Thai Civic Groups Slam Country's Mega-projects - Needless Drain on National Coffers by Phairath Khampha 28 March 2002 Civic advocates in Thailand banded together in opposition to mega-projects they said were needless and would financially enslave the country, in effect making it an economic neo-colony of western multinational corporations and banks. At the centre of the debate were the Thai-Malaysian gas pipeline, the Hin Krut and Bo Nok coal-fired power plants, and the Klong Dan water treatment pond, each worth billions of baht (1 US Dollar = 43.41 Thai Baht). Banjong Nasae, an opponent of the Thai-Malaysian pipeline, said the country was set for a senseless spending spree. The government's coffers could be drained doling out compensation for some already completed projects--such as the Bang Na-Chon Buri expressway where the contractor was demanding huge punitive damages for a delay in the hand-over of land at the initial stage of construction. Opponents of the mega-projects were accused of slowing national development, but in reality only a handful of people had a vested interest in the projects, he said. Taxpayers footed the bill while the country's economic and political elite made massive profits, usually from corrupt contracting practices, the cost of which was footed by taxpayers, including the interest demanded by Western financial sources, thereby financially enslaving the population for assets it did not really need. Mr Banjong questioned Senator Kamnuan Mohprasit's motive in gathering signatures in support of the pipeline project. He said the senator, who chairs the committee on energy, had interests in many petrol stations and was directly linked to the interest groups involved in the pipeline construction. He rejected as lame the senator's explanation the project would generate jobs and revenue particularly as most of the engineering consulting and specialised construction would need to be provided by Western compnaies. The project was funded by loans and only small sub-contractors would be hired for the construction. Mr Banjong said the downside of the project was omitted and Mr Kamnuan should be investigated The pipeline idea was pushed by Suwat Liptapanlop when he was industry minister, he said. Mr Suwat was now back in government as a Prime Minister's Office minister. Mr Banjong said Mr Suwat's brother owned businesses connected to the project. He contended the country would gain only 15% of the interest to be had once the project was up and running. The government should divulge full details of the contract with Malaysia before the April Songkran festival, he said. Opponents would fight to the death if the government decided to build the pipeline, he warned. They organised a protest rally when the cabinet met in Narathiwat at the end of March. Jaruek Homchan, a conservationist, said the Hin Krut and Bo Nok power plant projects would strain the government's coffers and were unnecessary. The country had access to ample electrical supplies, Mr Jaruek said, particularly that now the massive Nam Theun 2 hydropower project in Laos would go ahead. Being developed by Italian-Thai Development Plc, it would provide up to 3,000 megawatts of electricity to an already glutted power market. The activists' stand was supported by the National Human Rights Commission which on March 27 asked the government to suspend work on the Thai-Malaysian gas pipeline and the Hin Krut and Bo Nok power plants, citing constitutional violations during the planning stages. Saneh Chamarik, the chairman, said the projects did not represent the wishes of the public and should be fully reconsidered. The public hearings and environmental impact assessments (EIAs) had been conducted merely to move the projects ahead and not in good faith nor in the spirit of such studies, he said. The procedures failed to gain a public mandate, especially in the case of the pipeline project, the outcome of the EIA of which was influenced by the government. Public hearings were arranged only after the government had signed contracts with its partners for the projects, a move that spawned public displeasure and protests as it clearly indicated that the deals were fait accompli. Mr Saneh said the commission respected the government's exclusive right to national administration, "but that right must not be construed as a privilege entitling individuals to evade rules and laws, particularly those pertaining to human rights and freedom".