- •Public Administration And Public Policy
- •Contents
- •Acknowledgments
- •About The Authors
- •Comments On Purpose and Methods
- •Contents
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Culture
- •1.3 Colonial Legacies
- •1.3.1 British Colonial Legacy
- •1.3.2 Latin Legacy
- •1.3.3 American Legacy
- •1.4 Decentralization
- •1.5 Ethics
- •1.5.1 Types of Corruption
- •1.5.2 Ethics Management
- •1.6 Performance Management
- •1.6.2 Structural Changes
- •1.6.3 New Public Management
- •1.7 Civil Service
- •1.7.1 Size
- •1.7.2 Recruitment and Selection
- •1.7.3 Pay and Performance
- •1.7.4 Training
- •1.8 Conclusion
- •Contents
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2 Historical Developments and Legacies
- •2.2.1.1 First Legacy: The Tradition of King as Leader
- •2.2.1.2 Second Legacy: A Tradition of Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.1.3 Third Legacy: Traditions of Hierarchy and Clientelism
- •2.2.1.4 Fourth Legacy: A Tradition of Reconciliation
- •2.2.2.1 First Legacy: The Tradition of Bureaucratic Elites as a Privileged Group
- •2.2.2.2 Second Legacy: A Tradition of Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.2.3 Third Legacy: The Practice of Staging Military Coups
- •2.2.2.4 Fourth Legacy: A Tradition for Military Elites to be Loyal to the King
- •2.2.3.1 First Legacy: Elected Politicians as the New Political Boss
- •2.2.3.2 Second Legacy: Frequent and Unpredictable Changes of Political Bosses
- •2.2.3.3 Third Legacy: Politicians from the Provinces Becoming Bosses
- •2.2.3.4 Fourth Legacy: The Problem with the Credibility of Politicians
- •2.2.4.1 First Emerging Legacy: Big Businessmen in Power
- •2.2.4.2 Second Emerging Legacy: Super CEO Authoritarian Rule, Centralization, and Big Government
- •2.2.4.3 Third Emerging Legacy: Government must Serve Big Business Interests
- •2.2.5.1 Emerging Legacy: The Clash between Governance Values and Thai Realities
- •2.2.5.2 Traits of Governmental Culture Produced by the Five Masters
- •2.3 Uniqueness of the Thai Political Context
- •2.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •Appendix A
- •Contents
- •3.1 Thailand Administrative Structure
- •3.2 History of Decentralization in Thailand
- •3.2.1 Thailand as a Centralized State
- •3.2.2 Towards Decentralization
- •3.3 The Politics of Decentralization in Thailand
- •3.3.2 Shrinking Political Power of the Military and Bureaucracy
- •3.4 Drafting the TAO Law 199421
- •3.5 Impacts of the Decentralization Reform on Local Government in Thailand: Ongoing Challenges
- •3.5.1 Strong Executive System
- •3.5.2 Thai Local Political System
- •3.5.3 Fiscal Decentralization
- •3.5.4 Transferred Responsibilities
- •3.5.5 Limited Spending on Personnel
- •3.5.6 New Local Government Personnel System
- •3.6 Local Governments Reaching Out to Local Community
- •3.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •4.1 Introduction
- •4.2 Corruption: General Situation in Thailand
- •4.2.1 Transparency International and its Corruption Perception Index
- •4.2.2 Types of Corruption
- •4.3 A Deeper Look at Corruption in Thailand
- •4.3.1 Vanishing Moral Lessons
- •4.3.4 High Premium on Political Stability
- •4.4 Existing State Mechanisms to Fight Corruption
- •4.4.2 Constraints and Limitations of Public Agencies
- •4.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 History of Performance Management
- •5.2.1 National Economic and Social Development Plans
- •5.2.2 Master Plan of Government Administrative Reform
- •5.3 Performance Management Reform: A Move Toward High Performance Organizations
- •5.3.1 Organization Restructuring to Increase Autonomy
- •5.3.2 Process Improvement through Information Technology
- •5.3.3 Knowledge Management Toward Learning Organizations
- •5.3.4 Performance Agreement
- •5.3.5 Challenges and Lessons Learned
- •5.3.5.1 Organizational Restructuring
