On the latest suggestion that foreign experts be hired to solve the new airport problems, I feel like a foreigner in my own country.

Forty years ago, foreign planning experts came and decided on the location of the new airport at Cobra Swamp as part of the master plan of Bangkok. They were using the urban planning concept known as the "Litchfield Plan", which focused on motorisation with radial and ring roads as the backbones, which led to the multi-lane streets at the expense of the city's canals. Then a foreign architect planned and designed the new airport. Meanwhile, foreign engineering experts suggested building the runways in the swamp without piling.

Now it is suggested that foreign experts be hired to resolve the problems.

Where are the Thai soil engineers, many of whom have their doctorates from leading western universities? But beyond engineering specialists, we also need humanists at this point, people who are in touch with history and anthropology.

Sumet Jumsai

Bangkok

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

Country needs all the qualified outside advice it can get

Vira Mavijak's comments in your lead story concerning his objection to appointing foreign engineers to solve the problems at Suvarnabhumi Airport are understandable, given his position as president of the Council of Engineers. But saying that appointing foreign engineers would be a disgrace to the country is just laughable and, in many respects, worrying.

Thailand wants Suvarnabhumi to be a world-class airport, yet the country is not prepared to allow world-class engineers to work to solve the current situation. If the problems are as "tiny" as he claims then why is a move back to Don Muang even being discussed?

Thailand, and Suvarnabhumi especially, needs all the help it can get right now, and to discriminate against foreign help for the sake of protecting local workers just isn't realistic in this situation.

Andrew

Bangkok

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

THAI might improve services if govt stopped propping it up

Re: "Keep overseas flights at the new airport", Editorial, February 15.

I read with interest today's editorial regarding the transfer of international flights to Don Muang airport. However, I feel you seem to have missed several key points.

Many, many countries quite clearly do not place the interests of their national carrier above every other airline.

Many countries have placed their national carriers at the mercy of the free market. Huge improvements have occurred while bad airlines, such as Alitalia, have disintegrated.

You also mention that Thai Airways (THAI) is good for the tourist industry.

As someone who authors guidebooks to Thailand and who writes regular travel stories on Thailand for several national UK newspapers, I would suggest otherwise.

It does very little to support journalists. Its domestic and short haul customer service is a joke (two of my last four THAI flights were cancelled) while its long-haul reputation is only just recovering.

Maybe if more competition was introduced and THAI was protected less then its services would improve.

Andrew Spooner

Bangkok

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

Surayud and CNS have a full agenda for remainder of term

He was calm, serene, poised and honest - and what more can you ask from this gentleman prime minister? What seemed to be lacking in Tuesday's live TV interview with Thepchai Yong was the ebullient confidence that used to be General Surayud Chulanont's trademark. When asked why things were not getting done more quickly, Surayud replied matter-of-factly: "I respond to principle, not emotion".

That was as it should be, but General Surayud must also understand that he is not a prime minister at the best of times. His interim government just cannot simply ride out the tough times because it was not installed to do that; it was installed, rather, to manage one of the worst crises this country has ever experienced. The hopes and aspirations of Thailand as a nation rest upon this government's shoulders, to say the least. Here is a checklist, that I wish General Surayud would consider, of items to accomplish during his remaining seven months in office:

1) Meet the Thaksin challenges head on, in whatever form and by whatever means necessary.

2) Put words into action as far as the three southernmost provinces are concerned, and show conclusively that incidents of violence can actually be curbed or reduced, if not eliminated, effectively.

3) Restore Suvarnabhumi International Airport quickly to its place of glory.

4) Find better policies to replace the 30-per cent reserve measure that has proven ineffective in weakening the value of the baht that is hurting our exports.

5) Remove doubts about the newly proposed Foreign Business Act.

6) Restore the morale of Bangkokians who are scared of bomb threats and those in the provinces whose schools were burnt down by capturing and bringing those who committed the heinous crimes to justice through due process of law.

7) Contribute to the speeding-up of the drafting of the new constitution, so that fresh elections may be held within the time that was promised.

8) If necessary, the prime minister must make the tough decisions to remove those Cabinet members who do not perform; and if he cannot bring himself to do that he may well remove himself.

9) Punish officials of the Thaksin regime or those of any other regimes, who put themselves in a "neutral gear".

10) Finally, enlarge the power of and extend both the tenure and terms of reference for agencies responsible for weeding out corruption such as the Assets Examination Committee and the Office of the Auditor-General, with the full participation of the public.

If General Surayud can accomplish only half of what is listed above, then I feel that he can rightfully consider his job done, and the legacy that he will leave behind will be great. What we call the spirit of "the people's revolution" of 19 September 2006 will not have died in vain and instead will shine through.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

Revive the 1997 charter in the interest of transparency

Re: "Surayud's explanation was not too convincing", News, February 15.

It is sufficiently clear that we have a minimalist and cautious caretaker government backed by the coup group. The prime minister is a good and decent man who feels that his administration has met expectations if it is honest and transparent.

Within this context, let me propose that the Council for National Security (CNS) reinstate the 1997 constitution and schedule general elections on September 19, on the one-year anniversary of the coup. The CNS government will depart leaving two great achievements: the removal of Thaksin and organising free and fair elections. The 1997 constitution allows orderly amendments with systematic participation possible. The current drafting process and consequent plebiscite could turn counterproductive. A plebiscite also presupposes an electorate that is informed on constitutional issues.

Under this approach, we will have an orderly transition. It will remove the cloud of uncertainty, which could cause greater harm to the economy. We should not fear Thaksin's return. There is no defence under the sun to prevent his Thai Rak Thai Party from being dissolved. And he may not return if he feels disadvantaged in all kinds of litigation including possible arrest warrants.

Tunyatape Suwanjindar

Bangkok

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

Ban rice-field burning for environment and farmers

The dreadful period of burning rice fields has started again. The landscape begins to look like a fierce war has been fought: scorched earth, black burned trees. We all know the misery brought by the burning of the forest in Kalimantan, Indonesia. How sad to see Thailand contributing its unnecessary share to world pollution and the greenhouse effect. Thai researchers have proved that burning rice fields is not only detrimental to the environment but results in a smaller yield! Forbidding burning would be a win-win situation. Why don't government officials intervene?

Egon

Bangkok

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

Letter implying Howard is 'racist' has no basis in fact

Re: "Howard's reaction to Obama speech shows true colours", Letters, February 14.

So, Bangkok Clawman thinks that Australian Prime Minister John Howard's so-called 'attack' on Barack Obama was racially motivated. What a ludicrous claim.

Howard was making a political response to the policy announcement of a US presidential candidate, who just happens to also be a black American, and who made it clear that his policy on Iraq differs from that of President George W Bush and Howard, a staunch US and Bush ally.

As for the writer's uninformed and baseless claim that Howard and the current Australian government are racist towards Australia's indigenous population and that the country is facing "many difficulties", I suggest he looks at the facts. The current Howard government has spent more money on indigenous health, education and social welfare than any other government in Australia's history. Likewise, the country's current levels of unemployment, inflation and interest rates are the lowest they've been in 25 years - hardly the track record of a "racist" government or a country facing "many difficulties".

Rob Lenehan

Bangkok