Myanmar solution
Re: "Junta says Shan pullback meant 'for safety of people'", (BP, Aug 7).
Thailand should welcome the Myanmar firms and their patrons fleeing their civil war while subsidising productivity-boosting services for Thais. This would be a win-win for both countries and burnish our human rights stature even as we seek a seat on the UN Human Rights Council.
Thailand is rapidly ageing and sorely needs young, change-oriented Myanmar refugees and entrepreneurs to fill our age and investment gaps. The UNDP estimated there were 1.9m "regular migrants" from Myanmar in Thailand as of April 2023, and many more are fleeing the Tatmadaw's recent forced conscription.
We should give them work permits, an acculturation programme, and a merit-based path to citizenship so they will help our long-term economic development.
Who will be next?
Re: "MFP takes ruling in stride", (BP, Aug 8).
The court verdict on Wednesday sums up the past. After the charter court ordered the Future Forward Party dissolved in 2021, Pheu Thai issued a statement on Oct 30 that year saying that as the party with the most votes in the general election in 2019, it felt compelled to take up public concerns over excessive use of Article 112 to be discussed in parliament.
The pertinent and updated question is: who will be next after the MFP's ex-44 MPs? Pheu Thai? Or the 14 million who voted in the last election?
Visa quibbles
Re: "Passports to paradise?", (BP, Aug 5).
This is a response to Naruchai Ninnad, one of the chief architects of the new visa scheme, and deputy director-general of the Department of Consular Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Let me premise it by saying that in order to get any respect, you have to show respect, and as a longtime foreign resident here, I see nothing like that coming from him or the Chaeng Wattana branch of immigration.
So to get a five-year visa you have to show foreign sources of employment and that your income comes from abroad. For as long as I can remember, Chaeng Wattana has refused to accept my pension statement as well as an annual notice from Social Security. Together they amount to 100,000 baht per month. Are you or they making that much?
Also, if granted, the reporting time is shortened to every six months. It is bad enough to go there twice a year (to apply for a visa renewal and then going back to get the final visa) while wasting hours sitting around waiting for your number to be called.
If you think that a five-year visa is worth four visits a year, you are crazier than I give you credit for.
As for reporting, the 90-day unit must exist in their own little universe. They say you must report every 90 days, but if you do it by mail or online, they want it submitted 15 days prior to that date.
That amounts to a 75-day report.
One more thing. That unit does not recognise your reporting to get a new visa and then getting it as reporting to immigration.
Who are we reporting to then? I was told this by their own people. They also refuse to accept your TM47 if the reporting date falls between your application for a new visa and receiving it.
And, as many foreigners have asked over many years, why can't the 90-day report be eliminated for those who have reported the same address for over 10 years or more?
Permanent residency should be granted after 10 years of this nonsense, but immigration and Naruchai are hellbent on making our lives miserable.
They refuse to accept Thai ID cards (pink) and five-year driver's licences as evidence of residency. That is why I travel outside the country so much now.
So, along with the confusing tax bill, this will further aggravate foreigners living here. They show no respect nor any courtesy to those who support this country.
CONTACT: BANGKOK POST BUILDING136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110Fax: +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.