Let us not forget that the next premier will only serve for one year. It is a crucial position, because a lot will depend on his or her performance, and yet the country is now a can of worms. However, because it is only for one year, no capable and outstanding person who now has a stable and attractive career somewhere else and who is in his or her right mind will want to take the position.

I believe the best possible candidate for this position at this time is Supachai Panitchpakdi. He has the right combination of practical work experience, actual political and ministerial experience in Thailand, the right educational background and training and recognition by the international community.

The problem is will he accept the position with no assurance of what he will be doing after one year? I really wonder. A career with the UN in his position is not something one can take lightly. If it were a full four-year term as prime minister, then it would be another matter altogether. But a one-year interim position?

If Supachai were to return to Thailand, he should become the best candidate for premier as leader of the Democrat Party in a free and clean election. I am sure Abhisit Vejjajiva would voluntarily vacate his position if Supachai were to rejoin the Democrat Party.

So, who is the next best person to become interim premier?

I do not have the magic answer here. But what I can say is the Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy should not select a judge for the position, because a judge would not have the experience or ability to lead the nation. The individual chosen must be able to build and dynamically look after and direct a team of professionals who will have responsibility for managing the thousands of different things that are important in the day-to-day running of a country.

Big Brother of Siam

Bangkok

------------------------------

CDRM must follow letter of the law in asset freezes

We shouldn't do anything with Thaksin's assets, other than make sure he has completely paid his income tax.

Why? He founded AIS 20 years ago, long before he entered politics. By the time he did enter politics, AIS and Shin Corp were already market leaders, and he was already a billionaire. Every year, his companies paid corporate income tax and for all dividends and salary that Thaksin himself received. He also had to pay income tax.

Then when he sold them, he paid income tax on the profits of the sale. According to Thai law, he didn't have to pay capital gains tax, because Thailand doesn't have an individual capital gains tax for stock-market sales, and it has never had one in the past 30 years.

I'd like to see justice for Thaksin, but that doesn't mean the junta should steal his assets. If you cheer as the junta confiscates his assets, then you should quickly start hiding your own assets.

Legalist

Bangkok

------------------------------

Thaksin's control of media  blinded upcountry voters

Re: "How to salvage the coup and move on to the reform", Opinion, September 25.

This article stimulated the following thoughts:

First, the political preferences of rural voters have not been determined entirely by the sham populist programmes of the now-defunct Thaksin regime. Perhaps a more important factor that explains the differences in perception between urban and rural citizens is the lack of complete and accurate information.

Thaksin controlled all television stations; therefore, all the information presented served a single, self-serving point of view. With more complete information, they, too, would have seen Thaksin for what he is. Guaranteeing a free, equitable flow of information via state-owned media is, as the writer states, of the highest priority.

Second, prior to the Bt30 healthcare scam, most health services provided by government hospitals had been free or available at a low cost for many decades. All Thaksin did was package and rename the existing scheme and claim credit for what already existed. Moreover, to help guarantee a good return on his purchase of five hospitals, he changed a rule that allowed private hospitals to recover money from the Public Health Ministry for each patient equivalent to the value of the same services at a government hospital. The entire scheme was underfunded, causing great duress for many hospitals and resulting in many doctors quitting government service, due to exhaustion.

Third, perhaps the Human Rights Commission should have more than reprimand power. The Royal Thai Police are far too corruption-prone.

Let us hope the Council for Democratic Reform under Constitutional Monarchy does not forgive the very evil people of the last regime.

Gibson Martin

Bangkok

------------------------------

Good people may be cast aside due to their political leanings

I beg you pardon, but I see red lights everywhere. It has been mentioned frequently in the media that pro-Thaksin people are being moved to inactive government posts. Now, if I may ask, who is replacing them? One would think people should be considered according to their qualifications, experience and so forth and not for their political choice or freedom thereof. The bottom line is: who are these people being replaced by?

Johann Scheffer

Bangkok

------------------------------

TRT's deep coffers enabled it to quash opposition voices

Re: "There were democratic alternatives to the staging of a military takeover", Opinion, September 26.

There are no alternatives when one man and his wealthy party dominate the media, Parliament, the Election Commission (EC) and all the rest of the checks-and-balances mechanisms. Also, I don't remember you, Giles Ji Ungpakorn, risking your cosy job by staging any big protest rallies at your university during the last five years against the abuse of power and policy corruption by the Thaksin regime. Yes, it's true, probably all parties buy votes, but the party with the deepest pockets usually wins, and if the EC, which is supposed to ensure that all is fair and square, was also bought, then what alternatives were there? Thaksin knew just how to play the grass roots, who, by the way, are now more indebted than ever before!

A Lover of True Democracy

Bangkok

------------------------------

Greed, not intimidation, skewed reporting on TRT

Re: "CDRM must not mistake support for a licence to control media", Opinion, September 26.

Thepchai Yong writes that one of the biggest blots on Thaksin's record was his interference with the media. Maybe so, but surely the biggest blot on the Thai media's record is the ease with which, to quote Thepchai, "members ... were intimidated into compromising their journalistic principles". Among those so compromised, I presume Thepchai is also referring to The Nation.

A search of the website of Journalists without Frontiers reveals that last year in the Asian region, 17 journalists were killed and 352 jailed. None of these was in Thailand. Nor is there any recorded violent incident involving a journalist in the country, and the "blacklist" of those who have abused reporters contains no Thai names.

One can only suppose the pressure was financial, and those who sacrificed their principles for money should slink away and keep quiet.

Dom Dunn

Bangkok

------------------------------

US condemnation of  the coup hypocritical given Iraq War

Concerning the US condemnation of the coup, some questions for Condoleezza Rice: when the US-led forces liberated Iraq, did the Iraqi people come out to welcome the coalition troops with flowers? Did the people bring snacks and cool drinks of water to them? And a week after your coup/liberation/invasion, did coalition forces start pulling out?

Did important intersections and meeting places in Baghdad and Basra no longer need military personnel to guard them? Is that why the Iraqi palaces and museums and hospitals and schools had no protection round them at all, because there was no fear of looting or violence or anger? Was there a plan to install a respected Iraqi PM and interim cabinet within days of your intervention? Were the Iraqi people so happy at the arrival of your wonderful "democracy" that a national opinion poll showed 90 per cent in favour of what you had just done?

There is one more question this old man has for you.

In your view, is there anything doable in Iraq any more, how many years after your intervention? And are you proud of that?

Lung Kip

Chiang Mai

------------------------------

Taxi fee from airport 'almost tantamount to extortion'

We have been travelling as usual, and on our return we found that exactly what we predicted would happen has taken place. Airports of Thailand Plc (AOT) has upped the price of getting a taxi from the new airport-arrivals area to make it almost impossible for most to afford.

This has forced the majority of passengers to use the ridiculous system of busing passengers and their luggage to the outskirts of the airport. Does AOT realise they are going to be the laughingstock of the aviation world? Everyone cannot believe this is what is happening at the world's newest and supposedly most modern facility.

We were told that in addition to the taxi fare, we would have to pay Bt100 for AOT and Bt50 for the driver before we even moved from the terminal. We have no problem with the driver getting his fee for queuing up, etc, but why do we have to pay AOT?

We sincerely hope the new government will investigate this, which really is almost tantamount to extortion.

Roger Pilgrim

Bangkok