|
|
Post by Fletchsmile on Nov 27, 2015 13:54:26 GMT 7
I've often wondered whether there's more to it than meets the eye on the restricted industries list to reserve certain professions for Thais. I believe in essence it's supposed to protect certain industries. I've started to wonder over time whether there's other reasons they don't want foreigners involved which maybe less well intentioned, and prefer people didn't know what goes on Examples - Tuktuk and taxi drivers - often mafia control certain sections - Fishing - human rights abuses - profitable to a very small few who run it all though at the expense of others - Agriculture - I'm thinking rice pledging schemes and corrupt middle man I'm not convinced it's just to protect your average Thai person or the little man, and often wonder if the majority would be better without the list, so industries opened up to benefit more people more fairly ====================================================== Here's the list they messed up the translation for BTW bigmango.boards.net/thread/1899/mol-little-list |
|
|
|
Post by Fletchsmile on Nov 27, 2015 13:59:06 GMT 7
An example from today's Bangkok Post. Have to wonder if a more open and transparent fishing industry would be of more benefit to the country. Not to mention, more foreign businesses involved might bring more awareness of some of the things that go on, but don't get discussed while a few people take advantage and make big money at the expense of others.
In this case illegal workers have allegedly been used (or exploited) at the bottom of the food chain (excuse the pun) and people had been until recently turning a blind eye. Yet foreigners aren't allowed to operate near the top or control businesses.... don't want them making money? or don't want them knowing ?
===========================================================================
Government hits back on worker rights
Published: 27/11/2015 at 08:39 AM
Newspaper section: Business
The Thai government insists it has done its utmost to protect workers' rights.
It cites serious actions taken against suspected illegal workers, forced labour and illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing practices as clear proof that Thai authorities are dealing with the issue.
Deputy Commerce Minister Suvit Maesincee made the case yesterday after the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday said the US would review Thailand's eligibility for trade benefits after complaints that the country was not properly safeguarding workers' rights.
"We're ready to update what the Thai government has done and the actions we've taken if solicited," Mr Suvit said. "But we want to reaffirm that the Thai government has done its best in tackling alleged illegal workers, forced labour and IUU fishing."
The US umbrella union group AFL-CIO said Thailand breached standards under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) -- which allows duty-free access for some imports -- on a range of issues such as acceptable work conditions and forced labour.
The USTR said it would hold a hearing in January on Thailand and continue its work on GSP reviews of Fiji, Georgia, Iraq, Niger, Uzbekistan and Ecuador.
Thailand exported US$27.1 billion in goods to the US in 2014, mainly machinery.
The USTR closed a review of the Philippines after that country made progress in protecting workers' rights.
According to a Thai food industry source, the continuous negative reports issued by the US and the EU against Thailand appear to be part of a pattern of harassment by developed countries.
"We can't help thinking about that, as the reports by the US and EU came almost at the same time," the source said, referring to food giant Nestle's Tuesday report alleging the use of forced labour in Thailand's seafood supply chain and yesterday's statement by European human rights groups that migrant workers in Thailand suffer debt bondage and other exploitation at the hands of the poultry industry.
According to research by Swedwatch and Finnwatch, excessive fees for recruitment, paperwork and social services are routinely deducted from wages, pushing workers further into debt.
The source said the Thai government had done its best to tackle labour issues and worked closely with Myanmar counterparts to address illegal workers.
"They are now trying to play a political game with Thailand," the source said. "What they are doing is an attempt to make Thailand economically worse and instigate disgruntled people to act against the military government."
|
|
|
|
Post by Fletchsmile on Dec 1, 2015 14:51:22 GMT 7
I believe providing certain accounting/ audit services is also on the restricted list to minimise foreigner involvement. Audited accounts usually have to be signed off by a Thai auditor. Yes that makes sense now, reading today's Bangkok Post  At least she'll get to appeal to the courts.... which by coincidence is also a restricted profession ======================================================= Graftbuster Jaruvan gets 2 years for graftPublished: 30/11/2015 at 11:45 AM Online news: The Criminal Court has handed down a two-year prison sentence to former auditor-general Jaruvan Maintaka for misusing government funds to take officials to a religious ceremony instead of attending a workshop in 2003. Khamphi Sonchai, director for personnel resources of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), received the same sentence. The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) found she and other officials attended a royally sponsored thod krathin luang robe-giving ceremony at three temples in Nan rather than participating in a one-day workshop on Oct 31, 2003 at a hotel, for which the office had requested funding. The public prosecutor filed a court case against the two executives on Sept 4, 2015. The court said the OAG did not organise a seminar, which was the purpose of the 294,440 baht budget allocation. The fake seminar seemed aimed only at getting people to attend the religious ceremony, which was on the same date. The two senior civil servants had misused the funds and committed an offence under the Crimes Act, sections 157 and 83. They were each therefore sentenced to two years in prison. Both defendants were later released on bail of 200,000 baht each pending appeal. Jaruvan said after the judgement she felt the case was brought against her because the OAG had investigated certain issues, but she would rather not to say a lot at this stage. She said she had helped bring in more than 100 billion baht in government revenue, and asked why she would bother to cheat over a little more than 200,000 baht. Jaruvan confirmed she would take the case to the Court of Appeal. www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/780645/graftbuster-jaruvan-gets-2-years-for-graft |
|
