'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts." This famous slogan of the ruling Pheu Thai Party was clearly reflected in the government's policies presented to parliament by Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra last Thursday.
People's Party MP Sirikanya Tansakun pointed out that most of the government's urgent policies, coincidentally match the vision that her father, former prime minister Thaksin, announced at a dinner talk held by Nation Media on Aug 22.
That shouldn't be a surprise at all as it is an open secret that the person who actually holds sway in the government, starting from the formation of the government including which parties should be incorporated in the coalition and which factions in the fragmented Palang Pracharath Party -- one led by renegade Thamanat Prompao and the other by Gen Prawit Wongsuwon -- should be invited in and which should be kicked out.
Although, according to the textbook, Ms Paetongtarn has the final say as the government leader in the choice of the Pheu Thai Party's coalition partners, it took a seasoned old guard familiar with Thai politics from the inside out to decide it was about time to dump the once powerful army general without fear of retribution.
The entertainment complex idea, inherited by Ms Paetongtarn from the previous administration, is regarded as one of the urgent policies of her government.
During his vision speech last month, Thaksin said he initiated the project many years back, but it did not materialise due to stiff resistance. Today, however, he said the project is widely supported without his urging.
Strangely though, the idea of a legalised casino, which is the main attraction of the entertainment complex project, is not mentioned in the proposed Entertainment Complex Bill. Instead, the bill mentions other entertainment businesses such as hotels, restaurants, nightclubs, bars, yacht clubs, gaming, amusement parks, sports arenas, OTOP outlets and gambling.
The omission appears to be intentional to avoid criticism which may delay passage of the bill in parliament.
Legal experts point out there is no need to put it in the bill because the government can utilise a loophole in the obsolete Gambling Act and the Special Economic Zone Act to push for a casino in entertainment complex.
Thaksin claims the area to be allocated for a casino will be just 10 percent of the entire area of the project. But the size is not an issue. The real issue is the casino is the most controversial of all the entertainment forms in the complex.
It is the star money-making vehicle that the government, particularly the Pheu Thai Party, hopes will be a source of "new money" boosting the economy and restoring its waning popularity vis-a-vis the People's Party.
Mind you, the cost of a casino's licence is 5 billion baht which is valid for 30 years and can be renewed for 10 years. It is enough to build a hotel or an amusement park which may occupy a larger land plot than a casino.
A company which wants to invest in a casino in the complex must have a registered capital of 10 billion baht and would be required to operate at least four other businesses in the same complex such as a hotel, a sports arena, a yacht club or a gaming parlour.
Pheu Thai claims the complex will attract about 300 billion baht in "new money", mostly from abroad, to invest and will earn the government about 20 billion baht in tax revenue annually, and will also create about 20,000 jobs. That sounds quite impressive, but whether it can be achieved has yet to be seen.
The Finance Ministry, which is controlled by Pheu Thai, surveyed opinion last month which shows most respondents back the entertainment complex project.
As of now, the government appears to be going full throttle and does not care less about possible negative long-term social impacts such as entrenched gambling addictions, or objections by the civil society.
A casino is both a blessing and a curse. It will earn quick money for the government. Part of the revenue can be put for good use such as education or health care for the poor. But gambling or casinos will not improve people's livelihoods.
It is not entertaining either because, in the end, most gamblers will end up the losers, eventually becoming indebted.
Casino will not solve illegal gambling although it may attract people to gamble legally. Certain restrictions such as the proposed entrance fee to the casino, reported at 5,000 baht, will discourage low-income or even middle-income gamblers from using the facility and return to their old habit of illegal gambling, both online or offline.
On the negative side, the entertainment complex may be an ideal haven for laundering dirty money (money earned from corruption by officials, cyber scammers and other white-collar criminals) if enforcement of the law pertaining to gambling is lax.
One big issue rarely mentioned is: "Will there be a kickback for such a megaproject?"
For most contractors associated with government projects, kickbacks are often demanded by the decision maker, and the kickback rate may be up to 15% of the value of the project.
It is fair to say that government projects and kickbacks appear to go hand in hand like Siamese twins.
The Super Board chaired by the prime minister has the full authority to select the project bidder, to decide on the location of the project, to issue a licence and impose the tax rate for running a casino.
It should clear the air and make an exception for this project to show that Thailand, under PM Paetongtarn, is embarking on a new era of transparency and is corruption-free, even though the fight against corruption is not highlighted in the government's policies.
Veera Prateepchaikul is former editor, Bangkok Post.