Thailand to withdraw casino bill as ruling bloc hit by crisis
A motion to withdraw the so-called 'entertainment complex' bill from the current session of parliament will be raised on Wednesday when it was previously slotted for consideration, chief government whip Visuth Chainaroon told reporters on Monday.
The government had earlier indicated that it would delay the introduction of the bill — set to be the first major agenda after the House of Representatives reconvened last week — saying it needed more time to communicate with the public and address their concerns about problem gambling and money laundering.
The move to pull the bill came after the ruling alliance was pushed to the brink by the exit of the Bhumjaithai Party, which had opposed the bill, and the suspension of Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra for an alleged ethical misconduct.
Ms Paetongtarn also faces other legal challenges after coming under fire for a leaked phone conversation with former Cambodian leader Hun Sen, in which she was critical of the Thai army's role in an ongoing border standoff with the neighboring country.
Without a clear majority, the government may face challenges in passing controversial or essential bills that have been lined up in the coming months. The budget bill for next fiscal year from October is also expected to be taken up for the second and third readings in August.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bangkok Post
23 minutes ago
- Bangkok Post
Coalition in crisis
Amnesty bills are now taking precedence over the more controversial Entertainment Complex Bill as the administration walks a political tightrope, with critics wondering if the move is a sincere attempt to reconcile a fragmenting coalition or rather a strategic manoeuvre by an embattled government. As the House of Representatives held its first day of debate after it reconvened on July 3, the government has postponed the Entertainment Complex Bill -- which would legalise casinos within certain parameters -- in favour of advancing four amnesty-related draft bills. This has sparked widespread speculation about political motives, coalition dynamics, and the real intent behind the move. Strategic Retreat The decision to delay deliberation of the Entertainment Complex Bill stems from fears that the government, now sitting on a thin majority, lacks sufficient parliamentary support to pass the legislation. With the Bhumjaithai Party (BJT) having recently joined the opposition, the coalition has lost at least 69 crucial votes. The Democrat Party, which has 25 seats, and the Prachachat Party (nine seats), which opposes the bill on religious grounds, have also indicated some resistance. Meanwhile, the position of the United Thai Nation (UTN) Party, which has 36 seats, remains uncertain due to an ongoing internal rift. Faced with this fragility, the government chose to avoid risking an early defeat by shelving the bill for now. Amnesty Bills Steal the Spotlight Instead, the House will begin discussions on four amnesty bills: a people's amnesty bill (proposed by civil society), a general amnesty bill (proposed by the main opposition People's Party, or PP), a peace-building bill (put forth by the Thai Teachers for the People Party), and a peace-building bill (sponsored by the UTN Party). A fifth bill from BJT has also been added. These bills differ in scope and detail -- especially concerning the inclusion or exclusion of cases under Section 112 of the Criminal Code, better known as the lèse majesté law. Section 112 remains a contentious issue, which is expected to be a key factor in whether each bill passes the initial approval stage in parliament. Pheu Thai 'Seeks Closure' Wisut Chainarun, a Pheu Thai Party MP and chief government whip, said the push for amnesty was a genuine attempt to reconcile political divisions that have persisted for over two decades. He highlighted the disproportionate suffering of grassroots political activists -- particularly red-shirt supporters -- many of whom remain incarcerated for their involvement in past mass protests. Mr Wisut argued for compassion and closure, not for powerful figures, but for "the small people" who deserve a second chance. While confident that at least two bills -- those not involving Section 112 -- will pass the first reading, Mr Wisut admitted the differing opinions across parties, especially around Section 112, could complicate progress. Still, he insisted the initiative was not a popularity ploy. "This is not about scoring points... It's about peace," he said. Opposition: Sincere Reconciliation? Natthawut Buaprathum, a list-MP of the PP, questioned the government's motives, suggesting the shift to amnesty bills was more about political convenience than genuine reform. He warned against using amnesty as a political bargaining chip and called for all four original bills to be accepted for further consideration in the second and third readings. He further noted that if reconciliation is truly the goal, then no bill -- regardless of its sponsor -- should be preemptively dismissed. The refusal to even consider bills covering Section 112, he said, contradicts the spirit of inclusive political healing. Mr Natthawut also warned that, amid speculation suspended Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra may lose her case at the Constitutional Court regarding the leaked audio clip of her conversation with Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen leading to a dissolution of parliament, the future of the amnesty legislation remains uncertain. "This shouldn't be about delaying or defusing censure. It should be about real change," he said. He was referring a no-confidence motion BJT plans to file against the government. A parliament vote set for Wednesday to adopt any, if not all, of the amnesty bills for debate may be a key factor in the PP deciding to join the no-confidence campaign since it advocates in favour of amnesties for those who violate the lèse majesté law. Political Trap or Just a Distraction? Political activist and former red-shirt leader Jatuporn Prompan sees the amnesty bills leap-frogging the Entertainment Complex Bill as a "political trap" designed to create divisions among the opposition -- particularly between the PP and the BJT -- just as the two appeared ready to file a joint no-confidence motion. Mr Jatuporn characterised the move as "a shallow trick" to sow confusion, distract from internal tensions, and pave the way for the later passage of the Entertainment Complex Bill under a different name. He also cast doubt on the sincerity of the reconciliation effort, stating that Pheu Thai lacks the moral authority of past leadership. He accused the government of resorting to "day-by-day survival politics". Academics Warn of Political Chess, Not Reform Olarn Thinbangtieo, deputy dean of Burapha University's Faculty of Political Science and Law, echoed similar concerns. He described the amnesty push as a tactical plot by Pheu Thai to discourage the PP from moving forward with a no-confidence motion. Since the PP demands that any amnesty bill should include violations of Section 112, which the BJT opposes, Mr Olarn said the government is banking on sowing bad blood and hoping that internal disagreements derail the opposition's motion. Without the PP's support, the BJT lacks sufficient votes to push the motion through. Moreover, Mr Olarn argued that the Entertainment Complex Bill would have sparked fierce protests if it were introduced now. Instead, the amnesty issue offers a softer political landing, at least temporarily. "They're trying to kill multiple birds with one stone," he said, referring to Pheu Thai. "But that won't win back public trust." A political source said the government's choice to prioritise amnesty legislation reveals both a political opportunity and a vulnerability. With razor-thin parliamentary margins and mounting internal challenges, the coalition is attempting to stabilise its position by addressing long-standing political wounds. Yet the inclusion, or exclusion, of Section 112 remains a litmus test for the sincerity and reach of reconciliation. Whether such a shift will unify or further fracture parliament and the public remains uncertain, according to the source.
