BMA Cancels Khu Bon Water Project Amid Favoritism Claims
The Democrat Party spokesman accused the current Bangkok Metropolitan Administration of cancelling the Khu Bon water‑retention project to favour a housing development tied to the governor’s advisor. He said the project’s legal groundwork was complete and would have cost only 324 million baht, far less than the 11 billion baht claimed by officials. The cancellation, he argued, has deprived eastern Bangkok of a crucial flood‑prevention facility and warrants a serious investigation.
On October 3, 2026, at the Democrat Party headquarters, Pongsakorn Kwanmuang, party spokesman and former BMA spokesman under the previous administration, announced that the current BMA leadership had scrapped the land‑expropriation plan for the Khu Bon water‑retention project, claiming the process had been lawful and the budget only 324 million baht, not the 11 billion baht cited by officials. He said the Khu Bon project was a key initiative of the former BMA administration to create an eastern Bangkok flood‑water reservoir. Normally, issuing a royal decree for land expropriation takes three to five years; the legal process started in 2017. Although a new expropriation law (2019) required the procedure to be restarted, the previous BMA team continued with public consultations, surveys, budgeting and drafting the decree from 2019 through 2022, bringing it to the Ministry of Interior and the Cabinet ready for enactment. Pongsakorn presented budget documents showing the original land‑acquisition cost was 324 million baht—266 million for land compensation, 50 million for structures, totaling 316 million, plus a 2% annual increase of about 6 million baht. He stressed the figure was far below the 11 billion baht alleged by the current administration. Regarding claims that land prices had risen due to new housing construction, he cited Section 23 of the 2019 Expropriation Act, which states that any construction or land development after the expropriation announcement cannot be counted toward compensation. Therefore, if the BMA enforced the law properly, the budget would remain at 324 million baht. He noted that land‑sale or subdivision authority rests with the Land Department, not the BMA, but anyone aware that land under expropriation notice is unsuitable for housing projects would not invest unless other factors were involved. Pongsakorn raised three points of suspicion regarding the cancellation: first, the land meant for the water‑retention project had become a housing estate; second, that estate is linked to an official who serves as an advisor to the governor; third, the governor ordered a review of the project, leading to its cancellation. He urged the public to decide whether these were mere coincidences, but stressed that Bangkok and its residents have lost a vital flood‑prevention asset, and called for a thorough investigation into the decision‑making of the current BMA leadership.
