Somchai and PAD come up with Mediocre choices to end political conflict

The government's political expediency is to create a mediocre Cabinet and come up with half-baked ideas to mislead the PAD into establishing a second-rate model for the political system. Even though both camps claim its version of democracy is superior, their struggle for power is hampering efforts to pull through the political quagmire.

This week the government is expected to announce its Cabinet. No one has great expectations about the ministerial line-up but it would still be a letdown to see appointments being based completely on expediency.

In spite of public support, Somchai has allowed this golden opportunity to shore up confidence slip away.

The allocation of Cabinet seats is now mired with coalition quotas, factional squabbling and a game of musical chairs among cronies.

Like the Samak Sundaravej government - which was hatched in Hong Kong - the Somchai administration is being drawn up in London.

Key faction leaders like Newin Chidchob and Yongyuth Tiyapairat allocated seats under instructions from former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Khunying Pojaman.

Somchai's wife, Yaowapa, advised her brother Thaksin into reserving plum assignments for a clique of MPs from the North. Loyal allies from Chiang Mai were duly rewarded with jobs in the PM's inner circle, and Somchai reportedly agreed to rubber-stamp the deal worked out by his wife and in-laws.

The Cabinet line-up signals the People Power Party's determination to plough through all political adversity in order to cling to power.

Political expediency might yield an incompetent government, with coalition MPs focusing more on partisan interests than the greater good.

Even if the government were to collapse in a few months, it would not be of concern because the alliance and the electoral system would remain intact to help win re-election bids.

It is just a coincidence that the PAD-led opposition has decided to come up with a new political model to replace what it considers a flawed electoral system at the same time as the unveiling of the Cabinet.

The PAD intends to make people aware of the "evil-side" of the Somchai government - which it claims to be a proxy of Thaksin's autocratic regime. But by rushing to advance the tentative model for its so-called "new politics", it has failed to think things through. As a result, confusion only seems to intensify.

It remains doubtful whether its new politics could be a viable alternative to the existing political system.

Though the PAD claims it is drawing a road map to revamp the system, it appears unable to come up with either a fresh proposal or a breakthrough.

The debate on what constitutes an appropriate political model for Thailand has been rekindled time and again over the past 76 years. Arguments advanced by the PAD are nothing but a rehash of past issues.

The idea about allocating House seats between appointees and elected MPs is not new. For more than a decade after the advent of democracy in 1932, half of the parliamentary representatives were appointed.

However, nowadays people are more politically conscious, which is why the PAD is being met with such stiff opposition to the idea of House seats being allocated.

This idea has since been modified to divide seats between elected MPs via constituency vote and elected professional representatives via peer vote. The PAD has yet to clarify how the nomination process and peer vote would be organised.

The idea of professional representation sounds strikingly similar to the so-called democratic representation in a communist regime. If the PAD were to emulate a Chinese political model, many would cry foul over the regression of popular |democracy.