วันอังคารที่ 4 ตุลาคม พ.ศ. 2559

10 MRT lines: An unacceptable and far-fetched policy





10 MRT lines: An unacceptable and far-fetched policy

           

Professor Kriengsak Chareonwongsak, PhD
                                 President of the Social Science Association of Thailand
                                         kriengsak@kriengsak.com,http://www.kriengsak.com


            In December 2005, the government invited all foreign ambassadors to Thailand to hear its modernization proposals for the whole country. After discussions of the full details, foreign companies or trade emissaries will be invited to submit tenders on projects.
            I am absolutely certain that government policy on this proposed addition to the MRT system is as unclear as it was when the project was first announced as part of a pre-election platform.

            Vagueness of the construction budget
            Because the government is proposing to exchange investment in the MRT project with latex rubber, it is apparent that the government doesn’t have the finances for this project. Economic slowdown and, in particular, the now suspended privatization process have put financial pressure on the government. Therefore, it is forced to barter to obtain enough funds the project. This doesn’t look good.
Moreover, five countries – England, USA, France, Germany, and Japan – all who are the biggest names in MRT technology, have recently rejected the project. So, offering latex rubber, will not work in this case.
            In addition, if the government wants to exchange MRT system with rubber, it is necessary to deal with Thailand’s greatest para rubber buyer, namely, China. Yet, China is unlikely to have the best MRT technology because China only began building MRTs a few years before Thailand.
However, if there is a country willing to invest in a Thai MRT and willing to exchanging its investment with Thai goods, the specific source of Thailand’s financing portion still has not been definitively named. Furthermore, this barter system assumes that the investing nation lack the goods Thailand is suggesting for an exchange. Also, if the government produces these goods using private sector financing, who will be willing to pay the private sector the goods they have extended as a part of raising finances for the MRT ?

Vagueness of MRT type
Because the Thai government will invite foreign companies to submit tenders on projects without project specifications, it is clear that the government is not clear about the type of MRT construction it wants to have.
The uncertainty of government plans is further evidenced by its back-and-forth policy changes, i.e. from seven lines to five lines and then to ten lines. What is the government doing? Has the government conducted feasibility studies yet? Simply, because of the ambiguity of government plans, these public declarations by the PM may merely be stall tactics, a way to delay MRT construction.
In addition, if the government really wants foreigners to bid on the project, why hasn’t it taken the time to clearly define issues that would concern Thailand, that is, foreign technology issues within which Thailand has no knowledge ? For example, “What criteria will the government use to choose one particular type of MRT?” “Is it desirable for Thailand to choose foreign investment based on foreign options?” and “Will the decision be transparent?”
Such obscurity makes people doubt the validity of such projects. If foreigners reject the government’s proposed barter trade system, what can the government do? How can the government seek other investment? And if the type of rail system still has not been clearly identified, when will people be able to use the new MRT lines?

----------------------------------------



ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:

แสดงความคิดเห็น