Rome Cantona Defends No-Confidence Motion as Legitimate Critique

Hanoi:Rome Cantona countered Bhumjaithai's remarks, mocking the no-confidence motion as a 'democratic entertainment' and merely a discrediting tactic. He insisted that he has the most comprehensive evidence and is not simply showing a rerun of a movie. He explained that his focus on 18 ministers and the exclusion of Pheu Thai was aimed at penetrating the heart of the 'blue regime' (referring to the ruling party). He declined to comment on the identity of his 'benefactor'. Mr. Rangsiman Rome, a party-list MP and deputy leader of the People's Party, commented on the response by several Bhumjaithai Party MPs to the opposition's no-confidence motion, calling it a "democracy." He stated that if they are borrowing terms from Mr. Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, secretary-general of the Progressive Movement, they should borrow them completely. Therefore, they should define themselves as a "blue regime" or explain the term "double license" as previously used by Mr. Piyabutr. However, he added that this issue is a way of discr editing the People's Party by using Mr. Piyabutr's words. Mr. Rangsiman continued, saying that the various allegations must be considered based on the facts. Isn't the current state of the country a perfect proof that Thailand is rife with corruption? Whether it's the local government exam cheating cases or the Senate election fraud cases, isn't it clear that the rule of law has been destroyed in Thailand? Furthermore, several crises, such as the floods, don't clearly show the failure of the administration led by Prime Minister and Minister of Interior Anutin Charnvirakul, which is riddled with cronyism and serving those who have been benefactors? Therefore, he feels that the no-confidence debate based on these allegations is too mild compared to the pain suffered by Thai society. When asked if this would be a rerun of a previous issue, as some matters might have already appeared in the media or been presented to the public, Mr. Rangsiman stated that it wasn't a rerun of a movie, but rather a presentation of the suffering of the people, highlighting the severity of the situation currently facing Thai society. Some political analysts might already be familiar with the evidence, but many others may not have seen it. Therefore, there will be both aspects. However, he assured that everything they are discussing is not false evidence or baseless rumors. When asked about the reason for not submitting an interpellation against ministers from the Pheu Thai Party, Mr. Rangsiman said that based on the evidence and the severity of the offenses, ministers outside of these 18 individuals do not necessarily mean they are virtuous. However, the opposition needs to gather the strongest evidence and the most serious accusations, and therefore believes that these 18 individuals are the heart of the "blue regime" (referring to the Pheu Thai Party). Regarding concerns that the government might protest and prevent the debate from proceeding if it involves individuals outside the parliamentary system, Mr. Rangsiman said he was not wor ried, as he had experienced this in every term. However, he did not want protests to occur, as the regulations clearly state that mentioning individuals outside the system is only permissible when necessary. As for whether the debate would mention individuals in Buriram, Mr. Rangsiman stated that the motion uses the term "benefactor," but who that person is would have to wait and see. According to Thai News Agency,