- •5.3.5.2 Process Improvement through Information Technology
- •5.3.5.3 Knowledge Management
- •5.3.5.4 Performance Agreement
- •5.4.4 Outcome of Budgeting Reform: The Budget Process in Thailand
- •5.4.5 Conclusion
- •5.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •6.1.1 Civil Service Personnel
- •6.1.2 Development of the Civil Service Human Resource System
- •6.1.3 Problems of Civil Service Human Resource
- •6.2 Recruitment and Selection
- •6.2.1 Main Feature
- •6.2.2 Challenges of Recruitment and Selection
- •6.3.1 Main Feature
- •6.4.1 Main Feature
- •6.4.2 Salary Management
- •6.4.2.2 Performance Management and Salary Increase
- •6.4.3 Position Allowance
- •6.4.5 National Compensation Committee
- •6.4.6 Retirement and Pension
- •6.4.7 Challenges in Compensation
- •6.5 Training and Development
- •6.5.1 Main Feature
- •6.5.2 Challenges of Training and Development in the Civil Service
- •6.6 Discipline and Merit Protection
- •6.6.1 Main Feature
- •6.6.2 Challenges of Discipline
- •6.7 Conclusion
- •References
- •English References
- •Contents
- •7.1 Introduction
- •7.2 Setting and Context
- •7.3 Malayan Union and the Birth of the United Malays National Organization
- •7.4 Post Independence, New Economic Policy, and Malay Dominance
- •7.5 Centralization of Executive Powers under Mahathir
- •7.6 Administrative Values
- •7.6.1 Close Ties with the Political Party
- •7.6.2 Laws that Promote Secrecy, Continuing Concerns with Corruption
- •7.6.3 Politics over Performance
- •7.6.4 Increasing Islamization of the Civil Service
- •7.7 Ethnic Politics and Reforms
- •7.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.2 System of Government in Malaysia
- •8.5 Community Relations and Emerging Recentralization
- •8.6 Process Toward Recentralization and Weakening Decentralization
- •8.7 Reinforcing Centralization
- •8.8 Restructuring and Impact on Decentralization
- •8.9 Where to Decentralization?
- •8.10 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2 Ethics and Corruption in Malaysia: General Observations
- •9.2.1 Factors of Corruption
- •9.3 Recent Corruption Scandals
- •9.3.1 Cases Involving Bureaucrats and Executives
- •9.3.2 Procurement Issues
- •9.4 Efforts to Address Corruption and Instill Ethics
- •9.4.1.1 Educational Strategy
- •9.4.1.2 Preventive Strategy
- •9.4.1.3 Punitive Strategy
- •9.4.2 Public Accounts Committee and Public Complaints Bureau
- •9.5 Other Efforts
- •9.6 Assessment and Recommendations
- •9.7 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •10.1 History of Performance Management in the Administrative System
- •10.1.1 Policy Frameworks
- •10.1.2 Organizational Structures
- •10.1.2.1 Values and Work Ethic
- •10.1.2.2 Administrative Devices
- •10.1.2.3 Performance, Financial, and Budgetary Reporting
- •10.2 Performance Management Reforms in the Past Ten Years
- •10.2.1 Electronic Government
- •10.2.2 Public Service Delivery System
- •10.2.3 Other Management Reforms
- •10.3 Assessment of Performance Management Reforms
- •10.4 Analysis and Recommendations
- •10.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •11.1 Introduction
- •11.2 Malaysian Civil Service
- •11.2.1 Public Service Department
- •11.2.2 Public Service Commission
- •11.2.3 Recruitment and Selection
- •11.2.4 Malaysian Administrative Modernization and Management Planning Unit
- •11.2.5 Administrative and Diplomatic Service
- •11.4 Civil Service Pension Scheme
- •11.5 Civil Service Neutrality
- •11.6 Civil Service Culture
- •11.7 Reform in the Malaysian Civil Service
- •11.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.2.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.2.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.3.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.3.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.4.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.4.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.5.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.5.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.6.1 Context and Driving Force of Development
