I like the idea of distributing thousands of free CDs to English teachers nationwide, in order to improve their skills - that wouldn't hurt anyone, after all; however, it's not a lack of resources that hinders teachers' development, it's a lack of motivation to improve.

Like it or not, teachers operate in an administrative system staffed with incompetent people who got in their positions through seniority, personal connections and even outright bribery. Thai academics who designed education reforms did a reasonably good job of encouraging teachers' development through new curricula, compulsory lesson plans, personal portfolios and so on, but when these innovations hit the ground, all that came out of it was enormous piles of paperwork demanded by the administration.

The administration demanded not better lessons, but better lesson plans; not professional development, but extensive writing about it. Perhaps the underlying idea was that all the writing about better teaching would make the teaching better. It didn't work. Rather it made all attempts at teacher development extremely superficial.

Administrative overhaul, of course, was part of education reform, too - with decentralisation, small education zones, etc, etc, but it needed political will rather than academic knowledge or clever ideas. With the government adopting a top-down approach and "CEO" concepts, decentralisation has lost its appeal, the status quo has been preserved and meritocracy has become an extinct word.

In this situation, any teacher development, which is a bottom-up process, is not appreciated at all. The focus is on centrally spread "methods" instead, like that odd sounding "brain based learning". Please don't fall in this trap - no method and no magic CD-Rom will work unless you have qualified teachers to implement it, and you won't have qualified teachers and teacher development within an arcane administrative system.

Unspecified Non-native English Teacher

Bangkok

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

Global future grim with self serving leaders at the helm

It amazes me, and at the same time saddens me, to see that so many people just don't get it, that the mess the world is in at the present time is not going to change any time soon, no matter how hard we try to negotiate solutions. It is simple. Those egos that control the money of a nation also control the military and the direction they want to take.

Let's start right here and name some of the trouble spots: Burma, East Timor and Indonesia in general, Tibet, Nepal, Somalia, Africa in general, all of the Middle East, the sub-countries of Russia, North Korea, China-Taiwan, Spain, Northern Ireland, all of South America, Turkey, Serbia. The list is endless. You must first understand that when people are "dumbed down" and can't even locate their own country on a world map and are controlled by the promise of basic food and a few monetary hand-outs, nothing will change. Basic subsistence becomes the norm in accepting their leaders' direction. Thailand is also an example. Forget the "smile" and jai yen yen facade; it is just a facade in today's Thailand, sadly.

Three cases in point: North Korea (I have to laugh every time I see that midget of a leader with those horrendous clothes and even worse haircut), the Taleban and the Muslim extremists. What arrogance these extremists possess to think the creator of the universe would ever give permission for some mortal to take a life, even his own.

Yes, people, we are in deep trouble in today's world, and the only answer is in the leadership of a country, and these leaders of today lack the necessary ingredients: high moral character, humbleness, shame and a deep feeling of obligation to those who possess little. How do we get the kind of leaders that change the world for the better? I don't know.

Hyde Parke

Chon Buri

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

'The Economist' champions commerce, not democracy

Re: "Democratic principles more important than ousting PM", Letters, June 27.

I think Trirat Petchsingh is selectively championing the rule of law. Wasn't the present PM ushered into office, as was the present president of the United States, as well, by a court that refused to follow the law itself? It seems to have been one long journey into darkness ever since for each of our nations.

I can understand The Economist being a little edgy at the possibility of losing such a fine signer of free-trade agreements as our caretaker prime minister - one who came relatively cheaply.

Certainly, The Economist is as eager to hoist the banner of "the rule of law" when the subject of one-sided agreements at the expense of all other Thais is brought up as George W Bush is to wax on about freedom and democracy when the conversation turns to invaded and occupied Iraq and Palestine.

And I'm sure they're every bit as sincere, too.

John Francis Lee

Chiang Rai

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

Time for a new political party to wage war against poverty

The failure of the G-8 summit to fight global poverty and curb corporate abuse is matched by the regressive social policies of the present Thai Rak Thai government and its failure to fight poverty. The Constitution Court must not be blind to the huge demonstrations that have taken place against Thaksin and his cronies and the people's appetite for social change throughout the country.

The court must not fail to act. Making global poverty history means ending it in Thailand, too, and this is going to involve a new political initiative.

Giles Wynne

Nakhon Ratchasima

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

Granting equal air time key to democratic use of media

The government of Thailand exercises a great deal of control over the media, and the use of such powers to gain political advantage, as with the caretaker prime minister's radio programme, certainly corrupts the democratic process.

The long-term solution might involve loosening the reins by gradually reducing government ownership of the media and its ability to control media content. In the short term, the "equal time" principle may be applied. This principle requires that when the government's use of the media is deemed political, the opposition is allowed equal time to respond. In the case of the weekly talk show hosted by the government, a forum of critics and political opponents might be given equal time on the same station immediately following the show.

Free expression, open dialogue and transparency are vital to democracy. Shutting down the government's ability to plead its case directly with the people seems antithetical to this principle. Dialogue would serve democracy better than either monologue or silence.

Cha-am Jamal

Phetchaburi

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

System of patronage firmly entrenched at all levels

It was some time ago, but I do remember Franz Kafka's definition of the hierarchy of the human mind in his book, "The Trial", when it came to justice. It was based on the problems he had with his father; hence, it has certain parallels with patronage. He defined the court (read: the human mind) as making almost subconscious judgements on guilt at three levels: absolute guilt, ostensible guilt and postponement.

In Thailand's system of patronage - and as a farang, I have no real idea how or why this exists - the last term seems to ride to the top when dealing with someone in political office. To me, it is quite clear the election commissioners were biased; to me, it was blatantly transparent the Thai Rak Thai Party hired small parties to run. Both have to be proven, I agree. But I doubt that any real lessons can be learned from this episode. While the vagaries of Thailand's strangely twisted system of patronage exist, how can anyone possibly judge any outcome?

Franz

Bangkok

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

Embryonic stem-cell research devalues human life

I wish to express my disappointment with the recent decision of the European Union parliament to approve tax spending on embryonic stem-cell research. Genetic science has great potential for either serving or degrading humanity. Its proper use requires moral reflection and the establishment of moral limits.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest that embryonic stem-cell research has a greater potential to lead us to viable treatments for various diseases than do non-embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic stem cells carry the likelihood of immune rejection in humans. Animal trials suggest they are too genetically unstable and too likely to form lethal tumours to be used for treatment.

Tests using human adult stem cells, however, have produced significant and encouraging results in the areas of Parkinson's disease, spinal-cord injury, cardiovascular disease, sickle-cell anaemia and dozens of other conditions without posing any moral problems.

On a biological level, the prenatal being is not like any other tissue: it is human and with its own DNA, indicating that - as a human - it has the same fundamental and moral right to life as any other human being. Politicians and lawmakers have a moral obligation to protect human life in all phases of its existence, from conception to natural death.

We must help those who are suffering, but we may not use a good end to justify an evil means. Hence, the cry should be not for an increase in funding for embryonic stem cells, but rather an aggressive expansion of adult stem-cell research. If a man takes on the power to fabricate a man, he also takes on the power to destroy him. The human being has the right to be generated, not produced, to come to life not in virtue of an artificial process, but of a human act in the full sense of the term: the union between a man and a woman.

Paul Kokoski

Hamilton, Canada

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com