A majority of people believe the parliamentary grilling of Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha over the incomplete oath-taking during the swearing-in ceremony of the cabinet was useless and did not elicit a clear explanation from the prime mininister, according to a survey by Suan Dusit Rajabhat University, or Suan Dusit Poll.
The poll was conducted on 1,164 people from Sept 19-21 to compile their opinions on the general debate initiated by the seven opposition parties in the House of Representatives.
A majority -- 61.86% -- of the respondents said they were interested in the debate, while 38.14% were not.
The two groups were then asked to explain why.
Of those who were interested in the debate, 39.62% said they wanted to hear what the opposition would have to say; 25.79% wanted to know how the government would explain; 22.01% said the oath-taking is an important formality; 18.87% said the matter had been used to attack the prime minister and the government; and 13.21% said they were concerned about the country's future.
Of those who were not interested in the debate, 45.36% said they were fed up with politics and its quarrels; 24.75% said they were more interested in the problems of flooding and the poor economy; 21.65% said they were busy working and had no time to watch the debate; 16.49% said it was merely a war of words between politicians; and 12,37% said they did not watch the debate live because they knew they could get a summary from news reports afterwards.
Asked whether the debate was useful or not, only 37.24% said it was. The majority -- 62.76% =- said it was useless.
The two groups were then asked to give their reasons from a multiple choice set of answers.
Of those who thought the debate was useful, 34.74% said they received information from it; 23.26% said the debate enabled them to see the stances of the government and the opposition; 20.00% said they learned more about the importance of the oath-taking from the debate; 15.79% said the debate enabled them to get to know more about their MPs; and 12.63% said they were able to get information directly from the debate, not from news reports that are sometimes distorted.
Of those who said the debate was useless, 41.06% said the prime minister did not give a clear explanation; 26.49% said the debate ended without a vote or a conclusion; 23.18% said economic matters were not discussed; 21.19% said the debate was a political move and had nothing to do with the lives of ordinary people; and 19.87% said it was a waste of time and money.