Thai government considers three days sufficient for no-confidence debate — Bangkok Post

In Thailand, the government’s chief parliamentary coordinator, Korrawee Prissananantakul, said that three days should be enough for the planned debate on a vote of no confidence in the government. Opposition parties, by contrast, are asking for five days for the discussion, Bangkok Post reports.

The government’s position

Korrawee Prissananantakul called the five-day period excessive because, in his view, a significant share of the opposition’s accusations are broad and repetitive. He also said that the motion is worded too generally, making it difficult to determine which specific actions of each minister the opposition considers improper.

Last week, opposition parties submitted a no-confidence motion to the House of Representatives targeting the prime minister and 17 cabinet ministers. According to the government representative, the debate should be useful to the public: the opposition must present clear evidence of ministerial failures or corruption and explain why the officials it criticizes should not remain in office.

More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.

The opposition’s arguments

Sathit Wongnongtoey, deputy leader of the opposition Democratic Party, defended the demand for five days of debate. He said that the opposition bloc is questioning the accountability of 18 ministers for their use of authority and the government’s work.

According to him, the debate should not only assess the administration’s performance but also test the opposition’s ability to oversee the executive branch. Sathit Wongnongtoey insisted that five days is a justified period given the number of ministers and would allow an average of four of them to be considered each day.

Pheu Thai Party MP Sutin Klungsang said that the opposition may not have sufficient grounds to criticize ministers from other coalition parties, as the motion names only representatives of the ruling party. He also warned that without clear accusations and substantial evidence, opposition lawmakers risk damaging their own reputation.