People’s Party deputy leader Sirikanya Tansakul claimed the government is suffering a cash-flow crisis, using a ฿10.3 billion budget transfer to stay afloat. She said delayed investment, rising debt and weak financial leadership expose worsening public finances.
People’s Party deputy leader Sirikanya Tansakul on Thursday accused the government of sliding into a cash-flow crisis, claiming ministers were stripping more than ฿10.3 billion from investment projects simply to keep state finances afloat. In a blistering parliamentary attack on the Budget Transfer Bill, she warned that delayed investment, cuts to disaster-related spending and rising public debt exposed deteriorating public finances, arguing the government’s finances now resembled an overborrowed private company struggling to meet its obligations.
People’s Party deputy leader Sirikanya Tansakul on Thursday claimed the government was showing increasingly serious cash-flow problems as it sought parliamentary approval to transfer more than ฿10.3 billion within the national budget.
She argued the proposal reflected growing financial strain rather than a genuine reprioritisation of spending. According to Ms Sirikanya, ministers were delaying productive investment simply to keep government finances operating, exposing deeper weaknesses in public finances.
The House of Representatives met on Thursday morning under Speaker Sophon Saram to consider the Cabinet’s urgent Budget Transfer Bill. The proposal seeks to reallocate ฿10.328 billion between existing budget items.
Government accused of delaying investment to ease cash-flow pressures through a ฿10.3 billion transfer
During the debate, Ms Sirikanya, a party-list MP for the People’s Party, argued the measure would provide only temporary financial relief. However, she warned it would delay investment projects that generate stronger long-term economic returns.
Ms Sirikanya told parliament that approximately 93% of the proposed reductions affected capital expenditure. She estimated that roughly ฿9 billion of planned investment would no longer enter the economy.
Instead, she said the money would be redirected into expenditure programmes, including Thai Help Thai Plus. In contrast, she argued that capital investment creates a much stronger economic multiplier than direct spending.
She rejected the government’s claim that the proposal represented careful reprioritisation. Rather, she argued it reflected delayed payments and postponed project instalments because the government was struggling to maintain cash flow. In her view, ministers were not identifying inefficient expenditure. Instead, they were simply withdrawing funds from projects unable to spend their allocations before official deadlines. As a result, productive investment was being postponed while immediate liquidity pressures were eased.
Disaster funding questioned as water projects lose money while investment budgets face sweeping cuts
Ms Sirikanya also questioned the government’s explanation that the transfers would strengthen disaster preparedness. Notably, she highlighted a proposed reduction of ฿1.033 billion from the integrated water resource management programme.
She asked why funding linked directly to flood prevention and water management would be reduced if disaster preparedness were the government’s priority. Likewise, she questioned why investment budgets were being cut instead of recurring expenditure if economic security remained the central objective.
Separately, Ms Sirikanya acknowledged that several projects selected for reductions appeared reasonable because contracts had not been signed before June 2. Those included the Skill Credit Portfolio project, which remains under contract review.
She also referred to delayed Ministry of Defence construction payments, energy transition funding and allocations for independent organisations. In addition, she pointed to funding allocated to the National Anti-Corruption Commission that had been used to construct sports stadiums. Nevertheless, she maintained that these examples did not justify the broader transfer strategy.
“I’m confused about whether the government has prioritised properly, or if they’re just pulling what they can, or only using the criterion of not being able to disburse funds on time, without addressing inefficient spending,” she told parliament.
Sirikanya says ministers lack financial acumen as transfers expose growing pressure on state finances
Ms Sirikanya argued the legislation revealed weak financial leadership during a period of growing fiscal pressure. In response, she said ministers appeared to be reacting to immediate financial constraints instead of setting clear spending priorities. “The draft budget transfer bill reflects a lack of leadership in re-prioritising resources when faced with a crisis,” she said.
On another front, Ms Sirikanya claimed the government’s financial management had deteriorated well beyond simple budget adjustments.
She argued ministers were scrambling to find available funds only after financial pressures had intensified. “There are problems with poor financial management; it’s like waiting for debt to increase before scrambling for funds,” she said.
She maintained that the proposed transfer would merely ease immediate liquidity pressures. “The 10 billion baht transfer will only help the government cope with its current cash flow, which is already struggling, but it comes at the cost of delaying government spending.”
Comparison with indebted households highlights worsening public finances and rising debt pressures
As part of this argument, Ms Sirikanya said the government resembled heavily indebted households and businesses attempting to manage worsening financial obligations. She argued the benefits of the transfer did not outweigh the economic costs, particularly against debt obligations exceeding ฿140 billion.
Moreover, she claimed the delayed investment would weaken economic activity while solving only a short-term financing problem.
Budget Bureau warns Finance Minister that Thailand’s economy faces acute crisis with rising public debt
Incoming government must tackle the country’s rising public debt level and keep foreign funding open
“If the government were a private company, it would have serious financial problems, inability to manage cash flow due to overspending, and massive debt from trading partners and legal disputes—not debt incurred from borrowing,” she argued.
Finally, Ms Sirikanya referred to Article 144 of the Constitution, noting that budget amendments and transfers remain subject to constitutional restrictions. Even so, she urged MPs to scrutinise the legislation carefully. She said Parliament should record observations on spending that should be reduced, increased or reconsidered. That process, she argued, would allow Parliament to exercise its constitutional authority fully before approving the national budget.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
60-day visa regime to be ended confirms Minister responding to rising industry security concerns
Tourism boss warns Thailand it is facing a Chinese blacklist if another security controversy erupts
Visa waiver scheme questioned with another China Crisis for foreign tourism driven by security fears
