Public TV in Thailand

Public TV in Thailand

Prof. Dr Kriengsak Chareonwongsak

Senior Fellow, Harvard Univerisity’s Center for Business and Government

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

The rising popularity of the Thai Public Broadcasting Service (TPBS) opens our eyes to new possibilities for television broadcasting in Thailand. This station was established so all groups of people can participate.

Right from TPBS’s inception, its unique objectives have meant it has faced numerous difficulties. However, here are some suggestions that will make this new TV station truly television that belongs to the people.

Administering the station: Because this station is public, its income is capped at 2 billion baht per year. Therefore, the station’s board and administrative committees must work closely together to budget for staff salaries, station administration, program creation, program purchasing, technology and network fees, etc.

A team under the leadership of a Vice President Finance should monitor expenses and conduct quarterly reviews, so spending is both transparent and wise.

Managing the programming: Programs should include news, education, art, culture, music, miscellany, etc. An evaluation matrix can consider factors such as program length, style, and audience response. Prime time should be given to programs offering the most benefit to the most people.

Programs can be created for specific groups, such as the handicapped, youth, the elderly, the hill tribe peoples, or people with different religious persuasions. The Program Director should constantly evaluate which programs would best create a balanced selection for all sectors of society.

In addition, some programs should aim to inspire good works, helping to create a Thai society in which people really care for one another.

Evaluating the producers and the programs: Quality programs must be selected in a fair, free market process to prevent monopolization by any organization or group.

Inexperienced freelance producers should be given opportunity to vet their programs too, but the selection process should screen for quality to allow the station to promote new, imaginative shows that can benefit Thai society.

However, these new programs must be evaluated every time they are broadcast to achieve the highest levels of quality, public benefit, and entertainment.

Establishing public participation. Participation is one of democracy’s hallmarks. Therefore, the Council of Audience Members (TBBS Article 45) should be derived from people representing all of Thailand’s regions and people groups. The Council of Audience Members should be composed of a maximum of 50 people, who will bring the opinions of the people to
TBBS boards.

TPBS must also be open to suggestions, criticisms, and opinions from the general public. As the public is involved in shaping station policy, they will become more willing to financially support the station. Establishing these types of feedback loops will also help to guarantee that the station is owned, run, and shaped by the people of Thailand.

We should encourage TPBS, Thailand’s first public TV station. Giving careful thought to the administration, programming, evaluation processes, and public’s participation will ensure that this station will become a quality option for all television viewers in our nation.

The Roles of Foreign Minister in the Next Government

The Roles of Foreign Minister in the Next Government

Dr Kriengsak Chareonwongsak

Senior Fellow, Harvard University’s Center for Business and Government

If one were to ask the question as to which Minister would face the toughest job in the next government in rebuilding foreign confidence towards Thailand, which is one of the most pressing problems, especially the lack of confidence in Thailand’s economic outlook and direction that has caused some investors to shy away from investing here and others to relocate their investment overseas, what would the answer be?   

Several people might think the answer would be one of the economic ministers. But I am inclined to view that the Foreign Minister would have an equally tough job. This is because the lack of confidence problem is mainly about the psychological perception by foreign countries towards Thailand—something that the Foreign Ministry should understand better than other Ministries.  

Besides, the lack of confidence is not only limited to the economic dimension. It is undeniable that economic woes constitute the hottest issues at the moment, particularly the erroneous perception about the sufficiency economy policy, the problem of nominee shareholding, and the 30 per cent foreign reserve requirement. But the lack of confidence is also caused by other problems; namely compulsory licensing, violence in the three southern provinces, and political conflicts, among others.      

One question that follows is: what kind of roles should the new Foreign Minister take on? 

With a closer look, one would find that the lack of foreign confidence is caused by serious doubts about the government’s policy and capability to manage problems, be it policy direction or the inconsistent policy approach. Foreigners also think the government does not understand the cause of the problems, or is slow to respond to those problems. These perceptions cause serious doubts about the government’s ability to manage.   

Under a more positive light, the government’s policy and measures to solve problems may be well-intended and based on good principles. But the failure to clearly convey or communicate those policy measures has inadvertently sent the unfriendly signals to foreign investors. It so happens, too, that different government agencies give out different or conflicting information that causes confusion and the gap of understanding between the government and foreign investors.   

The job of foreign public relations undertaken by the government will therefore need to be carried out in a more integrated manner, with the Foreign Ministry doing the government’s PR work with foreigners through participation by and consultation with other Ministries in order to achieve a more pro-active or aggressive PR objective. 

The Foreign Ministry should therefore work more closely in parallel with other Ministries in planning policy communication. Such a practice will enable foreigners to better understand government policy, allow the government to explain the rationales behind those policies before they are officially announced, and allow for better preparation for solving any problems of miscommunication that may arise. 

