would be a good thing
* Need to ensure there isn't a return to local fiefdoms and all that entails
* Probably need to eliminate the current Provinces as a level of government and beef up Tambon Administrations as a third level of a federal structure (or is this a pro?)
* Too big a change? Can it be brought in gradually?
* Need to make sure some states don't get left too far behind, at least in terms of education and health care
Is the current governance structure better? Or working at all?
One proposal for Thailand might look like this:
* 12 to 15 states, loosely based on groupings of up to 6 to 8 of the existing provinces
* All Governors and Representatives elected
* Each state provides 10 Senators, all elected, to the national government
* States control at least 50% of funding for health, welfare, education, roads and have their own tax base to do so (perhaps a slice of the national VAT or similar)
* States control land ownership, agriculture, local roads, local authorities, police, compliance to national standards (eg building)
* National government remains responsible for defense/border/immigration services, telecoms/broadcasting, foreign affairs, trade, power and water resources/systems
* Fixed terms of 4 years for both national and state governments (but not all on the same day!)
Pros:
* The people will receive the government they want/deserve
* States more able and willing to respond to local needs (if they want to be re-elected), eg the south gets its autonomy, but so does every body else, the north east can provide the right focus on farming communities needs at last, the north can have a degree of separateness from Bangkok they obviously yearn for etc You get the picture
* Will address regional needs far better than a central government
* Will provide local elected officials answerable to local electors
* Competition between states for investment and in many other areas of government services
Cons:-
* Need to break Bangkok's stranglehold on power, which would be a good thing
* Need to ensure there isn't a return to local fiefdoms and all that entails
* Probably need to eliminate the current Provinces as a level of government and beef up Tambon Administrations as a third level of a federal structure (or is this a pro?)
* Too big a change? Can it be brought in gradually?
* Need to make sure some states don't get left too far behind, at least in terms of education and health care
Is the current governance structure better? Or working at all?
-
pquinlan - Posts: 8
- Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:03 am
1 post
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest
