Anutin Govt Policy Fails to Address Energy Crisis, MP Criticizes – Thailand News

On April 9, 2026, Veerayuth Kanchoochat, Deputy Leader of the People’s Party and List MP, criticized the policy statements of the cabinet led by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul.

Criticism of Government Response

Veerayuth began by criticizing the government’s delayed decision-making and handling of the oil crisis stemming from the situation in the Middle East. He stated that in a crisis, the public expects the government to “lead the public by at least one step,” but the current government is “many steps behind.” This delay included a lack of swift action in investigating oil hoarding, initiating scrutiny of refining costs, and acknowledging the existence of a crisis, which he said was 3-5 weeks overdue.

Veerayuth argued that this lagging response is reflected in the policy statements, which do not clearly address crisis management, suggesting a sense of normalcy despite the current situation.

He noted that the public expects clear direction to alleviate anxieties, specifically regarding oil price structures and assistance for vulnerable groups. He contrasted this with the urgent policies outlined in the Yingluck Shinawatra government’s 2013 policy statement, which were absent from Anutin’s 2026 statement, despite the current oil crisis being more severe.

Proposals for a Proactive Approach

Regarding medium-term impact preparedness, Veerayuth proposed that the government plan based on the “worst-case scenario,” assessing the cascading effects of a prolonged conflict lasting 4-5 months throughout 2026. He highlighted potential impacts on industries reliant on imports and exports, tourism (with a projected 65% decrease in flights in March), and agriculture, including shortages of fertilizer and seafood, and disruptions to rice and tuna export markets dependent on the Middle East. He emphasized that preparation should focus on critical areas, avoiding a blanket approach.

In addition to reactive policies, Veerayuth advocated for a proactive national mission: “increasing Thailand’s energy security,” defined as having sufficient, continuous, and affordable energy access for all sectors.

Achieving energy security, he stated, requires simultaneous efforts in restructuring the country’s energy infrastructure, increasing the proportion of renewable energy, and improving energy efficiency. He cautioned that state mandates alone are insufficient and that the government must demonstrate how a secure energy future will improve the lives of citizens.

Analysis of the Current Government Structure

Veerayuth analyzed the current government as a coalition between “big political clans” and “technocrats,” where each side “closes one eye” to maintain cohesion. He argued this results in a government that lacks decisiveness and principle.

He termed this form of governance “blind democracy,” citing the case of 57 million liters of illegally hoarded oil as an example. He stated this occurred given that each party overlooked the actions of others, with the Prime Minister supporting individuals with conflicts of interest during a period of price controls, and technocrats failing to push for transparency and real-time tracking of oil tankers.

Veerayuth questioned how Thailand will emerge from this crisis, warning against repeating the outcome of the COVID-19 crisis, where 1.9 trillion baht in loans primarily stimulated short-term consumption, increasing household and public debt instead of investing in the country’s future. He contrasted this with the oil crisis of 1976-1979, which ultimately led to a shift in the economic model towards export-oriented production.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did Veerayuth Kanchoochat criticize in the government’s policy statement?

Veerayuth Kanchoochat criticized the government’s policy statement for not reflecting the current crisis, lacking decisiveness, and not adhering to principles.

What proactive measure did Veerayuth propose?

Veerayuth proposed a national mission to increase Thailand’s energy security, ensuring sufficient, continuous, and affordable energy for all.

How did Veerayuth describe the current government structure?

Veerayuth described the current government structure as a coalition between “big political clans” and “technocrats” who “close one eye” to each other to maintain power, resulting in a lack of decisiveness and principle.

Will Thailand be able to navigate this crisis effectively and build a more resilient future?