- •12.6.2 Major Institutional Development
- •12.7 Public Administration and Society
- •12.7.1 Public Accountability and Participation
- •12.7.2 Administrative Values
- •12.8 Societal and Political Challenge over Bureaucratic Dominance
- •12.9 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •13.1 Introduction
- •13.3 Constitutional Framework of the Basic Law
- •13.4 Changing Relations between the Central Authorities and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
- •13.4.1 Constitutional Dimension
- •13.4.1.1 Contending Interpretations over the Basic Law
- •13.4.1.3 New Constitutional Order in the Making
- •13.4.2 Political Dimension
- •13.4.2.3 Contention over Political Reform
- •13.4.3 The Economic Dimension
- •13.4.3.1 Expanding Intergovernmental Links
- •13.4.3.2 Fostering Closer Economic Partnership and Financial Relations
- •13.4.3.3 Seeking Cooperation and Coordination in Regional and National Development
- •13.4.4 External Dimension
- •13.5 Challenges and Prospects in the Relations between the Central Government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
- •References
- •Contents
- •14.1 Honesty, Integrity, and Adherence to the Law
- •14.2 Accountability, Openness, and Political Neutrality
- •14.2.1 Accountability
- •14.2.2 Openness
- •14.2.3 Political Neutrality
- •14.3 Impartiality and Service to the Community
- •14.4 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •15.1 Introduction
- •15.2 Brief Overview of Performance Management in Hong Kong
- •15.3.1 Measuring and Assessing Performance
- •15.3.2 Adoption of Performance Pledges
- •15.3.3 Linking Budget to Performance
- •15.3.4 Relating Rewards to Performance
- •15.4 Assessment of Outcomes of Performance Management Reforms
- •15.4.1 Are Departments Properly Measuring their Performance?
- •15.4.2 Are Budget Decisions Based on Performance Results?
- •15.4.5 Overall Evaluation
- •15.5 Measurability of Performance
- •15.6 Ownership of, and Responsibility for, Performance
- •15.7 The Politics of Performance
- •15.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.2 Structure of the Public Sector
- •16.2.1 Core Government
- •16.2.2 Hybrid Agencies
- •16.2.4 Private Businesses that Deliver Public Services
- •16.3 Administrative Values
- •16.4 Politicians and Bureaucrats
- •16.5 Management Tools and their Reform
- •16.5.1 Selection
- •16.5.2 Performance Management
- •16.5.3 Compensation
- •16.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.2 The Philippines: A Brief Background
- •17.4 Philippine Bureaucracy during the Spanish Colonial Regime
- •17.6 American Colonial Regime and the Philippine Commonwealth
- •17.8 Independence Period and the Establishment of the Institute of Public Administration
- •17.9 Administrative Values in the Philippines
- •17.11 Conclusions
- •References
- •Contents
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Toward a Genuine Local Autonomy and Decentralization in the Philippines
- •18.2.1 Evolution of Local Autonomy
- •18.2.2 Government Structure and the Local Government System
- •18.2.3 Devolution under the Local Government Code of 1991
- •18.2.4 Local Government Finance
- •18.2.5 Local Government Bureaucracy and Personnel
- •18.3 Review of the Local Government Code of 1991 and its Implementation
- •18.3.1 Gains and Successes of Decentralization
- •18.3.2 Assessing the Impact of Decentralization
- •18.3.2.1 Overall Policy Design
- •18.3.2.2 Administrative and Political Issues
- •18.3.2.2.1 Central and Sub-National Role in Devolution
- •18.3.2.2.3 High Budget for Personnel at the Local Level