In Cabinet meetings, the Foreign Minister should play a role in reflecting foreign perception about issues with potential impact on the confidence of foreign countries. He or she should work more closely with economic ministers to fine-tune economic policy decisions and communication, while taking into account the potential impacts on foreign perception. 

As such, the Foreign Minister should have an excellent understanding about the works of economic ministries. This will help ensure that economic policy formulation takes into account foreign perception, as well as improving communications to make sure that foreign countries understand and have confidence in Thailand’s direction and outlook.   

I am of the view that the new Foreign Minister should have a role in ensuring that government policy direction is characterized by transparency and good governance, fairness to both Thais and foreigners, and stability, so that foreign investors can predict the policy direction and have confidence in the consistency of policy. It is also important that policy outlook does not lean towards any anti-foreign investment direction.  

Apart from that, the Foreign Minister should use more public relations strategies overseas, for examples, by coordinating with and making foreign government agencies display confidence towards Thailand, identifying and rallying support from countries that support Thailand’s policy approach to certain issues, seeking recognition from international organizations for the policy approach, or finding ways to make foreign investors in Thailand display more confidence towards the Thai economy.  

         Apart from a good knowledge in diplomacy, another favorable trait of the new Foreign Minister is that he or she should be a good communicator and public relations expert with multi-disciplinary knowledge, particularly about the economy. Most importantly, he or she should have extensive connections and networks overseas, have good relations with fellow diplomats, as well as with journalists and the foreign investors in Thailand.

A policy recommendation for the new cabinet… For Thailand’s next step forward

A policy recommendation for the new cabinet…

For Thailand’s next step forward

Dr.Kriengsak Chareonwongsak

Senior Fellow, Harvard Univerisity

As you read this article you will notice that Thailand is now in the hands of its new cabinet, led by Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajeva. While a variety of different attitudes to this new cabinet will inevitably lead the Thai people in their reaction to the new lineup, certain inescapable and important tasks now press on cabinet agenda and to these crucial tasks, attention must be given. Policies are to be formulated for each ministry and old problems remain to be solved. Thailand must even be protected from an inflowing barrage of problems; not only economic in nature – though this will very soon be a back-breaking burden for the government, but a plethora of other chronic problems also queue for the attention of Thailand’s new cabinet, whether the serious issues of crime, poor-quality education, or environmental degradation, to name a few.

To find success in the pressing tasks, there are two words which our new cabinet would do well to bear in mind; these are “Alacrity” and “Integration.”        The new cabinet must not adopt a “wait and see” approach in order to solve the problems. They should also be careful not to work individually, but by collating world resourced knowledge, vital connections should be made that can drive Thailand harmoniously forward, without conflicts of interest. If the new cabinet can succeed to achieve such a goal, Thailand’s old image of evil politics may be effaced from the people’s nightmare of memories.

                  In keeping with a truly collaborative approach, the favorable direction for the new cabinet should be to utilize each minister’s capacity completely; not to let any ministers “stand out” just because they hold positions of more responsibility and are due to receive a greater portion of budget. I believe that to “put heads together” will yield the overall optimal output, both short-run and long-run.

            Let me exemplify what I mean by integration. Supposing the Ministry of Energy’s vision is to promote alternative energy production, the Ministry of Energy would cooperate with the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives to plan an agricultural area systematically. They can cooperate in exploring an appropriate area for alternative energy plants and can protect agricultural product prices from being lowered by middlemen. Moreover, by cooperating with the Ministry of Science and Technology they can conduct research and thus accumulate new knowledge about alternative energy that is compatible with Thailand’s resources.

            While the case of illegal deforestation in Kao Yai National Park stands testimony to the bureaucratic sluggishness of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment, this Ministry must instead actively plan and then act out its role to revive natural resources throughout Thailand, instead of merely inspecting received complaints, as it does now. The Ministry should promote the participation of the people to protect their farmland and surrounding areas. It should develop community eco-tourism, which goes hand in hand with environmental conservation.

            Local people can also become the “eyes & ears” of civil servants far removed from their areas of responsibility by reporting illegal deforestation and other illegal activities. The new cabinet should therefore grant rewards as incentives for reporting. Should public participation grow well, the government will save administration costs and the public participation programme itself will be stronger.

            How well the new cabinet will perform and the evident truth of the new Prime Minister’s inaugural promise, “I will work on behalf of all Thai people” will depend on the integrity and determination of every minister in the new cabinet. Please don’t let the Thai people down by running your en masse megaprojects sponsored for selfish reasons without recourse to the humanitarian needs of all Thais, as has happened before.

Should There Be A Ministry of Water Management, or Not?

