BANGKOK, THAILAND – The ruling-party Bhumjaithai warned that the proposed Clean Air Bill could grant authorities sweeping powers and weaken Thailand’s competitiveness, arguing that poor enforcement, not a lack of laws, lay at the heart of the PM2.5 crisis.
Bhumjaithai warns against fast‑tracking
During a parliamentary debate on PM2.5 air pollution in the northern provinces, list MP Supachai Jaisamut voiced strong reservations about the Clean Air Bill. He said he was concerned about moves to push the legislation forward quickly after it had already passed the House of Representatives and moved to the Senate for review.
Supachai argued that the process should not be rushed while key implications of the bill remained unclear. He indicated that a more cautious timetable was needed to scrutinise the bill’s legal and economic effects.
“Enough laws – too little enforcement”
Supachai said the smog and haze crisis did not stem from missing legal foundations but from weak implementation of existing regulations.
“We have enough laws – it is the lack of enforcement that is the core problem of the PM2.5 crisis.”
said Supachai Jaisamut, list MP.
He also stressed that clean air was a fundamental right of the population.
“A good law must not create new problems or impose unnecessary burdens on the country.”
said Supachai Jaisamut, list MP.
Fears of excessive powers for officials
According to Supachai, the draft would grant state agencies very broad powers. These could include searches, seizures, asset freezes and orders to close businesses without a court warrant.
From his perspective, such provisions could undermine the rule of law and open the door to abuse. He warned that they could also limit citizens’ ability to seek compensation for any damage suffered.
Legal vagueness in the draft
Supachai also criticised the bill as being too vague in legal terms, saying it set out general principles rather than precise rules. In his view, crucial details would instead be left for administrative bodies to define later.
He said this created a risk that key rules would not be clearly determined through parliamentary debate. Instead, they might be shaped afterward by agencies, reducing democratic oversight of the regulatory framework.
Cost risks for industry and Thailand’s position
On the economic side, Supachai warned that planned pollution fees and risk‑hedging mechanisms could sharply increase costs for industry. He pointed to a period of global uncertainty, saying higher burdens would hit businesses at a sensitive time.
He cautioned that Thailand’s competitiveness could erode if additional costs rose faster than companies’ ability to adapt. Such pressures, he said, might weaken the country’s position as an investment and production base.
Doubts over EU‑style emissions trading
Supachai also questioned whether an emissions trading system modelled on Europe would be workable in Thailand. He said the success of such a system depended on strong domestic enforcement.
“An emissions trading model could fail if enforcement at home remains weak.”
said Supachai Jaisamut, list MP.
He argued that importing complex market mechanisms without fixing enforcement gaps could create a system that looked modern on paper but did not deliver real reductions in emissions.
Overlap with existing laws and new bodies
Supachai said the Clean Air Bill overlapped with existing frameworks on environmental protection, urban planning and traffic management. He noted that the draft did not clearly specify which existing laws it would replace.
He also opposed the creation of several new committees and a proposed Clean Air Office. In his view, this body could duplicate the work of the Pollution Control Department, adding complexity rather than improving coordination.
Principle accepted – but no collateral damage
Despite his criticism, Supachai underlined that he did not reject the idea of a clean air law in principle. He reiterated that protecting public health from PM2.5 pollution was essential.
“The final version must effectively protect public health without harming the economy or weakening the safeguards of the rule of law.”
said Supachai Jaisamut, list MP.
He called for a revised draft that balanced environmental, legal and economic considerations, ensuring cleaner air without unintended collateral damage for Thailand’s business climate or constitutional order.