- •18.3.2.2.4 Political Capture by the Elite
- •18.3.2.3 Fiscal Decentralization Issues
- •18.3.2.3.1 Macroeconomic Stability
- •18.3.2.3.2 Policy Design Issues of the Internal Revenue Allotment
- •18.3.2.3.4 Disruptive Effect of the Creation of New Local Government Units
- •18.3.2.3.5 Disparate Planning, Unhealthy Competition, and Corruption
- •18.4 Local Governance Reforms, Capacity Building, and Research Agenda
- •18.4.1 Financial Resources and Reforming the Internal Revenue Allotment
- •18.4.3 Government Functions and Powers
- •18.4.6 Local Government Performance Measurement
- •18.4.7 Capacity Building
- •18.4.8 People Participation
- •18.4.9 Political Concerns
- •18.4.10 Federalism
- •18.5 Conclusions and the Way Forward
- •References
- •Annexes
- •Contents
- •19.1 Introduction
- •19.2 Control
- •19.2.1 Laws that Break Up the Alignment of Forces to Minimize State Capture
- •19.2.2 Executive Measures that Optimize Deterrence
- •19.2.3 Initiatives that Close Regulatory Gaps
- •19.2.4 Collateral Measures on Electoral Reform
- •19.3 Guidance
- •19.3.1 Leadership that Casts a Wide Net over Corrupt Acts
- •19.3.2 Limiting Monopoly and Discretion to Constrain Abuse of Power
- •19.3.3 Participatory Appraisal that Increases Agency Resistance against Misconduct
- •19.3.4 Steps that Encourage Public Vigilance and the Growth of Civil Society Watchdogs
- •19.3.5 Decentralized Guidance that eases Log Jams in Centralized Decision Making
- •19.4 Management
- •19.5 Creating Virtuous Circles in Public Ethics and Accountability
- •19.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •20.1 Introduction
- •20.2 Problems and Challenges Facing Bureaucracy in the Philippines Today
- •20.3 Past Reform Initiatives of the Philippine Public Administrative System
- •20.4.1 Rebuilding Institutions and Improving Performance
- •20.4.1.1 Size and Effectiveness of the Bureaucracy
- •20.4.1.2 Privatization
- •20.4.1.3 Addressing Corruption
- •20.4.1.5 Improving Work Processes
- •20.4.2 Performance Management Initiatives for the New Millennium
- •20.4.2.1 Financial Management
- •20.4.2.2 New Government Accounting System
- •20.4.2.3 Public Expenditure Management
- •20.4.2.4 Procurement Reforms
- •20.4.3 Human Resource Management
- •20.4.3.1 Organizing for Performance
- •20.4.3.2 Performance Evaluation
- •20.4.3.3 Rationalizing the Bureaucracy
- •20.4.3.4 Public Sector Compensation
- •20.4.3.5 Quality Management Systems
- •20.4.3.6 Local Government Initiatives
- •20.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •21.1 Introduction
- •21.2 Country Development Context
- •21.3 Evolution and Current State of the Philippine Civil Service System
- •21.3.1 Beginnings of a Modern Civil Service
- •21.3.2 Inventory of Government Personnel
- •21.3.3 Recruitment and Selection
- •21.3.6 Training and Development
- •21.3.7 Incentive Structure in the Bureaucracy
- •21.3.8 Filipino Culture
- •21.3.9 Bureaucratic Values and Performance Culture
- •21.3.10 Grievance and Redress System
- •21.4 Development Performance of the Philippine Civil Service
- •21.5 Key Development Challenges
- •21.5.1 Corruption
- •21.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •Annexes
- •Contents
- •22.1 Introduction
- •22.2 History
- •22.3 Major Reform Measures since the Handover
- •22.4 Analysis of the Reform Roadmap
- •22.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •23.1 Decentralization, Autonomy, and Democracy
- •23.3.1 From Recession to Take Off
- •23.3.2 Politics of Growth
- •23.3.3 Government Inertia
- •23.4 Autonomy as Collective Identity
- •23.4.3 Social Group Dynamics
- •23.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •Contents
- •24.1 Introduction
- •24.2 Functions and Performance of the Commission Against Corruption of Macao
- •24.2.1 Functions
- •24.2.2 Guidelines on the Professional Ethics and Conduct of Public Servants
