The Nation
January 16, 2003

Prime Minister Thaksin Shina-watra yesterday reiterated that his decision on the Pak Mool Dam controversy was final, saying that any future protests on the matter would have to observe the rule of law.

“I made my decision in the interests of the majority,” he said. “Local fishermen told me that they wanted the dam’s sluice gates open for eight months and closed for four months.”

Thaksin said the partial closure of sluice gates met the interests of villagers living above and below the dam.

“My government considers the matter closed and will proceed to increase fish stocks for local fishermen and construct irrigation canals for local farmers,” he said.

The prime minister said the controversy had been resolved and it was not necessary to hold new public hearings on the matter.

He also denied the allegation that the government had skewed the opinion survey on the sluice gates.

“Villagers have different needs. I finalised the decision  to accommodate their differences. I wasn’t swayed by noisy protests,” he said.

Energy Minister Pongthep Thepkanchana said the government survey indicated that the majority of villagers in the dam area wanted the sluice gates open for four months, between July and October.

The Assembly of the Poor, which lead opposition to the dam, called for the opening of the sluice gates year-round. Pongthep also said the government had instructed relevant
agencies to assist in meeting the different needs of Pak Mool fishermen and farmers.

The Irrigation Department has plans to build canals connecting the dam to farmland and the Fishery Department plans to encourage deep-water fishing above the dam, he said.

In response to criticism of the opinion survey, National Statistics Office secretary-general Sue Louthai said it had been conducted in accordance with statistical standards.

“The survey was based on responses from villagers and it was not designed to favour the government as alleged,” he said.

Social critic Prawes Wasi yesterday warned that the controversy could lead to violence if the government insisted on a “legal solution” rather than paying attention to environmental problems.

“The government should try to reason with villagers instead of alienating them,” he said.