Central Government Intervention to Local Government Organizations: The case study of Parknum Samutprakarn and Kalasin Municipalities

Abstract

This study has the following four objectives 1. To examine the nature of intervention in local administrative organizations through public policy,2. To determine the implications of central government intervention with regards to contents and execution of the local administrative development plans, 3. To investigate the patterns of local administrative adaptation in response to central government intervention; and 4. To study local administrative organizations’ problems and obstacles, and identify recommendations that may be useful to management of municipalities’ affairs. The time frame of this research is from the fiscal year 2011 – 2013. The researcher focuses on two forms of qualitative research: 1) documentary research such as theoretical concepts, legal framework, and academic documents in foreign countries and Thailand and 2) in-depth interviews of elected administrators such as mayors, chief government officials and municipal assembly members, including the president of the municipal assembly. The researcher’s findings lead to the following response to the four objectives.

          Regarding the first objective, the research reveals that the public policy during Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s premiership is consistent with the directive principles of fundamental state policies in accordance to the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. Despite the fact that such public policy is beneficial to the state, official mandates issued by the Ministry of Interior and the Department of Local Administration to local government organizations can be considered a drawback and regarded as intervention on the administrative rights of local government organizations. Such practice contradicts the principle of local governance, which states “local administrative organizations should have the liberty to manage its own region in accordance to the law,” and goes against various legal documents such as the State Administration Act, B.E. 2534, the Municipality Act, B.E. 2496, and the Determining Plans and Process of Decentralization to Local Government Organization Act, B.E. 2542. These public policies allow the central government to excessively control and oversee local government organizations and limit local government organizations’ abilities to earn revenues on their own.

          As for the second objective, the research discovers that (1) impacts on budget: both municipalities were slightly affected, because only one percent or two million Baht of the two hundred million Baht annual budget were used to satisfy government intervention; (2) fiscal impacts: The two municipalities were greatly affected because the central government retains its authority on revenue collection and distributes such earnings to local administrations in the form of subsidy and revenue share from government agencies, totaling approximately 80 percent of the annual revenue. The remaining 20 percent comes from local administrators’ own effort; (3) impacts on the execution of municipal development plan: both municipalities were greatly affected by official mandates issued by the Ministry of Interior and the Department of Local Administration, which provide a directive for local administrative organizations to carry out public policy projects. In addition, the research suggests that Park Num Samut Prakarn Municipality has been influenced by informal political intervention. For instance, central government politicians commanded the municipality to enlist community members to participate in political events from time to time. Such informal intervention puts the municipality in an uncomfortable position, because the activities are not included in the municipal development plan.

          Concerning the third objective, the research indicates that there are two scenarios the municipalities used to adapt to government intervention. In the first scenario, both municipalities are able to make proper adjustments in accordance to public policies set forth by the government without obstructing such policies. In the second scenario, municipalities are not able to properly adjust their perspective and mentality to government intervention because such intervention lowers the municipal expense budget by the amount that could have been spent on additional public service.