OPINION

Weighing populism

What are populist policies?

 The term "populist" has become hostage to the political battle and lost its usefulness in distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable public policy.

We need a way to assess the policies being put forward because fiscal populism has undermined our democracy. If we want democracy to survive and prosper we must restrain our desires and refuse to vote for those who seek to bribe us with our own money in their quest for votes.

How to differentiate acceptable and unacceptable policy? I suggest four connected tests in addition to the obvious requirement of genuine necessity. Acceptable policy should be sustainable, affordable, fully funded and with minimum distortions and side effects.

Sustainable means expenditure should produce some permanent improvement for those helped or at least be a bridge to improvement. How many policies just fudge the numbers and leave a big void when they stop with no obvious long term impact? If you give handouts to alleviate poverty short term, you must also do something tangible about the root cause as well.

Affordable and fully funded means the resources must be available from the economy now and the annual budget must cover the full cost. None of this off-balance sheet financial engineering or ever-rising debt. There must be a fair balance between taxpayers and policy beneficiaries and between the younger and older generations especially where debt is concerned. The only exception might ben borrowing for infrastructure costs which have the ability to repay their cost from revenues over time.

Minimum distortions and side effects means we need to consider the whole picture and move in a measured way. Sudden wage hikes get votes but create unemployment. Controlled prices reduce producer incomes and indiscriminately benefit wealthy and poor alike. Half the time the impression is that policies do more harm than good and it would be better if politicians simply stopped meddling.

We should cut through the political hype and measure for ourselves the acceptability of policy. A look around the world shows many countries wallowing in debt with democracy increasingly at risk because their electorates failed to make this judgment.

The communities and development centres for hill tribes people may have been defrauded of 100 million baht in addition to the pervasive fraud found at the provincial centres for the derelict. This money has been stolen by government bureaucrats and, as such, is merely the tip of the iceberg in this country. The self-proclaimed goal of our coup-installed government has been reform, but it is increasingly apparent that reform is not their goal but merely a propaganda smoke screen. Everybody but the public is getting rich, in one way or another, on tax money.

Punishment is seen to be harsh when delivered to the meek and invisible when proposed for the wealthy and influential. If a list of the wealthy or influential who have gone scot free after committing serious crimes were a sponge, it could sop up an ocean of tears. And how many on that list are police officers, monks, or politicians? There is a crying need for reform and equal treatment under the law. Unfortunately, with the polls to be controlled by the powers that be, there isn't a chance in a million we will see significant change in the coming decade.

Re: "TEFL crackdown needed", (PostBag, May 6).

More is needed than a crackdown on just legal and illegal TEFL courses. Most Thai 4-year degrees are considered substandard by many European and Western universities. Many Thais have been rejected with their degrees after applying. Usually an extra year is required for admittance, a sort of "booster".

It is not a money grab. It is simply that many 4-year Thai degrees are worth 3 years elsewhere. University education needs to be brought up-to-date in content and intensity as well.

Contact: Bangkok Post Building 136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110 fax: +02 6164000 Email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th

All letter writers must provide full name and address.

All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.