Re: “Leaders must face up to their critics” (BP, Feb 1).
The editorial stated that the Department of Provincial Administration had asked officials not to use social media such as Facebook, Line and email to express their opinions.
On Jan 28, the Department of Provincial Administration sent a letter informing every province to notify officials under the department not to use computers or communication devices of the government in a manner that may cause damage to others or violate the law.
The letter did not ban or limit the rights of the officials under the Provincial Administration Department to use computers or communication devices as usual. The department simply asked them not to use computers or communication devices in a way that violates others’ rights or violates the law.
Grissada Boonrach
Director-general
Department of Provincial Administration
A JAB IN THE DARK
Re: “Vaccinated kids suffer” (PostBag, Feb 14).
Mike Sutter’s letter starts off with quoting the most recent study released in 2011 by the US Institute of Medicine, and then misquoting it for his own bias. He then refers to an ongoing independent survey on the same subject.
First, there have been many studies by reputable independent organisations since 2011, including the Institute of Medicine (Report Brief, 16/1/2013).
Second, Mr Sutter’s reference to the ongoing independent survey is to that being carried out by the not-so-independent and obscure Agenskalna Klinika, a profit-making homeopathic clinic in Riga, Latvia.
The Institute of Medicine summarised its 2013 report on the issue as follows: “Delaying or denying vaccination has led to outbreaks of such vaccine-preventable diseases as measles and whooping cough that may jeopardise public health, particularly for people who were never immunised.”
US states with policies that make it easy to exempt children from immunisations were associated with a 90% higher incidence of whooping cough in 2011. Simply do an internet search for the Institute of Medicine Studies, as well as other respected studies, for reliable vaccination information.
Tom H
STING IS DISCRIMINATORY
In his apparent defence of overcharging foreigners for entering parks etc in Thailand, John Arnone uses the old but highly flawed argument that Thais are paying “some sort of tax or another to subsidise the venue”.
John seems unaware that foreigners, depending on their circumstances here, also pay a variety of taxes, which include income tax and withholding tax on savings. John also appears to have forgotten that every single foreign tourist pays value added tax (VAT) on almost everything purchased here.
The point is inescapable: Overcharging foreigners for anything is discriminatory. Would John be happy to see signs outside tourist venues overseas stating that everyone who is a citizen of that country should pay one price, but anyone who is not should pay much higher prices? I hope not!
Martin R
DOUBLE PRICING NOT JUST HERE
I have always thought that double pricing as practised in many countries in Asia was discriminatory.
However, in the Northern Territory in Australia, resident Territorians are allowed into national parks in the Northern Territory for free, while all other Australians and foreigners have to pay a fee.
PD Pedersen
Chiang Mai
TOP SECRET TURTLES
It’s not just dual pricing that can rile some foreigners. If any foreigner has tried to visit the Sea Turtle Conservation Centre near Sattahip they may know what I mean. This is an excellent conservation project that I have visited several times with my Thai wife. Despite the large signs in Thai and English on Sukhumvit Road, no foreigner is permitted to enter the navy base en route to the conservation centre at this location.
Rather they are directed the long way round to the “back door” entrance near U-Tapao. Last weekend my wife was away for a few days so I decided to spend an hour or so on my own at the conservation centre via the U-Tapao entry point. But my entry was completely denied even with my Thai driving licence ID.
Admittedly my Thai is limited, but there was virtually no explanation why I could not enter. “No, cannot go” was the best I got in English. However, I did get a very smart salute from the marine on guard duty as I turned around and exited in my car.
I commend the Thais for this conservation project but why advertise it with signs in English if foreigners are barred from entry unless apparently accompanied by a Thai national? One must assume that no tourist would be permitted entry at either gate based on my experience. As for barring entrance at the main gate I wonder what military secrets the navy is concerned foreigners may see? Perhaps there has been a new national security directive issued by the PM? Or are the turtles now being trained for underwater espionage?
Chris Kaye
Chon Buri
VALENTINES SHAM IS A FARCE
My seven-year-old niece gave me a red rose, a box of chocolates and a “Happy Valentine”. I accepted with a false smile knowing full well that the multinationals have once again conned someone into buying a product under the guise of a fictional being.
Brian Forlonge
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING
136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110
Fax: +02 6164000 email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th
All letter writers must provide full name and address.
All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.