Government Minister Labels No-Confidence Debate as Mere 'Democratic Entertainment'
Minister Pharadr Prisananantakul dismissed the opposition's no-confidence motion against 18 ministers as mere "democratic entertainment," urging MPs to follow parliamentary rules and avoid harming outsiders. He said the government can answer all allegations and that the opposition's role is to accuse while ministers must explain, leaving the final vote to individual lawmakers. He warned that accusations of the government seeking to "consume the nation" are overly harsh but noted such fierce rhetoric is customary under Article 151 and must be examined for evidence.
Pharadr Prisananantakul, Minister attached to the Prime Minister’s Office, spoke to reporters at Government House at 9:05 a.m. on October 9, 2026, regarding the opposition’s no-confidence motion against 18 ministers. He said he believes the prime minister and all ministers are capable of answering every accusation, describing the motion as a weapon the opposition will use under Article 151 of the constitution. However, he urged members of parliament to strictly follow parliamentary procedures, insisting that anything unrelated to the motion should not be mentioned in a way that harms outsiders, and called for compliance with the rules.
When reporters asked whether the opposition’s allegation that the government seeks to "consume the nation" is overly harsh, Pharadr replied that, according to the motion and Article 151, the opposition’s duty is to accuse the government while ministers must explain; the final decision rests with each MP after hearing both sides, which is normal practice. He noted that, historically, accusations under Article 151 have never been mild; they are deliberately fierce at the outset, after which supporters must seek reasons and evidence to back them up, a process that requires consideration.
When asked if the strong language in the opposition’s motion resembles an attempt to vent and directly attack the government, Pharadr said it’s fine, calling it "democratic entertainment," and suggested asking Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, secretary‑general of the Progressive Movement, what the term means. On whether naming 18 ministers is excessive, he repeated that it is precisely why he called it democratic entertainment.
Regarding claims that filing a broad no‑confidence motion against many ministers is like casting a wide net without a clear target, implying a lack of solid information, Pharadr said it is the opposition’s right. On confidence in government support, he declined to say whether he feels confident or not, stating that each MP’s decision is privileged; they must listen to the accusations and the government’s explanations and then exercise their own judgment. He added that the no‑confidence vote will not be dictated by party leadership or whip decisions, leaving each MP free to decide after hearing both sides.
He also commented on the absence of the Kao Klotham party’s MPs signing the motion, saying the government might welcome their support, but ultimately the outcome depends on the opposition’s debate and the government’s responses, and MPs of any party retain the right to vote according to their own judgment.
When reporters asked whether he worries about outsiders being dragged into the debate—naming, for example, Newin Chidchob, president of Buriram United Football Club—Pharadr replied that everything will be conducted according to the rules.
Regarding the number of days allocated for the debate, Sathit Wong‑nong‑toey, a party‑list MP from the Democrat Party, requested five days. Pharadr said that, according to precedent, the debate usually lasts three to four days, because time must be divided fairly among the 18 ministers who must be given sufficient opportunity to respond.
He added that, while the accusing side naturally needs more time, having 18 ministers to answer requires an equitable split. When asked if anyone is trying to predict which topics will be raised, Pharadr quipped, "It’s a rerun."
The excerpt ends there.
