Relief in the scorching sun

Is water splashed on bodies and earth

Returning to freshness is the burnt feeling -

Grace and charm in wet reality.

Luscious laughter emanating in sparkles

Lustral waters gleam with rose petals and jasmine      buds

Poured from urns onto the fingers of elders

Signifying respect and love in aesthetic Thai ways:

Sunlit April is optimism renewed

Transition in sun phases though silent in the spheres

Brings out festivities in dancing lights, here on earth.

Arrayed in this vast celebration

Fathering all the joys of the occasion

Is His Majesty whose presence

In every Thai heart and life,

Solaces the heat and care of the day -

Royal patron of this cultural feast

King adored as Father of the nation

His constant love and protection regenerating

Thrilling songs that enchant the ancient air,

Fervent drumbeats which excite dancing feet

Goodwill among sisters and brothers all

Tolerance in the midst of merriment.

The Thai family in exuberance

Of unity, welcomes the new year

In new hues and hopes

That the days gone by

With lessons of loss and winning

Will lantern prudent pathways to the future.

The sun's intensity, the summer's blue

Shall breed health of being and joy

Under th' oriental Thai sky

In the midst of blest,

Happy, grateful Thai smiles

Celebrating immortal culture

Of jocundity in Songkran.

Happy Songkran to all!

Glen V Chatelier

Director, Office of International Affairs

Assumption University

Bangkok

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

Act threatens to shut out huge revenue source for country

I find it difficult to understand the government's thinking on the Foreign Business Act. I fully appreciate that certain industries or market sectors should remain under Thai control but the one market sector which is badly punished with these changes is the property sector, particularly in areas where foreigners would like to live.

It is not the issue of leasehold or freehold for the overseas buyer but the ability for foreigners to develop property. As a foreigner or foreign company cannot own land, the practice of using nominees has been widely used, this is illegal but has been widely accepted. The issue now is why would a foreigner invest in a Thai company that he has no control over in order to acquire the land required for development. Does the Thai government realise that foreign-controlled companies cannot borrow money in Thai baht but instead have to bring foreign currency into the country and then invest in the property market? That in turn brings in more foreign investment from the end buyers of the property.

All of these transactions result in large tax revenues for the central government. The net result of this is that more local Thais earn their living by opening shops, restaurants and other businesses to cater to the growing market.

Take a look at Phuket and see the huge numbers of shop houses and local housing estates and ask yourself how will they survive if the property market collapses? One must remember that the total number of foreigners in these areas is small but they do contribute a large amount to the local communities not only at times like the tsunami.

International schools, international medical facilities, furniture shops and other retail outlets require clients.

However, instead of opening up to the outside world Thailand seems to be retreating while its neighbouring countries are doing the opposite. I am worried that the Foreign Business Act and the current visa restrictions are sending the wrong messages to the foreign community

Grenville Wilson

Bangkok

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

Finalise Foreign Business Act and let investors decide

What must happen is for the current uncertainty on the eventual draft on the Foreign Business Act to end. Until it does foreign investment will be put on hold. Thailand does need foreign investment and the foreign investor must be treated in an equitable manner.

Most foreign investors bring with them skill and expertise and are involved in technology transfer to the Thai work force.

Neighbouring countries are cashing in on this uncertainty and taking investment and possibly future investments away from Thailand.

RPB

Chon Buri

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

Negative ramifications will be felt over long term

Re: "Cabinet okays Business Act amendments", News, April 11.

It is a general fact that international capital will move to (a) where it can produce the best risk-adjusted return and where (b) it feels welcome.

The latter is important as sudden changes, especially those applied retroactively, sharply increase the perceived risk gradient of a country. The effects for Thailand will not be sudden either in actions or in amount, and as they are likely to be mainly opportunity losses (investments that simply do not happen) rather than high-profile departures or divestments, they may attract little attention.

However apart from money, foreign investment tends to bring technology and expertise plus better access to foreign markets. Thailand risks losing these advantages.

Even simple housing purchases by foreigners brings not just the cash for the purchase (and the construction and supply jobs involved) but also increased spending on goods and services while the owner is in Thailand.

Increasingly people are looking to Malaysia as a better alternative for a retirement home or to Vietnam for business investment. It will be Thailand's loss.

Rory Keelan

Bangkok

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

Current government in need of a scapegoat for its troubles

A scapegoat is badly needed to shore up the declining popularity of the government and its patron.

Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont checked into a hospital for a severe cold after returning from signing a free-trade agreement with Japan that drew criticism from civic society groups, and praise from the business sector. Of course, the economic engine makes a louder noise than the peasantry whose cartwheels squeak once in a while to call for some financial oiling. Both classes certainly give Surayud a constant headache, if not exacerbate his flu.

The top military brass who ushered him into power following the September 19 coup marched to visit him at the hospital. This might have shaken his pulse and caused unimaginable side effects. Well-wishers need not disturb him in his time of rest. Some had suggested that he resign after setting a date for the next general election, an exit window for him to leave office with grace. Army strongmen might not have been happy about that, for an election spells the end of their clinging to power and vast interests.

The business sector is known to traditionally seek patronage from the powers-that-be, particularly those with the power of firearms. We see a recurrence of some five-star generals being appointed chairmen of large organisations, not different from many decades ago when they were invited to chair commercial banks and companies with government concessions. Together they complain that the economy is not running the way they want it to. The industrialists and their patrons now need to find a scapegoat in someone.

Sai Sima

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

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

Bottom line in public safety debate is money comes first

The lack of public safety is a growing problem for many residents of Thailand. Examples abound, including unsafe public buses resulting in loss of life, polluted air resulting in eye and respiratory illnesses, and motorbike traffic on public sidewalks resulting in accidents with pedestrians. Yet the Thai government continues to ignore these and other painfully obvious threats to public safety.

Why does the Thai government fail to protect its citizens from such hazards? The answer rests with the roles and responsibilities of government. Like many Asian governments, the Thai government views its role as the advocate of business interests. Public safety is just not a priority. And business interests are often directly opposed to public interests.

If public buses were required to be properly maintained, and if bus drivers were required to undergo proper training, the profitability of bus transportation companies could be negatively affected. If farmers were prohibited from burning their fields, they would have to pay for waste disposal services (or even engage in composting, heaven forbid). If motorcycle drivers were required to drive only on roads, deliveries would be delayed in traffic. Thus, the public's interest takes a back seat to business interests.

Politicians have, of course, adopted laws to address public safety issues. But, as the politicians well know, these laws are never enforced. Thus, the politicians have plausible deniability. They can be seen as taking action in support of public safety, without ever actually taking any action that causes inconvenience to business interests.

Over the next few decades, as Thai democracy matures, we can only hope that the consumer-rights movement will gain power and that the Thai government will someday be forced to consider public safety as a priority. In the meantime, don't ride the bus, don't breathe the air, and don't walk on the sidewalk.

Outside the Box

Bangkok