Amid a flood crisis that is happening across a major part of Thailand, including Bangkok, the concept of a “Ministry of Water Management” has been proposed by many as a long-term mechanism for integrated water resource management and as a solution to prevent flooding and drought. Some Members of Parliament (MPs) from Pheu Thai Party have agreed conceptually with the idea and have tried to push this issue as an urgent motion for consideration in the Senate.

The establishment of a “Ministry of Water Management” is not a new concept. In 1993, a group of MPs came together to propose this idea. Later in 2007, the government led by General Surayud. Chulanont proposed the water issue as a national agenda item. The Ministry of Agriculture raised the matter for public attention again in 2008. However,   until now, there has been no consideration by the government for serious implementation of this measure.

The idea to form a “Ministry of Water Management” to solve problems in water management comes from a situation in which many public agencies are responsible for water issues, with each unit working and functioning in its own way, scattered across different departments and ministries, and with unity and co-ordination lacking. For example, the Irrigation Department is part of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Department of Water Resources is in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, and the Meteorological Department is in the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology.

Thus, to collect these different agencies together under the same Ministry, would help to achieve the integration of various departments. The management system would be comprehensive and move in the same direction. Co-ordination would be more effective, budgeting easier, and strategic long-term planning for water resource management would provide sustainable solutions to Thailand’s water problem.

However, the concept of a “Ministry of Water Management” has been criticized for various reasons, such as the long process and time involved to establish this new ministry, including research that must be conducted, laws that must be passed, a new structure that must be set up and resources that must be re-allocated.

Lessons from new ministry establishment during the first Thaksin government have taught us that new ministries are weak and take a long time before they can function properly.  Moreover, some opponents will criticize the establishment of a new ministry as a mere attempt to add a new ministerial position to the cabinet in order to seek benefits.

In my opinion, the idea of setting up a “Ministry of Water Management” is interesting in terms of integrating various government agencies to work more efficiently and to move in the same direction. However, I will suggest some issues for the government to consider before deciding on whether to set up a ministry or not.
First, to be “problem-oriented,” or “goal-oriented?”

The concept of establishing a “Ministry of Water Management” seems sourced from a problem-oriented perspective. The public sector has experienced problems in its management and co-ordination of various departments. Thus, a “Ministry of Water Management” was proposed in order to solve these problems. Though collecting together all the related departments to be under a “Ministry of Water Management” may improve Thailand’s water management, it may not provide the best solution because it is not a goal-oriented perspective. A “problem-oriented” perspective focuses on how to set a proper structure in place for all departments, related to water issues, rather than proposing what the government wants to achieve or do long-term and then setting up a proper structure for the Ministry in support of its operation toward goals in the most effective way.
Second, to be at “operational level,” or “policy level?”

The idea of establishing a “Ministry of Water Management” has been proposed in order to solve the problems of management, lack of unity and co-ordination. The important reason for these problems may be due to many past governments never setting a long-term vision, or having strategic plans or the political will to push this issue forward for the country.  The establishment of a “Ministry of Water Management” may not be useful or powerful enough for policy implementation if the government has no commitment and determination to push this idea through until it is successful.
Third, to be with “centralized authority,” or “centralized co-ordination?”

Management, based structurally on a “Ministry of Water Management” would be hierarchical, and seem centralized in authority.  Policy operation and implementation based on a bureaucratic system with its top-down chain of command would be beneficial as authority, budget, resources and information are found in the same place. However, effectiveness in management may be low due to rigid government regulations, system inflexibility and a bulky structure.

Water management is related to other issues. Although the new structure will be helpful in terms of reducing co-ordination costs across ministries and departments responsible for water issues in the country, no matter how it is structured, to manage water effectively needs continuous co- ordination across ministries and departments. For example, co-ordination is still necessary with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Industry to take care of the manufacturing sector, or co-ordination with the Department of Lands and the Department of Public Works and Planning to plan and control the use of land to be consistent with water management plans.

Moreover, central government is not the only agency dealing with water management. Alongside government at national-level, are local government authorities, the private sector, the civil society sector and the third sector (comprising NGOs, social enterprises, co-operatives, etc.), or even international agencies that can play important roles, or that can influence the government in water management.

To set up a proper public sector structure for water management should not be narrowed down only to establishing a “Ministry of Water Management.” It should be compared to other types of structures by considering the ability to co-ordinate and co-operate with other departments in order to work together effectively. This new idea could even become innovative in public administration itself.

In fact I agree and have proposed the establishment of a “Ministry of Water Management” in the past years ago and I agree that it is most likely necessary to re-organize the structure of the entire public sector in order to remain consistent with current contexts and future direction. But, before establishing a “Ministry of Water Management,” the important issue is to establish a vision for the country’s water management and to ensure the commitment of government to fulfill this vision by recruiting all stakeholders to be involved. Without such a perspective, it will be useless to establish a “Ministry of Water Management,” and will instead prove the old proverb that one should never “Count one’s chickens before they hatch.”