- •24.2.3 Performance
- •24.2.4 Structure
- •24.2.5 Personnel Establishment
- •24.3 New Challenges
- •24.3.1 The Case of Ao Man Long
- •24.3.2 Dilemma of Sunshine Law
- •24.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •Appendix A
- •Contents
- •25.1 Introduction
- •25.2 Theoretical Basis of the Reform
- •25.3 Historical Background
- •25.4 Problems in the Civil Service Culture
- •25.5 Systemic Problems
- •25.6 Performance Management Reform
- •25.6.1 Performance Pledges
- •25.6.2 Employee Performance Assessment
- •25.7 Results and Problems
- •25.7.1 Performance Pledge
- •25.7.2 Employee Performance Assessment
- •25.8 Conclusion and Future Development
- •References
- •Contents
- •26.1 Introduction
- •26.2 Civil Service System
- •26.2.1 Types of Civil Servants
- •26.2.2 Bureaucratic Structure
- •26.2.4 Personnel Management
- •26.4 Civil Service Reform
- •26.5 Conclusion
- •References
Decentralization and Local Governance in Thailand 69
The picture is very different, however, where there are serious conflicts of interest between the mayor and the assembly. In these instances, opposition groups in the assembly lobby assemblymen from the mayor’s team to switch sides to block the mayor’s budget proposal. As a result, municipal assemblies can be very unstable, as usually found in many developing countries with unstable coalition government. Elected local politicians in Thailand are frequently motivated by their personal business interests. If their short-term interests are not being served adequately, opposition groups in the municipal assembly go to work trying to undermine municipal executives. If they can criticize the municipal leadership for the gridlock they help create by spreading rumors or blocking budgets, they may hope to replace the existing leadership. The old system, in short, often produced weak municipal leadership. Municipal governments often lasted no more than 2 years.
Mayors, under the strong-mayor system, are directly elected by local residents, and are eligible to hold the mayorship for no more than two consecutive 4-year terms. The mayor can appoint deputy mayors (they need not be members of the municipal assembly): up to two deputy mayors for tambon-level municipal governments, three for town-level municipal governments, and four for city-level municipal governments. Mayors appoint advisors and secretaries who are allowed to sit in on municipal meetings (without a vote).
This system strengthens mayoral executive powers. Even though the municipal assembly can question the mayor regarding policies and administration, it cannot vote no confidence. The strong-mayor system does not allow the assembly to use the budgetary process to unseat the mayor and executive council. According to the Municipal Act of 2000, if a majority in the assembly do not pass the mayor’s budget, the assembly must set up a committee of seven assemblymen, seven mayoral appointees (they need not be assemblymen), and a committee chair appointed through agreement among the fourteen committee members within a week of their initial assembly. The chair cannot be one of the fourteen committee members or an assemblyman. If there is no agreement on who will be the committee chair within 7 days, the provincial governor will appoint a chair. This committee has to consider the budget proposal within 15 days after the chair’s appointment. If three-quarters of the assembly still oppose the committee’s recommendations, the budget proposal is canceled and the municipal government operates under the budget proposal from the previous year’s budget. In this event, the interior minister can dissolve the assembly with the mayor’s consent. The threat of loss of office considerably reduces the likelihood that the assembly will reject the committee’s recommendations (Thailand Municipality Act of 2000).
