[ad_1]
6 opposition parties provoke an extraordinary motion for debate by the government, defaming the people, insisting on their full fight Together with the people
On October 22, 2020, the reporter reported At Pheu’s Thai Party Six opposition party leaders were summoned, consisting of Pheu Thai, Kao Klai, Pheu Chat Party Prachachat Thai Liberal Party Thai People’s Power Party
After the meeting, Pheu Thai Party leader Sompong Amornvivat said that the opposition party had a thorough discussion. Who thought that such a movement Look and intend to defame the movement of the protesters. Make protesters become a source of insincere trouble. The debate does not lead to a way out, so even the opposition is limited. But the opposition parties must unite to protect the rights of the people.
Together to explain all the facts The opposition party will not allow the government to use the parliamentary platform as a detergent to clean up the white government. A platform like this should speak to the public. Who has both economic difficulties AND the problem of protesters who want things
While Mr. Sutin Klanggeng, MP Maha Sarakham, Pheu Thai Party, as chairman of the opposition, said he was disappointed by the motion. By the opening of the Extraordinary Council It may not lead to a solution to find a solution, so the concrete solution will have to bring the 3 requirements of the assembly to speak. But the government presented a proposal All the lack of material in this matter And also discussing the obstruction of the procession. In detail, the protesters accused the protesters of invading What this point picks up, not a solution. But it will become more of an extension of the conflict.
And the injustice of the people in many ways is the cause. But this is also a reproduction of the accusation and a new resentment. Reflects accusation of defaming protesters AND insincere
“The movement is far from the exit. It blames the protesters Deviate from the opposition to the failure of the government. Let’s talk only about the actual procession And they want to purify themselves, take people as their weaknesses and take advantage of their own issues to discuss. It is self-cleaning Such a proposal for the government without maturity May violate regulations Large-scale impact damage Therefore, the opposition was asked to attend the meeting To explain the fact that the public is accused To not allow the government, the coalition and Senators argue with one-sided information, ”Sutin said.
Mr. Pitha Limcharoenrat The leader of the Adelante Party said that the opposition’s intentions wanted the Chamber to be a safe place. Solve the country’s problems But the government’s proposal is not only to solve the problem. Instead, it is an accusation of defaming the people in many ways, so the opposition party has to enter the discussion to protect the rights of justice with the people, hoping that the president will control the meeting. Give justice to all parties You will work hard even if the opposition has only 8 hours while the government and the Senate have 15 hours together.
The meeting of the leader of the 6 opposition parties is urgent. After the meeting of the four parties, namely the Cabinet (Cabinet), the Government Senate, the opposition deputy and the Senate to determine the theme and the timetable for the opening of the Extraordinary General Assembly on 26-27 . To find a way out for the country from the situation of the public assembly to expel General Prayut Chan-o-cha, Prime Minister and Minister of Defense.
However, a government source from Whip said that in the motion to open the Extraordinary General Assembly of the Cabinet it specifies the reasons for declaring a serious emergency. For the interruption of the procession and an assault against the Queen on October 14, 2020, as well as three demands from the student group as a reason to open a motion.
However, the government whip There was a resolution that there would be no secret meeting. And it doesn’t deter if the opposition talks about these issues Including having a live broadcast
But the panelists are responsible for their own words. This may violate article 45, paragraph two of the articles. And do not mention the monarchy or publish the names of members of parliament or anyone else unnecessarily. ” That can be held responsible for what the opposition used to argue.
[ad_2]
