The political temperature will rise substantially next week as the awaited censure debate is due to start on Tuesday, even though Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha's administration -- thanks to it holding a majority of seats -- is likely to survive the no-confidence motion, just as it did in the past. As such, the live broadcast five-day censure debate is worthy of attention.
It will be the last censure debate during the four-year term of the Lower House and the current government, so politicians from both camps will give their all to impress voters and damage their rivals.
Prime Minister Prayut, who brazenly skipped ordinary House sessions last month, and the government will use the event to defend themselves against accusations and allegations of mismanagement and corruption. After publicly hinting he may seek another term, Gen Prayut will be out to woo voters to give him a boost in the next election.
The censure debate is already stirring controversy. The reports from parliament in the past few weeks hint at political machinations and horse trading as the government strives to win support to ensure it will survive.
In a bid for more public support, the government is this week rolling out populist measures to reduce people's economic hardship.
For example, the cabinet early this week announced two more months of diesel subsidies and a reduction in the excise tax paid for petrol.
This week, national oil and gas conglomerate PTT Plc also announced it will add 3 billion baht to the fast-dwindling Oil Fuel Fund. PTT is 51% owned by the Finance Ministry.
But such measures are only temporary band-aids. Waiting for donations from private energy firms to shore up the Oil Fuel Fund is just a case of kicking the can down the road. It doesn't get to the root of the oil price problem.
As this is likely to remain a problem for many months, possibly into next year, critics have lambasted the government for mismanagement.
For example, ex-finance minister Korn Chatikavanij asked the government to collect a windfall tax from oil refineries to lower the oil price instead of keeping on borrowing to pave the way for subsidies.
Consumer activists and critics asked the Energy Ministry to clarify how the complex oil price structure is calculated and provide the relevant financial data including marketing fees and oil refineries' profit margins.
Sadly, all of these proposals fell on deaf ears. Energy Minister Supattanapong Punmeechaow, who has surprisingly been omitted from the censure targets, asked private refiners to donate their profits instead, saying the windfall tax could violate contracts and disrupt the open market.
Bread and butter issues like this will be the focal point of next week's debate. So we hope MPs dig deep to find the causes and solutions, while acting transparently with the data to ensure those solutions are sustainable. The last thing voters want to hear is more slander and hot air.
Parliamentary debates are not just battles between two political camps. They are the best and only system we have to resolve political and social conflicts.
After all, a peaceful democratic society is one where conflicts are solved in parliament through rational and civilised debates. If that doesn't work we can look forward to another round of street protests, with troops possibly being summoned from their barracks to restore order.
