His departure would have been more respected and dignified had he taken full responsibility for the ailments of the Thai economy, instead of citing his discomfort with the ill-fated appointment of Somkid Jatusripitak as special economic envoy and his conflicts with certain ministers within the Cabinet. The many flip-flopping policies that took place under his stewardship are known to have caused instability in the Thai economy.  Capital flight continues unabated and foreign investors are looking elsewhere.  Indeed, Thailand has economically not been the same since he arrived on the scene.

With MR Pridiyathorn out of the picture, what about his economic "dream team", who must in some fashion be responsible for the mismanagement of the Thai economy?  Are they going to sit back and hold on tightly to their chairs, knowing that the government's term will end in seven months?  If the new finance minister wants his/her own "dream team" instead, what will the prime minister do? Will he allow more rifts to take place?

This is a soul-searching time for Premier Surayud Chulanont.  He has seven months left, which is a short time indeed.  But within that short span the prime minister can also accomplish a lot, if the right decisions are made.  I feel that with MR Pridiyathorn's resignation, an opportunity has arrived for General Surayud to take a close look once more at his remaining colleagues and judge their performances.  Do what you must, prime minister, and make sure that you have good and capable people to help you steer the country out of harm's way and to contribute their best efforts in a very difficult time such as this.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

Thaksin's 'clique' still has its hooks in highest level of govt

It was a big mistake for Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont to fail to prevent MR Pridiyathorn Devakula from leaving his posts as deputy prime minister and finance minister.

Pridiyathorn said that a minister was acting as a conduit through which a member of the previous regime was able to sneak into this administration, apparently referring to the appointment of Somkid Jatusripitak as a mouthpiece for the sufficiency economy model. Though Pridiyathorn said that the event was over after Somkid withdrew his services, a certain minister in the Cabinet is still around, acting as a bridge to the old clique. No names were mentioned, but everyone knows that he meant PM's Office Minister Thirapat Serirangsan. It is unlikely that he meant Piyabutr Cholvijarn, the deputy industry minister.

Letting go of Pridiyathorn and keeping Thirapat leaves Surayud with a huge deficit, not to mention his administration's lingering liabilities. The whole saga can be explained by putting together the previous roles of well-known public players, as follows:

Sondhi Limthongkul, owner of Manager Media and ASTV, and a sworn enemy of Pridiyathorn, attacked him while he was governor of the Bank of Thailand, and did the same to his predecessors for nearly a decade.

Pridiyathorn blocked a bid by Viroj Nualkhair to renew his tenure as president of Krung Thai Bank.

Krung Thai Bank generously gave a "haircut" to Sondhi's huge debts owed to the bank, and granted him media advertising contracts.

Thirapat and Somkid helped Thaksin found his Thai Rak Thai Party - one specialised in politics, another economics. Somkid, when teaching at the National Institute of Development Administration a decade ago, moonlighted at Phatra Securities, where Viroj was president and wrote a daily column for Manager Media.

Sondhi befriended Thaksin, through his high-school chum Thanong Bidaya, and was once Thaksin's mouthpiece on his Channel 9 program, "Thailand Weekly".

When Thaksin ceased supporting Sondhi's failing businesses and Somkid opted to stay aloof, the anti-Thaksin movement took to the streets.

Believe me or not, it's up to you.

Sai Sima

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

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

iTV must be allowed to remain true to its independent roots

ITV station was founded in accordance with the May 1992 incident. The concept was to form a private television station, independent from state power. However, over the past six years, the intention behind iTV's founding has absolutely changed. iTV must be reformed so that it is a truly free television channel with a structure that is truly independent from state power, not one that falls under state authority again.

The Campaign for Popular Media Reform (CPMR) disagrees with the government taking possession of iTV and allowing the PM's Office to manage it. This will result in control of iTV's editorial direction.

CPMR, therefore, sees the resolution of the Council of Ministers as containing a hidden agenda that shows the government is not determined to make media reforms.

 The government needs to reform iTV by insisting that iTV be allowed to remain private and that a new concession allocated and iTV's structure reformed so that it is independent from state power.

The CPMR urgently proposes the following:

1) The government must take its time - about four to six months - before deciding what to do with iTV, while permitting the station to air programmes without state interference.

2) The government must open a public debate in order for every part of society to be able to propose solutions for iTV and to hold a referendum regarding iTV's future within the next four to six months.

3) The government needs to gather the proposals and suggestions for iTV reforms so that they can inform political parties' policy platforms in the next election. Then, the elected government can carry on with iTV reforms, pushing towards it being free television supported by the media business sector and the public.

Campaign for Popular Media Reform

Bangkok

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

BBC-style channel would be a waste of taxpayer's money

Re: "Panel will be set up to control embattled iTV", News, February 28.

There has been much debate about what will happen to iTV once it is forced to file for bankruptcy next month, and one option that has been bandied about for quite some time is for it to be remodelled along the lines of the BBC. But when you look at the BBC's structure and its financing, all Thais with a television set will be forced to pay Bt10,000 a year to watch it. Not only that, but the BBC's website is also financed from those funds, and a large percentage of the Thai TV-watching population will be excluded from it.

Also, the BBC has always been intellectually, politically and artistically impartial, employing some of the best journalists on the planet. The Thai model surely cannot compete or even work because quality and integrity will always be undervalued and compromised by those in power, who will use it for personal gain and influence. The best thing for the notion of the Thai Broadcasting Company is to liquidate the idea and forget it ever existed.

Sucatash

Bangkok

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

Ensuring equality only solution to southern troubles

I am from the democracy of Canada and I want you to know that we too have problems with separation and unrest.  The important thing is to look for the truth behind the excuse.  The excuse in the South of Thailand seems to be a lack of total equality with the rest of the country.

A democracy must above all be equal - equal opportunity, equal representation, equal rights, equal wages, etc. I understand this is not so in the South, so I would think the effort should be to correct the imbalance.

Seeking investment in the region from Malaysia is a positive step, but all democracies should also step in and help to bring prosperity to the area. This would create more balance in the region and not further segregate it.

None of this need be handouts or charity as the right investment in the right industries could show a great profit.

Show the South that every effort is being made to bring equality to the region and their concerns will lose strength, leaving only a handful with a political agenda who can no longer exploit the imbalance. I am only a guest in Thailand but love the culture, art, and most of all the people ... all the people and long to see harmony, love and prosperity in all regions.

Tim Devlin

Toronto, Canada

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

Expand surveillance in major tourist spots to cut crime

The recent murder of two Russian women in Pattaya has caused much anguish and hand wringing in Thailand; witness The Nation's recent editorial ("Time to clean up Pattaya", February 27).

Certainly no shadow should fall on the general friendliness of the Thai people, which I witnessed on my visit to Thailand earlier this month.

However, issues of public safety should be taken extremely seriously, since they can lead to either positive or negative spirals. Pattaya is in danger of falling into a negative spiral of shadiness and violence, which attracts the worst kind of visitors and repels those you would like to attract.

In a positive spiral, good public safety encourages new visitors who value a good safe environment. Thus the Thai police authorities and ministers responsible for public safety need to pay close attention to crime in popular tourist areas.

One effective method for combating crime is to place surveillance cameras all over public locations, for example, in the most popular tourist areas. Use of these cameras in Britain and other Western nations shows that criminals are almost inevitably caught on some surveillance camera or other. For example, with a lot of surveillance cameras around, people who placed the bombs in Bangkok on New Year's Eve would almost certainly have been apprehended by now.

Janne Salonen

Helsinki, Finland

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com