OPINION

Golden opportunity

Re: "Myanmar crisis: security and humanity", (Opinion, March 19).

I agree with columnist Khun Kavi Chongkittavorn that the situation in Myanmar is fast-changing and unpredictable.

Yet, it presents Thailand with a windfall, a win-win major opportunity if we have the vision to grasp it. As one of Asia's fastest-ageing societies, we have an ever-rising number of elders needing support. The Myanmar people fleeing being forced to kill their countrymen are the exact group we need to slow down our ageing. We should offer them a merit-based work path to citizenship, including an acculturation programme, while we upgrade the productivity of Thais.

This would be a win-win for all concerned. The immigrants would hone their skills by helping us grow instead of rusting away in refugee camps, a burden on everybody; we'd boost our expertise and help show the world that we deserve a seat on the UN Human Rights Council.

PM Srettha, think win-win and move quickly.

Haze of neglect

Re: "Risky business", (PostBag, March 20) & "Disaster zone label will hurt tourism", (BP, March 19).

I agree with David Brown's letter that it's a disgrace that the Thai government cares more about tourist dollars than public health. The last time I was in Chiang Mai I was actually worried that I was losing some of my eyesight. I didn't realise it was the smog that was blocking my vision. I was relieved that my clear vision returned after I left that city. (I'm only half-joking.)

What kind of government would deliberately downplay a very real health threat to the public and try to make tourists think that everything is fine? This is a thousand times more dangerous than Covid ever was.

Battle for reform

Re: "Pita power", (PostBag, March 20).

Vint Chavala wonders about his alleged fact that Move Forward Party's list MP Pita Limjaroenrat -- also former party leader -- has never given any indication that he regrets the fact that he had led his party executives and members -- 43 of them besides Mr Pita -- to co-sign with him the MFP's proposal to amend Section 112 in parliament. But why would the increasingly popular leader of the increasingly popular MFP have such regrets? It is not as if he or his party have misled anyone or done anything wrong.

The MFP and its members knew what they were doing. They acted openly and honestly. Prior to May 14 last year, when the nation showed its strong approval, the Electoral Commission had no problem with their popular flagship policy. It was and is in accord with democratic principles. It is exactly the sort of reform that Thailand needs, hence MFP's popularity with the electorate. The only explanation needed is why some persons and institutions are now using legal mechanisms to put themselves and everything they represent in direct conflict with what is majority support by the Thai voters.

Regarding the degrees of popularity currently enjoyed, a few pertinent polls to put some percentages not only on the actual popularity of MFP and Pita today but also of the parties and persons on the other side are long overdue. By proving to a percentage point just how effectively the legal actions against MFP and Pita are actively undermining faith in and respect for associated institutions.