Although your article said that the Commerce Ministry revised the draft Foreign Business Act amendments to make them more friendly towards foreign investors, it is more likely that those considering investing in Thailand will consider the new draft to be less friendly than the previous one.

The latest amendments increase penalties under the act from three to five years in prison and have eliminated the previous amnesty provision, while the most contentious point, that companies be classified as foreign based on their voting rights, remains as one the core of the amendments.

The only real concession is very minor and affects a relatively small number of foreign firms. That is the extension of the grace period for Annex 1 and 2 companies to restructure their voting rights from two years to three years.

The removal of certain businesses from Annex 3, such as non-commodities futures broking and insurance on the grounds that they are governed by their own laws, while cited as a concession, seems to be more the correction of an oversight.

While most foreign businesses that are already here are likely for the most part to try to restructure as necessary in order to stay on, if the act is passed, I think the picture will be very different for those considering either coming to Thailand for the first time or expanding their existing investments here.

The reality is that very few companies, Thai firms included, are interested in investing overseas, if they cannot have control over their investments.

Those investors who are willing to cede majority control to local partners have an extremely hard time finding suitable partners in Thailand with the necessary expertise and capital to add value to their businesses.

Horror stories of the many joint ventures with Thai business families that unravelled acrimoniously after the Asian crisis, even with majority voting rights legally held by the foreign partners, serve as stark warnings to those who might like to try the officially prescribed route.

With so many other countries in Asia competing for their investments on more attractive terms and with more dynamic economies, the Foreign Business Act amendments will make it an easy decision for investors to pass on Thailand and ordinary Thai people will be the losers.

George Morgan

Bangkok

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

Google taking a step back by assisting govt to block videos

An open letter to Google: On November 16, 2006, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) wrote you of our concerns that Google would cooperate with Internet censorship here.

You replied on November 17 that Google had no intention of assisting the Thai government in its illegal Web blocking.

And now we have YouTube. YouTube is a fine example of the kind of free expression and public participation possible because of the very nature of an unfettered Internet.

The press in Thailand has reported that the entire YouTube site was blocked because the Thai government couldn't figure out how to block the single video which the official censor of the military coup found so offensive.

Google, admirably, refused to delete the video and comply with the Thai censors.

However, FACT now understands that Google plans to help the Thai government by teaching them how to block individual videos on YouTube.

Censorship, friends, is a slippery slope. In every instance, the censors become drunk with their own power and never know where to stop.

We feel the most responsible sort of censorship occurs at home: don't like it, don't look.

If you assist such censorship, Google will have compromised the integrity of your reply to FACT in November.

We think censorship in Thailand, where all Web blocking is done illegally and in secret, conceals a hidden political agenda.

FACT feels the Information and Communications Technology Ministry will block many videos dissenting from the views of the Thai government, such as videos of the insurgent situation in our Muslim South, commentary from our deposed prime minister, and those related to the hundreds of tortured and disappeared and the thousands of extrajudicial killings.

When government acts to excess (45,000+ websites blocked), it is up to all thinking people to oppose them.

Please don't facilitate Thai censorship. "Do no evil."

CJ Hinke

Freedom Against Censorship Thailand

Bangkok

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

Column 'told it like it is' on changing Net freedoms

Re: "Net's cheap and easy freedoms put values to the test", Opinion, April 11.

All praise to Tulsathit Taptim in his section 'Stoppage Time' for telling it like it is. The lesson we learn from the schoolyard to ignore name-calling lest we get even more of it, hasn't been learned by the powers that be in Thailand. Edward Norton's celluloid attack on everything that moved is an amazing piece of film, and Tulsathit has produced an amazing piece of journalism.

Chiang Mai Mike

Chiang Mai

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

Failure to pin ex-PM on lese majeste charge a blow for CNS

Re: "Thaksin clears his 1st legal battle", News, April 11.

Round one has gone to Thaksin Shinawatra. The Office of the Attorney General has decided not to charge him with lese majeste, and with that decision one of the main justifications for the September 19 putsch by the Council for National Security (CNS) has suffered one of its biggest blows. While that decision is not yet final, the chances of the charges sticking are not good.

Rounds two, three and four will be equally difficult for the CNS.

For the responsibilities it entrusted to the Surayud government are not being carried out as speedily as they should be, leaving the people who supported the putsch in great puzzlement. After only a few months in office the current government instead has suffered a loss of popularity so fast that it is difficult to get it back.

The government's failure to arrest and convict those responsible for the New Year's Eve bombings, quell militant violence in the South and prosecute Thaksin for the alleged instances of corruption for which he was ousted, indicates poor governance by the team General Surayud has set up. There have been tales of some "secret agreements" that have been struck.

No one doubts General Surayud is a good and honest man, but doubts are increasing as to whether he is the man for the job.

At the same time people are beginning to have doubts in the CNS as well. These doubts centre on whether it has the ability to hold itself together and put itself in a crisis-management mode. Moreover beyond the elections in December that have already been announced by the prime minister, the CNS is still struggling to get off the back of a tiger that it has been riding on for the last six months without ending up inside.

Nevertheless the CNS has no viable replacement for General Surayud and thus must still keep him around. At the same time General Surayud needs the CNS just so he can become more effective.

He cannot depend on his Cabinet or advisers alone, who have often churned out unpopular policies that are deemed detrimental to the investment climate.

His government never has had the grass-roots support from the beginning and so far has done little about it. It is high time for a change of attitude - both for General Surayud and the CNS - just so the country can move forward with confidence if they can really work together.

Prachyadavi Tavedikul

Bangkok

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

Exorbitant shipping rates hit tourists and small businesses

The costs to send a 220-pound person to America (based on return economy fare) is one-sixth the cost of sending a 220-pound package there via UPS, FedEx, EMS, DHL or any of the other international mailing services. The rates for airmail post are nearly as high.

Why should it cost six times more to send a large box of chopsticks overseas, than a person weighing the same?

Passenger insurance and peripheral costs (meals, hostesses, etc) should dictate that transporting a person should cost more.

I'm not advocating higher costs for passengers - instead I'm lamenting the excessive costs for packages.

In order for all the mailing services to charge such similarly high prices, there must be collusion to jack up rates - and therefore it should be a matter for anti-monopoly courts.

Does Thailand have such laws, which safeguard consumers?

Who gets hurt by such usurious rates? The partial answer is tourists and small businesses.

Ordinarily, tourists like to purchase items and have them shipped to their homes, rather than having to haul them around.

Similarly, small businesses often want to ship samples or orders overseas. The criminally high rates charged by shippers preclude all but the most carefree spenders from doing this. Is there an entrepreneur out there who might consider entering the shipping market by offering reasonable rates - along the lines of discount air carriers for passengers? They'd get my business for sure.

Ken Albertsen

Chiang Rai

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