Opposition Calls for Five-Day No-Confidence Debate, Not Three
Opposition MP Rangsiman Rom criticized the government's plan to limit the no‑confidence debate to three days, insisting at least five days are needed to properly examine the censure motion against 18 ministers. He accused the authorities of rushing the schedule to avoid thorough scrutiny and said no consultation meeting has yet taken place. Rom warned that cutting debate time would prevent a full investigation into alleged corruption.
On October 14, 2569, Rangsiman Rom, a party-list MP and deputy leader of the People's Party, told reporters that the government had set the no-confidence debate timetable for October 27‑30 without prior consultation. He said the parliament speaker normally summons both government and opposition lawmakers, including cabinet representatives, to agree on the schedule, but no meeting has yet occurred. Declaring the sudden decision to limit the debate to three days as heavy‑handed, Rom claimed it reveals governmental anxiety and an effort to give the opposition as little time as possible.
He pointed out that previous no‑confidence debates have varied in length, but the opposition’s current motion lists 18 ministers, and even the section covering Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul — who is also prime minister — exceeds half a page. Many ministers face multiple allegations, and Labor Minister Supamas Isaraphibal has already raised questions about what a “broken heart” means in the debate, indicating she will be a key target.
Rom warned that if the government silences the opposition and cuts debate time, lawmakers will be unable to delve into details of alleged corruption networks involving numerous figures. He insisted that before finalising the schedule, talks must be held with the opposition, and that the opposition stands firm on a minimum of five days, which they consider the least necessary for a thorough scrutiny, noting that even five days might be tight.
When asked about reports that the prime minister would be abroad after the debate window, Rom said the government could offer many excuses, but the opposition’s position remains that five days are required beforehand. He added that the exact timing of those five days can be negotiated, but the principle is that the debate length must serve the opposition’s need to interrogate the government, not the government’s convenience.
Rom said he has not yet discussed the issue with other opposition parties, but the five‑day demand has been a shared stance from the outset. He criticised the rush to conclude and “cut off” the debate as improper, accusing the government of using the tactic to bury evidence and prevent full oversight. “What are they afraid of?” he asked. “If they truly have nothing to hide and enjoy the spectacle, why deny us a full debate? If they are sincere, why not let us proceed as we intend?”
Regarding possible opposition response if the government keeps the three‑day limit, Rom said it is premature to speculate and characterised the move as a trial balloon from the government side.
