It has been expected for quite some time, and now General Surayud Chulanont has confirmed it: Thaksin Shinawatra wants to come home.

General Surayud has said that he could, but it was a question of timing. As a Thai, however, I feel that Thaksin has every right to demand that he can come home at any time he wants without any conditions, provided that he is prepared to face possible prosecution over some of the misdeeds he presided over during his five and a half years as prime minister.

This will be good for Thailand in a number of ways. Thaksin's plight after the September 19 coup has constantly been under world scrutiny, especially the major Western powers that decried the Council for National Security's (CNS) takeover of government by unconstitutional means. Ever since Thaksin has been breathing down the neck of both the CNS and the Surayud government. There has been talk of a possible counter-coup to be instigated by him and his supporters.

Even if that were true, whether he is here or not will not alleviate the situation, as common knowledge has it that Thaksin's roots are firmly entrenched everywhere - in the bureaucracy, the rural masses, the armed forces, the National Legislative Assembly, the Cabinet, and even within the CNS itself.

By allowing Thaksin to come home, Thailand will be spared outsiders' accusations that the people's civil liberties here are being violated on a massive scale because of a coup d'etat. On the contrary, this would demonstrate to them that the country's political future is in good hands and that the situation has returned to normalcy. Confidence in our country would return, and no "white paper" to describe or to apologise for the circumstances leading to or surrounding the coup would be necessary.

After all, Thaksin is just a former prime minister. He no longer commands any troops, let alone the 40 battalions and 10 tank divisions that took over the capital from September 19 to October 8. Let him come home and be answerable to whatever charges that may be awaiting him.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

Lack of strong action gives people cause for worry

 Re: "Disuse of power, soft approach weaken govt hands", Opinion, October 15.

Sopon Onkgara paints a very alarming picture of possible lassitude and dereliction of a clear duty the new government has to the people to pursue those of the Thaksin era who robbed the Kingdom. It causes one to ask what has changed, if anything. Indeed the worry is further exacerbated by the plea from Thaksin to come home and the response that it is acceptable but not at the moment. Is this a serious proposal? Just what is going on?

What are the people to believe, who are the people to believe? There are some very worrying mixed messages coming from the interim government at present. It is time they started to lead the country and explain exactly what they are doing on behalf of the people.

Dr John Patterson

Bangkok

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

Giving credit to the sufficiency economy

 I was pleased to read about the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Mohammed Yunus for his work on micro-credit in Bangladesh. The success of his Grameen Bank in relieving poverty through lending small sums mainly to women invites comparison with Thaksin Shinawatra's "Bt1 million village fund" policy.

If a populist policy such as this is not to be accused of ulterior political motives, it should perhaps mirror some of the principles of the Grameen Bank. For example, loans should generally be very small and should be given for purposes that will demonstrably generate the income to assure repayment. Promoting efficiency and responsibility among borrowers is a crucial objective.

In contrast, the flood of excessive credit from public and private sources in Thailand can be immensely damaging in many ways. In the village in Surin province where I live, during the past few months three households on my soi that are poor by any standards have acquired brand new pickup trucks on credit. The finance deals were irresistible, requiring minimal deposits, but I doubt that the families will ever generate the income to make their pickup profitable and they will probably come to grief.

Another incident is of a young woman earning Bt4,000 a month in Bangkok who was given "gold card" consumer credit of Bt100,000 which she spent on a television, mobile phones and so on for her boyfriend and then lost her job. Lending such as this is to be deplored as it can cause untold damage to the young and impressionable.

Thailand has been awash with easy credit that makes economic statistics look healthy but does nobody any good in the long term. The principles of a sufficiency economy should be strongly opposed to the corrosive effect of excessive credit, while lessons should be learned from the very real benefits of micro-credit. The success of the Grameen Bank could be followed here with great benefit as there is still very real poverty amidst all the glitter of the consumer society.