As a result, mayors under the new system enjoy more secure job tenure. Mayors and other executives can be driven from office only on the approval of the interior minister or if three-quar- ters of eligible municipal voters decide. This process is cumbersome and sets a high hurdle that is unlikely to be often cleared. This strong-mayor system obviously gives tremendous administrative and legislative powers to the mayor and his executives. Under this presidential-like system, municipal politicians who really want to serve the office and local community face lesser obstacles. Candidates for the mayoral position do not need to carry a slate of candidates competing in municipal assembly elections and this may boost the numbers of mayoral candidates in the future.
3.5.3 Fiscal Decentralization
Table 3.3 shows local government revenue in Thailand. The fiscal decentralization process in Thailand focuses primarily on increasing revenue share of national budget. Table 3.4 shows local government revenue share.
The building and land tax is assessed based on the rental value of the houses and buildings for commercial and industrial purposes. It accounts for the largest portion of all local taxes, but is not
© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
70 |
Public Administration in Southeast Asia |
|
||
Table 3.3 Local Government Revenue |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Centrally Collected Taxes for |
|
|
Own Collected Revenue |
|
Local Government |
Grants |
|
|
|
|
||
• Own-collected taxes |
• Commerce tax |
• General grants |
||
° |
Land and building tax |
• VAT and specific business |
• Specific grants |
|
° |
Land development tax |
tax |
|
• Miscellaneous |
|
|
|||
° |
Signboard tax |
° |
VAT |
|
|
|
|
||
° |
Slaughter duties |
° |
Specific business tax |
|
|
|
|
||
° |
Swallow nest duties |
• Liquor tax |
|
|
|
|
|
||
° |
Tobacco tax |
• Excise |
|
|
|
|
|
||
° |
Petroleum tax |
• Vehicle tax |
|
|
|
|
|
||
° |
Hotel tax |
• Property registration duties |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
• Gambling tax |
|
|
• Own-collected non-tax |
• Royalties for minerals |
|
||
• Royalties for petroleum |
|
|||
° Fees and fines |
|
|||
• Other |
|
|||
° |
Revenue from property |
|
||
|
|
|
||
° |
Revenue from infrastructure |
|
|
|
|
services |
|
|
|
° |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
efficiently collected due to exemptions for owner-occupiers. Land values are used in computing the land development tax. Municipal governments are responsible for determining land values using current market values based on land sales and must revalue every 4 years. Signboard taxes vary with the size and number of foreign characters. The Slaughter tax varies by the type and number of animals slaughtered (from interviews with directors of the Division of Finance in four municipal governments). Grants from central government were the major sources of municipal revenue. General grant allocations were based on population (150 baht per capita). This general grant was allocated without earmarking for specific uses. Specific grants served various purposes, e.g., developing infrastructure, education, and other programs promoted by central government. Decisions on specific grants were made through discussions between officials in the Division of Local Finance and the Bureau of the Budget. Grants for specific purposes accounted for 45% of all grants and were allocated to local governments through many government bodies, including the Ministries of Interior, Agriculture and Cooperatives, Transportation and Communications, Public Health, Education, Industry, Labor and Social Welfare, Science and Environment, as well as state enterprises and other government agencies.43 Both types of grants, however, were generally provided through the DOLA, MOI. Specific grants are among the most important grants designated for local development purposes, especially those allocated under the subject criteria of the Regional Cities Development Program (RCDP). This program aims to reduce regional income disparities and to dilute the concentration of economic activity and population in and around Bangkok by improving basic infrastructure in secondary cities.
