According to the Finance Ministry disclosed,rice
pledging
programme have
recorded an accumulated loss of 682
billion baht over the past decade as of the cover period
from 2004
to 2014 with 15 subsidy schemes. Of the total about 76
per cent
or 518 billion baht in loss were accumulated during Ms
Yingluck
Shinawatra administration from 2011-2014.The loss inure
from
corruption because there are loopholes in the
process,causing
financial leaks and leading to problem with
transparency.
With hugh amount of these corruptions, Mr.Yungluck
indicted
for criminal malfeasance for holder of Political Position
at
The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division which will be
announced on March 19 that the case will accept for trial
or not.
Despite a lot of loss and corruption there is a research
indicated that rice
subsidy must be continue either in the
from of rice
pledging programme or price guarantee
programme after the
new election.Because farmers are
the major bastion
in the election and they are still poor so
the populist
policies is predicted to be continue.
According to the research Thai farmer are caught in a
trap of
populist policies although there is tardily delay in the
process
of payment,they still satisfied with the subsidy
programme.
If we set the
hypothesis that price receive from rice pledging
programme is equal to price guarantee programme .The
result
Within the group of farmer who have attended in rice
pledging
programme :
33.52 per cent of farmer choose rice pledging programme.
32.67 per cent choose price guarantee programme while.
23.30 per cent choose two of the subsidy programme.
For farmer from outside group of rice pledging programme
the result is :
35.42 per cent choose price guarantee programme.
27.08 per cent choose rice pledging programme while
27.08 per cent declare that they do not have experience
in
the subsidy programme.
Farmers choose rice pledging programme for three
reasons:
1.Revenue from this programme is better than the price
guarantee
programme.
2.Price receive from rice pledging programme is more
certainty.
3.Their personal like.
Farmer choose price guarantee programme for three
reasons :
1.They can receive faster revenue from this programme.
2.They believe this programme can make more revenue.
3.The process are not complicated.
From the research above it indicate that the benefit and
price are
the reason that make farmers choose the subsidy
programme.
If the subsidy programme can not be avoided we choose
find
which programme is the best for our country.
Rice pledging programme :
1.The principal is the same as loaning money which rice
is a good for pawn.
2.Farmer can have money to spend without being forced to
sell their rice at the cheap price in the beginning of
the season.
3.This is a procedure to force temporary loss of rice
supply from
the market which can support the price of rice away from
lower
price.
In principal the price pawn should not too high from the
market price.
Price guarantee programme for rice :
1.The government set standard price of rice guarantee.
2.If farmers sell their rice in the market which lower
price
than price guarantee,they can receive the different
price
from government.
In practice rice pledging programme cause hugh loss
because
the price pawn is too high from the market price so government
must absorb a lot of loss and there are corruption from
every
process of this programme that make our country in crisis
situation now.
Meanwhile with price guarantee programme for rice the
government can set the price that they will guarantee which
should
not a wide-range from the market.
With this programme government can set the budget that
they
shall guarantee by calculate from rice yield and price
guarantee
so that they can limit the budget for this programme.
This
programme does not have cost of warehouse,get around the
problem
of rotten rice and middleman so that the procedure is
not complicated
and can decrease the way to corruption.
So if we must use subsidy programme ,I think price
guarantee
programme will be work more with less corruption and
budget
deficit and it
will not make too much burden for government
and our country to carry on.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น