Word has it that a new ground (the Stadium of the British Virgin Islands) will be constructed on swampland as far away from Manchester as possible. The northern end of the stadium will be for home supporters only and labelled "The Shin Cop"; the old ground will remain open in case of likely flooding at the new venue. A futuristic satellite city, even bigger and better than London's 2012 Olympic Village, will be built close by on dry land for the families and friends of WP&P. All visiting supporters must arrive in chauffeur-driven limousines owned and operated by members of the management team. The chairman of the board will exhibit a hands-on approach; initially, it is expected that he will attempt football management, refereeing and grass-cutting.

A new clothing label, "Ample Stitch-Up", will manufacture overpriced sports gear, and the club entertainment venue, "Sue's Bar", will also house a vast legal team. The club's "media machine" will be operated entirely by positive-speaking robots. The medical centre will offer health checks to all supporters at a cost of Bt30 per visit.

An innovative lifestyle project will ensure that all players are in bed by midnight, completely sober, for fear of losing their place in the team, or worse. Gifts will be offered to the supporters of opposing local teams in return for their transferred allegiance. A new spirit of democratic teamwork will appear to be the order of the day, though foul play will be quietly encouraged. Failure will be totally eradicated and champion-status will be achieved within six months, and repeated five times in the following two seasons.

Mega-projects indeed - but for the benefit of whose promotion?!

John Shepherd

Bangkok

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

Stronger focus on education will lift Vietnam higher

Re: "Thai investors look to hitch on to Vietnam's 'rising star'", Opinion, May 1.

Thepchai Yong wrote an excellent article in the "Hard Talk" column about Vietnam. In this article he mentioned that Taiwan, China, South Korea, Japan, and Singapore are among the top Asian investors in Vietnam while Thailand does not make it into the top 10. This is just one aspect mentioned. Many people, including I, believe that Vietnam will overtake Thailand in every aspect very soon.

The key to prevent that from happening can be summed up in three words: education, education, and education. Vietnam fully realises that education is of the utmost importance. Vietnam's education and training minister recently said that it was vital for education reforms to be implemented. Vietnam is aiming for 20,000 doctoral graduates over the next 13 years with half of those trained abroad, and welcomes foreign investment in education.

It has also set the goal to increase standards of education to international levels and takes this very seriously, too.

For example, the Vietnam Education Fund is a special programme aiming to improve Vietnamese-American relationships through educational exchanges in science and technology. This programme has for four years brought about 200 Vietnamese students to more than 50 leading universities in the US. Most of these students are in PhD programmes. All will be required to return to Vietnam after completing their studies in the US.

Vietnam realises that it cannot rely on cheap labour and the vital key to achieve this is quality education of the highest standard.

Looking at Thai education, we are still doing nothing to improve the quality of our public universities. Whatever sorry state we were at 10 to 20 years ago, we are still in that state now, still debating whether we should let our public universities become autonomous. I actually have no idea now whether the education minister still supports this idea and how he is managing it. Since there were protests from some academics and students, I haven't heard anything from the minister or, for that matter, the prime minister.

Education is vital not only for Thailand's economic growth but also for its long-term stability. When will we realise that education is the key to everything?

Sanpawat Kantabutra

Savannah, Georgia

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

SEC: We followed letter of the law in Yingluck ruling

We write with reference to the special report on your front page of April 30, regarding our insider trading investigation concerning Yingluck Shinawatra ("Yingluck ruling shows watchdog failing the public"). The writers unfortunately failed to separate between what the public perceives to be insider trading and indecent practices and whether the case can be prosecuted under the law.

In a general sense, a person is perceived to have committed insider trading if he or she possesses material information and trades before such information is disclosed to the public. In that sense, Yingluck's sale of Advanced Info Service (AIS) shares may seem to meet the test of both elements, ie. she should have been in a position to know information about the upcoming sale of Shin shares because she apparently was one of the sellers, and she did sell her AIS shares.

However, there are discrepancies between what constitutes insider trading under the law and the public's perception. Under Section 241 of the Securities and Exchange Act BE 2535, it is just not enough to prove that the person possessed the information and executed the trades. Rather, the law enforcement agency has the onus to further prove that the person did "use the information" in his or her trading decision and that such information was obtained from his or her "use of position".

Our ruling on Yingluck's case was based on the fact that she had been selling the shares she exercised from her employee option continuously over a two-year period. The pattern of her past trading, rather than where she got her shares from, gave her a strong argument that her sale of AIS shares was not based on information on the Shin deal. Hence, it did not meet the "use of information" test, and we do not have any other evidence to prove otherwise. Without sufficient evidence to prove each and every element of the law, a case cannot be prosecuted despite the public's perception.

However, we would welcome any suggestion from the writers or any person on how such "use of information" can be proven under a similar circumstance.

For the future, in this type of share deal, minority shareholders will definitely be better protected if the law requires all shareholders with major stakes to publicly declare their intention to sell out beforehand. So far, we have found one country - Canada - that demands this. We shall later open it to a public debate whether Thailand should adopt something similar. It must be thoroughly examined, however, to make sure that such a rule does not do more harm than good.

Should we finally decide to proceed with any law reform in this regard, we hope to receive support from you and the public to ensure that minority investors will not be disadvantaged in their investment trading.

Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala

Secretary-General, Corporate Affairs Department

Securities and Exchange Commission

Bangkok

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

More needs to be done to preserve beauty of Chiang Mai

Re: "Deputy to give tourism a sporting chance", News, April 28.

I was interested to learn of the appointment of the new Deputy Minister of Tourism and Sports Nat Indarapana. I would like to encourage him to look before he leaps into this new position and avoid pushing through the mega-projects that are being planned for Doi Suthep - Doi Pui National Park in Chiang Mai. I hiked in this area with nine other American exchange students last week, and I was very impressed with this natural refuge so close to the city limits. I was also turned off by the concrete reservoirs and massive pipes built by the Chiang Mai Night Safari.

Chiang Mai is already thriving as the cultural heart of Thailand. A giant elephant park and an artificial "safari" stocked with non-native animals will do nothing to further its appeal. The lack of success with the Night Safari seems to be proving this already. I was drawn here because Chiang Mai has real depth to its history - an asset that my country sadly no longer has. It would be a significant loss if the natural beauty and the traditional communities of Chiang Mai province were pushed aside to provide cheap thrills for deep pockets.

Amy Jonason

Chiang Mai

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

Most employers have a soft spot for workers' religions

Re: "Religious sensitivity does not extend to paid holidays", Letters, May 1.

Meechai Burapa's readiness to accept another viewpoint impressed me. Rarely does one see this gracious admission.

I owe him an explanation on my statement of the sympathetic and tolerant view of most employers towards employees who are non-Buddhists. The sympathy is either in the form of turning a blind eye on that employee's absence on their religious days or not counting the days off from their annual leave. Employers in Thailand tend to have a soft spot when it comes to people's beliefs and effectively grant them leave with pay for those days. I personally practise this view and have seen others doing the same.

I am prepared to be corrected, if it isn't so.

Songdej Praditsmanont

Bangkok

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

Thailand Post should focus on basics of service first

Re: "Thailand Post opts for hi-tech expansion plan", Business, April 29.

Well, before expanding into other areas it would be good if some hi-tech techniques were applied to the existing postal delivery system, which leaves much to be desired. I am told by those who should know that there have been problems with sorting mail at the new airport and at intermediate sorting offices before it is sent to the local area for delivery. I am missing some mail that I know was posted from Europe.

Observer

Bangkok