43 Japan International Cooperation Agency, 2001, p. 6.
© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
LLC Group, Francis and Taylor by 2011 ©
Table 3.4 Local Revenue by Sources
Revenue Sources |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Own-collected |
9,330.74 |
11,419.42 |
12,280.31 |
13,416.18 |
14,410.58 |
15,729.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.88 |
11.40 |
9.46 |
8.21 |
7.36 |
6.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Central government |
42,887.98 |
50,262.16 |
63,643.37 |
73,100.27 |
106,983.16 |
121,666.58 |
|
collected |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40.83 |
50.18 |
49.02 |
44.71 |
54.61 |
52.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Fee and surcharge |
8,271.44 |
6,024.74 |
4,990.00 |
5,648.48 |
5,966.09 |
6,465.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.87 |
6.01 |
3.84 |
3.45 |
3.05 |
2.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Grants |
44,546.18 |
32,464.24 |
48,905.35 |
71,342.39 |
68,556.18 |
88,594.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42.41 |
32.41 |
37.67 |
43.63 |
34.99 |
38.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
105,036.34 |
100,170.56 |
129,819.04 |
163,507.33 |
195,916.02 |
232,456.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
100.00 |
100.00 |
100.00 |
100.00 |
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source: Department of Local Administration, Ministry of Interior. Thailand (October 2007).
Thailand in Governance Local and Decentralization
71
72 Public Administration in Southeast Asia
Municipal government expenditures include (1) monthly wages and salaries; (2) allowances; (3) general expenses; (4) supplies expenses; (5) stationery expenses; (6) costs of land, construction, and other property; and (7) other expenditures based on specific clauses, regulations, and acts issued by the MOI.
The 1997 Constitution calls for increasing the share of local government revenues and expenditures, assigning more revenue sources to local governments, promoting local fiscal autonomy, and revising the system of intergovernmental transfers to provide grants in a more transparent and predictable way. According to the Decentralization Plan and Procedures Act of 1999, local governments are to be allocated at least 20% of the national government budget by fiscal year 2001 (October 2000–September 2001) at the end of the Eighth National Social Economic Development Plan, and at least 35% by fiscal year 2006 (October 2005–September 2006) at the end of the Ninth National Social Economic Development Plan. These specific targets have been subjects of heated debate. Central revenues will no longer flow solely through the DOLA of the MOI. The Decentralization Plan and Procedures Act of 1999 enables local governments to receive grants from other government agencies and ministries as well, beginning in fiscal year 2001 (Thailand Decentralization Plan and Procedures Act of 1999). Under the 2003 National Budget, central government successfully allocated 184,066.03 million baht, or 22.19% of the total national budget (829,495.60 million baht) to local governments (Thailand Office of Prime Minister, 2002).
3.5.4 Transferred Responsibilities
As a result of fi scal responsibilities that were transferred, responsibilities were also transferred. Under the decentralization surge, municipal governments face major changes. Responsibilities, funding, and personnel are being transferred from central government to local governments all over the country. There are six major categories of responsibilities transferred from all ministries, including (1) basic infrastructure; (2) quality of life; (3) community development;
(4) local commerce, investment, and tourism; (5) environmental preservation; and (6) local cultural preservation and local wisdom (Ministry of Interior, 2003; Thailand Transferring Responsibility Act of 2000). Municipal officials are frustrated with the rapid increase in their responsibilities.
Although municipal governments now receive more funds from central government, their discretion in administering those funds is very restricted. A fierce debate rages as to whether or not earmarked funds transferred to localities should be included in calculating the target of transferring 35% of the national budget to local governments by 2006 (this transferring target of 35% has not yet been met). Municipal governments oppose the inclusion of earmarked funds in these calculations, contending that they violate at least the spirit of decentralization legislation.
One of the major concerns among municipal governments is their responsibilities in managing municipal sewage systems. These responsibilities entail very high operating costs that may be shared if municipal governments can persuade municipal residents to assume some of the costs of the service. Total costs may also be lowered if information is shared and local residents cooperate in service delivery.
Still another burden that municipal governments, especially larger ones, confront is the need to assist new municipal governments in their regions. With sanitary districts elevated to tambonlevel municipalities, these small, new municipalities lack experience in administration. Nearby governments with more resources and capacities are expected to provide technical and personnel help as well as some financial resources to the tambon-level municipal governments.
© 2011 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC