Hopes for the creation of a true welfare state in Thailand are fading fast as campaigning hits top gear ahead of the February 8 election.
Pledges to improve state benefits for millions of vulnerable Thais are almost absent from party manifestos, replaced by watered-down populist policies.
“Political parties have failed to demonstrate a sincere political will to improve people’s lives,” said Nitirat Sapsomboon, a coordinator at We Fair, a network advocating for social justice and state welfare.
Nitirat said parties were now offering even less than they promised in the run-up to the 2023 election.
He cited the People’s Party, then known as Move Forward, which promised elderly voters a monthly pension of 3,000 baht three years ago.
It has now cut that offer in half, pledging to raise the monthly payment to just 1,500 baht by 2027. The pension currently ranges from 600 to 1,000 baht, depending on the recipient’s age.
“Development of the state welfare system is now in reverse,” Nitirat said. He added that without a strong social welfare system, deep inequalities in Thailand would persist.
He highlighted the disparity between the 600-baht state pension and the 65,000 baht received monthly by generals when they retire, asking, “Why is the gap so massive?”
He added that the government allocates 90 billion baht annually for the pensions of 14 million elderly citizens, far below the 300 billion baht spent on 1.2 million retired civil servants.
Policies to woo votes
Along with the 1,500-baht subsidy for the elderly, the People’s Party has also pledged to raise monthly payments for people with disabilities.
The payment would rise to 2,000 baht under the People’s Party, compared with the current rate of 1,000 baht for state welfare cardholders and 800 baht for others.
The People’s Party also promises to increase the monthly young-child subsidy from 600 baht to 1,200 by 2029, while expectant mothers will receive a payment of 5,000 baht at five months pregnant.
New mothers will be handed a 3,000-baht cash coupon to purchase baby products, and the party has pledged to open 1,000 crèches for toddlers aged four months to two years, so their mothers can return to work.
The Pheu Thai Party promises a subsidy for the poorest 3.4 million Thais to lift them above the poverty line.
It has also vowed access to prenatal care at any medical facility for pregnant women, guaranteeing the same standard of child delivery services as civil servants receive.
To help working mothers, Pheu Thai says it will set up childcare centres across the country to mind children from birth to the age of six.
It also promises to deposit 3,000 baht a year in the accounts of all children up to the age of 15, as a nest egg for them to fall back on later in life.
Bhumjaithai is promising one volunteer nurse for each village, to provide immediate care for pregnant women, young children and the elderly.
It also pledges measures to promote the employment of people beyond retirement age, including tax incentives for employers.
Palang Pracharath is pledging a monthly payment of 1,500 baht for expectant mothers, starting four months into their pregnancy and ending at childbirth.
The subsidy will then switch to 1,000 baht per month for the first six years of the child’s life.
The Democrat Party’s election platform includes a 5,000-baht monthly payment for new mothers for 12 months. It also promises to deposit 500 baht per month in each child’s bank account until they turn 18.
If the money is left untouched, the beneficiaries will get a bonus every five years. Additionally, the Democrats plan to raise monthly state subsidies for the elderly and disabled individuals to a flat rate of 1,000 baht and 1,600 baht, respectively.
Budget concerns
Prof Athiphat Muthitacharoen, who teaches economics at Chulalongkorn University, said the campaign pledges to boost welfare might sound attractive, but voters should examine carefully to see if they can actually be implemented.
“You should check and see how these parties plan to finance the implementation of their policies. If they do mention funding sources, then check to see if they are feasible,” he said.
Athiphat noted that Thailand is facing bigger financial challenges than three years ago, citing public debt levels that are nearing 70% of the country’s GDP. Such constraints are limiting the government’s flexibility in managing the national budget, he said.
“It’s time to tell people frankly that populist policies are becoming more difficult to implement.”
Though acknowledging that populist policies can be beneficial, he warned they should not be imposed at the expense of the country’s financial stability and long-term growth.
What activists say
Nitirat argued that Thailand could upgrade state welfare and tackle inequality by reforming its tax and budget ecosystem – a view shared by many social activists.
Arunee Srito, who works for a group advocating community rights, said they would not back down on their demand for a 3,000-baht monthly subsidy for the elderly.
“Even though the government offers free medical treatment under the universal healthcare scheme, patients still need money to travel to the hospital,” she observed.
Sunee Chaiyaros, whose group focuses on welfare for young children, said each child in the country should also receive a 3,000-baht monthly subsidy.
“Providing better welfare for children is key to achieving a sustainable quality of life for all Thais,” she said.
Athiphat said that raising value-added tax (VAT) by just 1 per cent would generate an additional 70-80 billion baht in public funds.
“However, imposing that measure would carry political costs. Around the world, government parties that raise VAT often find themselves on the opposition bench after the next election,” he said.