Andrew Hicks

Surin

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

Micro-credit is nothing like ex-PM's poverty schemes

 Re: Nobel Peace Prize winner had same idea as Thaksin," Letters, October 15.

Kaew's claim that Thaksin's village fund was similar to that of Nobel Peace Prize winner's Muhammad Yunus micro-credit scheme is simply laughable. More in-depth study into the two men's projects is needed.

As far as I know, Yunus' Grameen Bank provided minuscule loans to the poor in Bangladesh exclusively for investment in their household business - not for consumption. Ninety-six per cent of his bank's clients are women because, according to Yunus, men do not spend the money to help their families. His first customer was a housewife making bamboo stools. She and some other villagers merely needed $27 [Bt972] in loan money to run their business without resorting to the local loan sharks. In the 13 years that his bank has lent money to them, very few villagers have missed a monthly payment. The villagers have become more financially independent and prosperous. Yunus says there are two reasons for his success: people invest wisely and apply peer pressure to make sure the village as a whole keeps a spotless record.

Thaksin's village fund was far from being similar, and the results are far from being as satisfactory as that of Yunus' project. Our poor villagers, pandered by Thaksin's easy loans, used most of the money for the wrong purpose: consumption. They spent the money on cell phones, new motorcycles and pickup trucks. The result, as we know it, is our poor are now even more dependent on loan sharks, and thus getting poorer and deeper into debt.

As for the Bt30 health scheme, only time will tell whether the plan is sustainable; maintaining a good quality of healthcare with more capable and dedicated doctors still working for the project. Constant moral boosts and tonnes of money are needed for an acceptable end result here. Don't be overjoyed just yet. There's more hard work to do.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

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

Many thanks to the over-80s for all they have already done

 Re "Time for the over-80s to show what they can do", Letters, October 13.

I would like to sum up what the over-80s have done for the country. When I was a small child, Thailand was not much more advanced than present day Cambodia or Laos. There were no universities outside Bangkok, no dams for generating electricity or irrigation, no hospitals or doctors in rural areas, no telephone services, clean water or electricity in the villages, no modern highways throughout the Kingdom, no industries of any kind to absorb labour from agricultural sector, very few trucks or motorbikes outside Bangkok, no modern port on the eastern seaboard to attract foreign modern factories, no tourism industry, no television.

Now, about 50 years later, we have all of the above, created by those who are now around 80 when they were much younger. None have become famous because they did not give daily or weekly interviews to make themselves popular. They simply implemented several mega projects, not just talked mega projects. Millions of families have escaped poverty and now are considered middle class. The wealth of the nation has increased tremendously.

There is no need for the over-80s to prove what they can do. Thailand has been transformed by the over-80s from a backward country into a modern state in the past half century. I hope someone will write books on Thai social, economic and political developments during this period as vividly as Prof Benjamin M Friedman describes these developments in the US in his book "The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth".

Let's see what the younger generation can do other than talking to news reporters almost daily. And many thanks to the over-80s.

Prichar

Bangkok

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

Chaturon should learn from the Democrat Party

 A good sportsman learns from his opponents - and the Thai Rak Thai Party's new leader, Chaturon Chaisang, would do well to study the Democrat Party. Why is it that when the Democrats lost by a landslide to the Thai Rak Thai - not once but twice - the leaders and members stayed with the party and did their best to strengthen it? Nobody fled abroad. In contrast, the Thai Rak Thai founder promptly resigned his leadership of the party and is living a life of luxury in London with his family - leaving those who trusted him to struggle alone; its executives have scattered to the four winds, each seeking to avoid being party leader.

Chaturon has said that as leader, he must have a free hand to run the party. I suggest he build Thai Rak Thai around a philosophy other than self-interest, and make its fortunes (figuratively and literally) independent of himself. He should encourage views opposed to his own, so long as all opinions are well reasoned, especially his own. He also should build Thai Rak Thai around a philosophy of humility, listening to we the people and following our sage monarch's advice.

I wish Chaturon well, for Thailand needs more than one party committed to democracy. 

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok