The censure debate against Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra resumed at parliament on Tuesday morning with the opposition-core People's Party seriously questioning gaps in her knowledge and citing numerous examples.
People’s Party (PP) MP Pakamon Noon-anan told the House that Ms Paetongtarn had no suitable knowledge for the premiership. The opposition MP cited many examples to support her criticism.
Ms Pakamon said that on Sept 24 last year, reporters asked the prime minister how she would handle a stronger baht, the prime minister replied that the baht's appreciation would benefit Thai exports.
“How’s that possible? People worldwide know that a strong baht benefits imports because they cost less to bring in. It harms exports because our products are more expensive… You gave a wrong answer to a basic question,” the PP MP said.
“Lack of understanding of a simple issue affects people’s confidence in the nation's leader,” she said.
On Feb 25, Ms Pakamon said, reporters asked the prime minister about a possible stimulus for the Stock Exchange of Thailand, as the SET index had at the time plunged to 1,200. The prime minister had smiled and left without an answer.
On March 10, reporters had asked her why the government would hand out 10,000 baht to people aged 16-20, the prime minister replied by asking reporters if they had posed that question to the Finance Ministry, and then left.
At the time, the prime minister had just emerged from chairing a meeting on stimulating the economy, Ms Pakamon said. “Was there any reason why the chair of the meeting couldn’t give an answer on the subject of the meeting?”
The opposition MP also referred to the prime minister’s performance during the Forbes Global CEO Conference in Bangkok on Nov 21, 2024. “At that forum, if Paetongtarn had performed well, huge investments could have been attracted to Thailand,” she said.
During the Nov 21 discussion, Ms Paetongtarn was asked how the government would develop technological infrastructure and skilled workers to attract technology projects to Thailand. She replied by talking about the government’s farm debt moratorium, 10,000-baht handouts and soft power promotion, Ms Pakamon said.
In the same forum, the interviewer asked Ms Paetongtarn why global investors should come to Thailand, and the prime minister replied that Thailand’s location was good, at the centre of the region, the PP MP said.
“The audience on that day knew where Thailand was. How is its location related to the capability of the prime minister in developing the national economy?” the opposition MP said.
“If you mention the outstanding feature of Thailand is its location, you do not have to be prime minister because Thailand cannot move elsewhere,” Ms Pakamon said.
To woo investors, the prime minister should have mentioned stability, economic growth outlook, tax privileges, business facilitation in Thailand, support from the government, plans to develop workers’ skills, Thailand’s outstanding industrial and agricultural sectors and the achievements of investors who did business in Thailand, she said.
The interviewer in the Forbes session asked about the most common question that foreign investors and chief executives asked about investment opportunities in Thailand when they met the prime minister. Ms Paetongtarn replied that they frequently asked about the health of her father and her aunt, Ms Pakamon said.
The answer was irrelevant and did not benefit investment opportunities in Thailand, the opposition MP said.
When asked about the possible impact from the return of United States President Donald Trump, the prime minister replied that there would not be a problem because Thailand’s exports to the US amounted to only 10% of the gross domestic product of Thailand.
“If there is damage to the source of that 10% of GDP, will the prime minister not view it as a problem?... You are unable to discuss economic issues at this level,” Ms Pakamon said.