Bangkok Post
9 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Thai exports face ‘severe harm' if high tariff sticks
Thai exports could contract in the second half of this year if the United States imposes a 36% tariff rate starting next month, business leaders said on Tuesday. Starting on Aug 1, Washington plans to impose a 36% tariff on all Thai products, separate from sectoral tariffs, according to a letter signed by President Donald Trump and issued on Monday. Finance Minister Pichai Chunvajira said the letter was sent before US officials had seen a revised proposal from Thailand, and he expressed optimism that Thai negotiators could get the tariff rate reduced. Dhanakorn Kasetrsuwan, chairman of the Thai National Shippers' Council, said a 36% tariff could severely harm Thailand's export market, particularly as nations such as Vietnam (20%) and Malaysia (25%) currently have significantly lower rates. This could diminish Thailand's competitiveness, leading to a shift in orders to those countries, he said. Moreover, high tariffs could deter foreign investment, with potential investors opting for locations such as Vietnam or Malaysia due to unfavourable tariff conditions in Thailand, said Mr Dhanakorn. He urged the government to study Vietnam's approach, which quickly led to an agreement with Washington, in part by agreeing to eliminate tariffs for all US products as Hanoi did. Mr Dhanakorn said the government must develop a model that equally engages both China and the US, while exploring the possibility of offering zero tariffs on US products. 'A 36% tariff will definitely affect Thai exports, potentially causing them to contract in the latter half of the year. The severity of the downturn will depend on how much higher Thailand's tariffs are compared with those of competitors,' he said. Mr Dhanakorn said the speed at which competitors can replace Thai export orders to the US will be another important factor. The United States accounts for more than 18% of all Thai exports by value. The government must weigh the long-term impact on Thai exports, looking beyond the immediate effect on orders, he said. Poj Aramwattananont, chairman of the Thai Chamber of Commerce and the Thai Board of Trade, said Thailand's negotiating team should promptly revise its proposals for US review, as the tariff enforcement has now been postponed to Aug 1. The government is planning a meeting on Wednesday on tariffs with the Joint Standing Committee on Commerce, Industry and Banking, according to Mr Poj. Commerce Minister Jatuporn Buruspat said the ministry would have discussions with related industries to evaluate the impacts and plan appropriate countermeasures. 'The export structure will inevitably change regardless of the tariff rates,' he said. 'We will explore various strategic models, including the possibility of reducing tariffs on US products to zero.' Team Thailand and relevant ministers have a meeting planned at Phitsanulok Mansion on Friday for further discussions.
Bangkok Post
10 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Thai pig farmers raise alarm about possible US imports
Thailand's pig farmers have warned the government against opening the pork market as a trade concession to secure tariff reductions from the United States, adding that even imports for animal feed production pose significant risks. With the US announcing a 36% import tariff on Thai goods effective from Aug 1, renewed negotiations are inevitable, said Sittiphan Thanakiatpinyo, president of the The Swine Raisers Association of Thailand. However, he stressed that any government concession allowing US pork, parts and offal imports would devastate domestic pig farmers and the entire supply chain. The association highlighted the vast production cost differential, warning that cheap US pork imports would collapse the domestic market and force local farmers into bankruptcy. Mr Sittiphan emphasised that pork should not serve as a negotiating tool in international trade discussions, given its high production costs, low profit margins and direct connection to national food security. The association raised concerns about potential disease outbreaks, particularly swine flu, which has never been detected in Thailand. Opening imports could compromise the country's internationally recognised livestock disease prevention standards. A critical health issue involves Beta-agonist growth promoters, permitted in US pork production but strictly banned in Thailand. Despite claims of safety, these substances can cause rapid heartbeat, hypertension, headaches and tremors in humans when consumed in large quantities. Scientific reports indicate these compounds accumulate more in organs than muscle tissue, creating risks even if used for animal feed production due to potential market leakage. The association called on the government to reconsider negotiation strategies, abandoning plans to open vulnerable agricultural markets and instead focusing on competitive industrial products to maintain grassroots economic stability, promote food safety and ensure long-term food security.
