The more sceptical ones even interpret it as another sign of the administration trying to roll back media freedoms. But do the new security measures really have an impact on the way journalists at Government House get their news? Yes, it is surely causing them some inconvenience, but there are doubts as to whether they are missing out on something important as far as news-gathering is concerned.

The security boost was obviously a knee-jerk reaction to the presumed threat on Thaksin's life, and it's supposed to help add credibility to the alleged plot, which has otherwise come under a cloud of suspicion. How can you not tighten security for the country's leader and his office if his life is said to be in danger?

By the way, the man most responsible for turning Government House into a mini-fortress is none other than Peeraphan Prempooti, the permanent secretary of the Prime Minister's Office, who is best remembered for his role in the secret investigation into the bank accounts of several journalists critical of the government while he was secretary-general of the Anti-Money Laundering Office (Amlo) a few years back. Under his watch, Amlo was unashamedly turned into a political tool and Peeraphan has been handsomely rewarded for his unwavering loyalty to the Thaksin administration.

Government House reporters are now being barricaded, ambushing the prime minister and Cabinet members for an interview is a thing of the past. But does that restriction really make any difference? Yes, in terms of restricting access to the country's top political leaders. But do the new security rules result in less scrutiny and accountability? The answer is a big no.

Journalists might have had easy access to Thaksin in the past, but it was always a big question mark as to whether what he had to say, or wanted to say, was in the public interest. More often than not, the prime minister treated Government House journalists more like a channel through which he could vent his frustrations or propagate his political messages.

Thaksin chose to speak to reporters only when it fitted his agenda or when there was something to be gained. And when he wanted to skirt difficult questions or controversial issues, he either ignored pursuing journalists or simply walked away. There were times when Thaksin deliberately kept reporters at arm's length for weeks simply because he was not in the mood to answer their questions.

Thaksin only consented to holding a formal weekly press conference last year, apparently because he believed that he could manipulate the forum. Of course, everyone still remembers that famous "x sign" that Thaksin gave to shoot down a question he labelled as being "unconstructive" during one press conference.

But the idea of meeting journalists in a formal setting obviously backfired and was abandoned shortly afterwards. Thaksin had apparently thought he would have an easy time taking questions from Government House reporters who he already knew. But the weekly press conference turned out to be too much for him, as seasoned journalists from other news beats left him with little breathing space. And no matter how unpalatable the questions, Thaksin found it impossible to walk away from a roomful of journalists.

As political tensions heightened, Thaksin found it much safer and politically expedient to go back to using the Government House steps to spar with reporters. His mobility is his biggest advantage. He answers questions only when he feels like it and simply turns away when confronted with unpalatable queries. A frowned face and curled lips or snapping, "You journalists are an unconstructive lot", have become his trademark responses when he feels uneasy in front of the microphones.

So, long before the latest security beef-up, Government House reporters hardly got anything newsworthy or serious from the prime minister anyway. Not once did Thaksin seriously sit down with reporters to discuss the political crisis engulfing his leadership. He didn't even have the patience to answer questions about his political future without appearing irritable or derisive.

In fact, the politically beleaguered prime minister imposed a de facto boycott on the Government House press corps by refusing to take reporters' questions for almost two weeks until the alleged assassination plot was dealt with. Overnight, Thaksin forgot the bitterness he had been harbouring towards the media and began using them in earnest to promote his version of the alleged attempt on his life.

Thaksin's distaste of the media, however, is selective. While he has no love lost for the critical print media in particular, the prime minister feels especially at home with a few select television news personalities who often provide him with a platform to speak uninterrupted, without putting him in awkward situations by asking tough questions.  Just before he left for his current overseas trip, Thaksin gave a lengthy interview to the host of a morning news programme on the army-run Channel 5. And it's no coincidence that the interviewer happens to be a member of the Thai Rak Thai Party. "The prime minister spoke from the bottom of his heart on every subject that is of interest to the public," the programme's host boasted in his promo for the interview, which is to be aired in three parts starting tomorrow morning.

Under Thaksin, Government House, after all, is not where journalists are supposed to get the best news stories - with or without the new security measures. At best it is where politicians spin the news. So journalists should stop complaining and go where the real stories are.

Thepchai Yong