Bangkok: “Pichet” gets angry and explains that the “Parliamentary Budget” can be inspected, emphasizing that the allocation depends on the committee and urging not to demolish their own house. ‘Rakchanok’ agrees, stating her embarrassment due to uncertainty about having enough power.

According to Thai News Agency, during a meeting at the Parliament building to discuss the draft of the 2026 Budget Expenditure Act, Mr. Pichet Chueamuangphan, the first deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, addressed concerns raised by Ms. Rakchanok Srinok, an MP from the Prachachon Party. She had mentioned budget issues in the House, following comments by Mr. Panus Wacharasindhu, which implied potential corruption. Mr. Pichet clarified that the budget is still under consideration and its approval relies on a special committee.

Mr. Pichet elaborated on the budget distribution, highlighting that the legislative branch, a crucial pillar of the nation, received over 8 billion baht in 2026, with the House of Representatives getting over 6 billion and the Senate 2 billion. He pointed out the necessity of maintaining the parliament building, which has been used without repairs for five years. He cited issues like insufficient parking spaces and the need for renovations, such as the Glass Pavilion, to accommodate a monument of King Rama VII, scheduled for installation next year.

Addressing the renovation of the budget meeting room, Mr. Pichet mentioned the inconvenience faced due to its current design and justified the need for updates to facilitate long meetings. He also touched upon the importance of a 4D animation room to educate visitors about the history and development of democracy, asserting that these facilities should be up-to-date.

Mr. Pichet welcomed scrutiny of the budget, urging investigations into larger ministry budgets, emphasizing that the parliamentary budget is modest in comparison. In response, Ms. Rakchanok clarified her stance, stating she did not allege corruption but emphasized the need for preemptive measures against potential mismanagement. She questioned why public funds are used to correct legal violations instead of holding wrongdoers accountable.

Ms. Rakchanok highlighted that simply replacing chairs in the House of Representatives Budget Study and Monitoring Committee room could suffice, rather than extensive renovations. She expressed her embarrassment over the public’s critique of parliamentary budgets and questioned whether her party had the influence to challenge them.

Both Mr. Pichet and Ms. Rakchanok agreed on the importance of transparency and accountability, with Mr. Pichet reiterating his openness to investigations while stressing the need for practicality in budget allocations.