Irish were right to reject the EU's Lisbon Treaty

Their vote is a reflection of the heart and soul of a nation in touch with its democratic roots and moral foundation. Acceptance of the treaty would have enhanced the power of a EU that aims at forced compliance of all member states to accept a culture that includes homosexuality, same-sex marriage and abortion.

The increasing tendency of European nations to repudiate their Christian roots is not the expression of some morally superior tolerance for other cultures but rather the authorisation of an absolute way of thinking and living that is radically opposed to the variety of cultures.

Secularists are motivated by a totalitarian concept of the State. But this is not reality. It should be the State that conforms to the society it serves - not the other way around. This is the essence of democracy. The opposite is dictatorship and totalitarianism

Paul Kokoski

Hamilton, Ontario

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

Samak's childish outburst was a pathetic spectacle

Re: "Samak says he stared at reporters out of 'astonishment', June 15.

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej made a clown of himself by grimacing at reporters who showed up at the luncheon he was attending with his coalition partners last week. He put on a stern face in front of TV cameras for nearly two minutes - which all TV stations broadcast in full. The footage showed our prime minister at his most pitiable moment. One wonders why he didn't give the coalition leaders a hard look plus some harsh words for leaking news of his luncheon with them. They were supposed to be the culprits.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Finance minister should clarify FIDF's investment

Whilst I agree with MR Pridiyathorn Devakula's concerns over the Minister of Finance's questionable judgement over his reported choice of Selection Committee, whose task it will be to select the Board of the Central Bank, I was more interested in his account of the FIDF investment in Bank Thai (BT). Specifically he mentioned the FIDF had committed to investment in Bank Thai at a price of Bt1.36 based on book value on November 29, 2007 of Bt2.17. The investment was eventually made in January only for the declaration of BT's book value to have declined to Bt0.30 at the end of February.

I do not think that the question of what price FIDF will eventually receive when the shares are actually sold is particularly valid - FIDF is not in the business of speculating on stock investment. However, the critical questions which were not addressed by MR Pridiyathorn are:

1) Did the FIDF really not know of the decline in the book value of BT given that the loss was as a result of so-called sub-prime investment, the state of which was evident to everyone, let alone the Bank of Thailand, at the time. 

2) Perhaps more pertinent: Did the FIDF have an 'out clause' in the agreement inked with the co-investor who had already injected funds at the same price? In other words, even had the decline in book value been known in January, could the FIDF have walked away or re-negotiated?

Given that MR Pridiyathorn is linking this issue with the alleged attempt to replace the governor of the BOT, it would be beneficial if he, or the FIDF, could provide clarity.

Korn Chatikavanij

Shadow Finance Minister - Democrat Party