In a stunning display of political fireworks, Phuket MP Chalermpong Saengdee has unleashed a verbal tidal wave against the Thai Government’s latest financial strategy, or, as he calls it, “a betrayal” and an “insult” to Phuket—a province that plays a gigantic role in filling the nation’s coffers. Speaking for the opposition People’s Party and representing Constituency 2, Chalermpong did not mince words when he lambasted the 267.34 million baht allocated to Phuket from the 157-billion-baht national stimulus pot. Ranked a sorry 75th out of 77 provinces, he found the paltry sum nothing short of outrageous.
For those keeping tally, that’s merely a tiny sliver of 0.17% of the total budget. Compare that with provinces like Nakhon Ratchasima, pocketing over 3.5 billion baht—yes, a staggering 13 times more—and you’ll see why Chalermpong is ready to rip his hair out. “Year after year, Phuket sends some of the highest tax revenues to the central government,” Chalermpong fumed. “But when the chips—or should we say, the baht—are down, we’re left scraping the bottom of the jar. It’s unjustifiable.”
The government had promised, time and again, to designate Phuket as a “pilot province” for futuristic recovery and innovation schemes. Yet these glimmering promises have apparently evaporated like morning dew under the scorching Phuket sun. New data from Rocket Media Lab has only added fuel to Chalermpong’s fire.
“Phuket is always trotted out in speeches as a critical economic hub, but when the bucks are parceled out, it’s a whole different ball game,” Chalermpong stated with exasperation. “This budget looks more like a political piggy bank than a serious economic plan.” Ah, but his rhetoric didn’t stop there. The man of the hour even accused the Cabinet of doling out larger shares to provinces that play nice with the ruling coalition—a reward system, if you will, that punishes provinces not allied with them.
“What’s going on? Is it because I don’t hail from a political dynasty or because I’m not cozy with the coalition? Why else is Phuket being punished?”
Add to that the complications from unchecked issues such as visa loopholes exploited by illegal tour operators and rampant, unregulated cannabis use, and you might start to see why Chalermpong feels the situation is slipping from sunny skies to storm clouds. “These are national-level issues,” he pressed, “yet we have to fend for ourselves with the smallest budget in the country.”
The man with the plan suggested urgent decentralization, urging that every province should be given more control over its purse strings to better tailor financial initiatives to local needs. “Let each province design its own stimulus plan. We understand our local economy better than a ministry in Bangkok ever could,” he reasoned. “Imagine if even the tiniest fraction of that 157-billion-baht budget had been entrusted to Phuket. We could have launched real, high-impact initiatives. Instead, we’re left with crumbs.”
Indeed, it seems that the MP’s call for reshaping allocation strategies could drum up some serious consideration. But whether or not his impassioned crescendos will resonate with those steering Thailand’s fiscal future remains to be seen. For now, one thing is clear: Phuket’s MP isn’t going to let the matter rest, and who knows, he may just have the mix of grit and gravitas needed to make a splash.
I completely agree with Chalermpong! It’s outrageous how Phuket, a major revenue contributor, gets so little from the national budget.
Yeah, but doesn’t Bangkok need more support with all its projects and density?
I get that, but why should Phuket be so neglected when it contributes so much?
It’s politics as usual, Anna. The central government always plays favorites.
Phuket isn’t the only place struggling. What about smaller, less well-known provinces? They get even less.
True, but smaller provinces don’t generate the same revenue as Phuket. Prioritization should be fairer.
Wow, the audacity! Phuket deserves better, leadership needs to shake things up.
Easy to say ‘shake things up’, but actual governance is complex.
Sure, Pete, but ignoring major issues won’t solve them either.
This just highlights the bureaucratic mess that seems never-ending in Thai politics.
Decentralization sounds sensible. Local governments know their needs better than central planners.
Decentralization can lead to inconsistencies in governance and corruption if not checked.
I’ve visited Phuket, and it’s evident they need more resources for infrastructure and services.
As a local, I agree. Tourist impact is immense, and we’re underfunded.
I’m skeptical of these claims. Isn’t this just usual political theater?
While politicians gain points by making noise, there’s truth to Phuket’s budget issues.
Why is this a surprise? Money follows political influence, not need.
Sadly true. It’s who you know, not what you need.
Exactly! Real change needs to happen at the foundational level.
I support decentralization. Local leaders can respond more efficiently to crises.
Provinces need autonomy over their economic recovery plans. Chalermpong is right!
Autonomy might work, as long as there’s accountability.
It’s a disgrace. The government should be more transparent with budget allocations.
Transparency is key, but it’s sorely lacking nowadays.
Are we ignoring the fact that tourism dollars primarily come from Phuket? It warrants more funds.
That makes sense, Joe. But the system isn’t set up to reward revenue contribution fairly.
I hope Chalermpong’s cries don’t fall on deaf ears. Something needs to change.
The central government has the final call, but they should conduct regional needs assessments.
Assessments are just paperwork if not acted upon.