EDITORIAL : THE BANGKOK POST, THAILAND

Questionable spending spree

Cabinet's final spending spree on Tuesday was typical of Thai politics. The Abhisit Vejjajiva government was not the first to carry out this ugly practice and it will not be the last. Several previous governments unabashedly did so. Hence such Thai phrases as thing thuan (dropping of lances), ploy phi (setting free the ghosts) or tay krajard (emptying the baskets) have been coined and used to describe this final act of splurging.

In a marathon meeting which began at 8am on Tuesday and lasted till 2am the following day (allowing for an afternoon break from 1pm to 7pm), the cabinet endorsed more than 200 on- and off-agenda proposals and issues worth almost 100 billion baht in budget.

Indeed, it was an extraordinary feat by the government as far as the number of issues, proposals and projects was concerned.

Setting aside the quantitative achievement, one may justifiably wonder whether the hard-working Cabinet had exercised discretion or proper consideration before giving their approval, especially for multi-billion-baht projects. Or did they merely give the ministries concerned the benefit of the doubt and simply glanced through most of their proposals or projects? Considering the number of projects approved and the time it took to approve them, the latter seems to have been the case.

Some of the projects approved by Cabinet are populist in nature and do not need to be implemented in a rush. These include the 25-billion-baht housing loan scheme for first-time home-buyers, to be implemented by the Government Housing Bank; and the 20% pay rise for officials of tambon and provincial administration organisations, provincial councillors and Bangkok councillors.

The opposition Pheu Thai Party has cried foul over these projects and will ask both the Election Commission and the National Counter Corruption Commission to take a closer look, to see whether these approvals amount to vote-buying.

One particular project appears suspicious and should be scrapped. That is the 200-million-baht public relations budget sought by the Labour Ministry, supposedly to inform the public about the benefits of the social security scheme. The amount is comparatively small but the question is why is it needed. Why can't the Labour Ministry let the Public Relations Department and the state-run television stations do the publicity for free, with the Labour Ministry simply supplying the information?

There certainly are projects worthy of the expense and a quick cabinet decision on these projects was necessary. A case in point is the substantial increase in special compensation for provincial waterworks staff in the strife-torn deep South, from 2,500 baht to 5,000 baht a month. Because of the dangers posed by Islamic extremists and the high risk involved in their job, these workers deserve the pay rise, which will also serve as an incentive for them not to leave the region for safer places.

The most important point about this traditional practice of a cabinet's final spending spree is that it is completely wrong _ morally, financially and economically. Taxpayers' money is supposed to be used wisely and productively on projects which have been carefully thought out, and are for the public's benefit. Cabinet ministers, the prime minister in particular, are duty-bound to see that the projects are worth the expenditure. Rushing them through, especially those projects which would be binding on the next government, is an act of sheer irresponsibility.