• 
• 
• 

Abhisit's TV talkshow on Sunday morning is a significant departure from his predecessors, notably Thaksin Shinawatra. It is a constructive engagement in which he displays intimacy and sincerity. It's not just rambling sweet-talk. Abhisit conveys a human touch through his eye contact and voice.

The people who will really sweat after watching Abhisit's performance include Thaksin and his minions, watching for the young man's weak spots. Thaksin now understands more the real significance of PR to boost the popularity of public office holders, especially politicians.

The opposition remains in disarray as it has yet to find a meaningful leader with the credibility and stature of Abhisit, who proves that age is not that important, and that leadership can be judged through performance.

The business community has heard reassuring words from Abhisit as it measures them against his deeds. The programmes he intends to carry out for national recovery are chiefly on the economic front and in providing a substantial improvement to the livelihood of the poor.

But there is no reason yet for hubris. What lies ahead will be a real threat. However, the opposition will have to revise its strategy to counter the scores piled up by Abhisit at the expense of Thaksin, who continues to sink into obscurity. Thaksin's phone talk DVD, as promised by his cronies, will be even less regarded if it offers only repetitive content and woeful stories about injustice.

For the first time, the Democrat Party has shown creativity in PR strategies - a game Thaksin used to show finesse in, in the absence of a real competitor. Abhisit's PR counter-move has worked well, while there is still much room for improvement. The next round should see him in the TV studio with poor folk and community leaders from the Northeast, who can be an important bridge for Abhisit to gain more ground in a region traditionally hostile to the Democrats. Empty talk and hollow promises will not work. Projects must create jobs and lead the poor from a state of hopelessness as unemployment continues to rise.

Convincing communication lies in real performance and solid results. There is no harm in telling the public of achievements as long as they are not exaggeration or outright propaganda. People love to know what good is coming to them. Thaksin was good at populist policy, but Abhisit has showed over the past two weeks that he can still make this better with a lot more to come.

What Abhisit must avoid is any policy flaw. Land reform, which pulled the rug from under the party several years ago, is being revived for reasons known to the party's heavyweights. Maybe they are more confident about plugging all the loopholes, leaving nothing to be exploited by adversaries. Still, the issue is a hot potato, and must be handled with extreme care and sensitivity.

In the Sor Por Kor land reform programme, the government can still do a lot more by allocating land to help the rural poor. This could revive agriculture through workable reform with taxation measures to discourage land grabbing.

For decades, public land has been occupied via the Por Bor Tor scheme, under which a citizen can occupy vacant and untitled land by paying a token amount of tax annually that is nothing compared to the value of the land. Occupied areas can be used for any purpose and with possible transfer rights. The Sor Por Kor scheme forbids transfer of land-holding rights.

The land under these programmes should be reviewed, re-allocated, or put to better use through large-scale contract farming to ensure higher productivity and proper management and product marketing. Limited private land-holding should be allowed to prevent excessive land grabbing and under-utilisation of resources. Big-time land-holders are either required to pay hefty land taxes or part with untitled tracts.

This is a herculean task that will encounter stiff opposition and outright hostility. Big-time land-holders will be up in arms. Food is the key for long-term prosperity for our nation, not the stock market or derivatives. What's more, oil and minerals will not last forever, while our land can yield crops for centuries to come, barring calamity or havoc inflicted by global warming. Abhisit should rethink long-term national strategies, whether we should discard expensive heavy industries in which we lack technical know-how and capital input, and go for revival of agriculture.

The first voices of opposition will be heard in the Cabinet and Parliament, where big-time land-holders protect vested interests. If Abhisit wants to become a statesman and leader of the people, he must fight for this cause and tell the public what he wants for fair distribution of wealth derived from the land. This sounds like a lofty ideal impossible to achieve. It is Abhisit who should say whether it is attainable or not.

The rich won't like this idea, but there is one thing more. For decades we have heard about inheritance tax, but nobody has been serious enough to propose it to the House. If Abhisit thinks that some schemes are easy, he should raise this issue to know immediately how many friends he actually has.