OPINION

Hiding the truth

Re: "Stop blaming others", (PostBag, Sept 19). Well said, Darius Hober. The worst possible solution to the threats posed by false statements would be to entrust the truth to the state, or to any other sole institution.

Free speech is the only sound antidote to fake claims in the news, intentional or not, by officials or concerned citizens, by good or bad people, or in accord with or deeply offensive to social norms.

Naturally, this efficacy against fake news is precisely why dictators make a habit of suppressing free speech, as Section 34 of Thailand's constitution does to prevent important truths about their nation being discovered by Thais.

Heads in the sand

Re: "Crackdown ordered as haze worsens", (BP, Sept 18).

It is disheartening that Asian governments repeatedly fail to deal with forest destruction, fires, and haze that chronically affect millions of people in the region. These fires not only destroy valuable biodiversity and release millions of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, but the resulting smoke and haze also kills hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people.

It's not as if the fires are a surprise. Because of the failure to address the root causes of forest destruction (ie, primarily the cheap clearing of land for oil palm and agricultural production), Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar and Thailand face this scourge every year. The disaster is worsened in drier years, especially when the El Nino effect suppresses rainfall.

Everyone knows the problem is recurring. Yet political heads remain in the sand, while the best an ordinary citizen can do is pray for rain. Sad.

Used to Prayutisms

Re: "PM's flood of anger", (Editorial, Sept 18).

The failure to improve Thailand's water management and disaster response systems over the last decades is clearly disheartening. Some experts had hoped that after the coup an authoritarian regime could effect significant reforms which previous governments had been unable to implement, but this clearly has not happened. On the contrary!

Now, the only good thing the prime minister has done in these circumstances is to avoid visiting the flooded areas, which could only create additional chaos and distractions to beleaguered populations and officials.

It is nonsense to suggest that "only by witnessing the scale of the disaster in person could he organise effective response measures". Either the systems are in place or they are not.

A prime minister should not be some sort of Superman flying around, but someone who makes sure that they are around. And if you criticise flood response for being overly centralised, don't suggest it should be even more centralised and personalised.

As for his style of reaction (which I find equally sad and funny), we should, by now, be as much used to his Prayutisms as we are, unfortunately, to Trumpisms.

Be prepared

The Boy Scouts used to have the motto, "be prepared" and probably still do.

In a country not unaccustomed to floods and other disasters, surely there should be detailed recovery plans in place to provide food and water rations, medical equipment, temporary accommodation. Army engineers and other members of the armed forces, with their equipment, should be trained to react quickly, capable of mobilisation within 24 hours.

Sufficient funds should be available in a timely manner to reduce danger and hardship. But apparently, the paperwork and regulations involved are just too damn difficult and time-consuming and cannot be rushed.

Where are the Boy Scouts when you need them?