Why struggling Thailand keeps voting for change that never comes

BANGKOK – Two decades of chronic political instability have seen Thailand go from an aspiring economy on track to follow South Korea and Singapore into the ranks of rich nations, to a regional laggard beset by stagnant growth, soaring debt, widening inequality and a shrinking workforce. 

That is the backdrop for this weekend’s election that pits a party campaigning on sweeping reform against two blocs pledging more populist policies. 

The People’s Party

, successor to the Move Forward group that won the largest share of seats in the last election, says Thailand can reverse its decline only through deep political and economic reform.

It is pushing to rewrite the Constitution, curb entrenched monopolies and dismantle an oligopolistic economy that it says stifles competition and innovation. 

Yet even if it wins the biggest share of seats in the 500-member Lower House, the lack of a natural coalition partner makes its path to government tough in what’s essentially a three-cornered contest.

Rivals Pheu Thai and Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul’s Bhumjaithai favour policies largely consistent with the past two decades: cash handouts and short-term stimulus. 

“If you had meaningful political reform – if you did have a stable pro-reform government in power – then it’s possible that over time, they could try and fix some of the problems that Thailand faces,” said Mr Gareth Leather, a senior economist at Capital Economics. “But until you get that political stability, it’s going to be very, very hard.”

Thailand’s economy is now only 5 per cent larger than it was before the pandemic, equivalent to average annual growth of roughly 1 per cent.

By contrast, Vietnam and India are about 40 per cent bigger than they were, according to Mr Leather. 

Repeated military coups and short-lived civilian governments since the early 2000s have made long-term planning near impossible, with short-term fixes and populist spending prioritised.

That has left the country heavily reliant on exports and tourism – engines that powered past growth but are now sputtering – with no new industries ready to take their place. 

The People’s Party’s push to overhaul Thailand’s economic and political order has also put it – and its millions of young, urban supporters – on a collision course with Thailand’s powerful, entrenched business elites and the royalist-aligned conservative establishment. 

“We have a system that’s trying to pin down politics so that it doesn’t change, while politics of the younger generation, as is being symbolised by the People’s Party, wants change,” said Mr Supavud Saicheua, chairman of the National Economic and Social Development Council, the state-planning agency.

“The politics of representation is at odds with the politics of tradition.” 

Even if voters signal a desire for reform, the electoral maths is daunting.

Thailand hasn’t had a single-party government with an outright majority since the 2005 election.

To govern alone, a party needs at least 251 seats in the 500-member Lower House – a high bar under a system that dilutes the People’s Party urban-heavy support.

Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai, by contrast, draw votes more evenly in key regions, giving them a structural advantage, while their policies and ideologies make them more natural coalition partners.

The People’s Party, led by 38-year-old Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, has argued that monopolies are a central driver of rising living costs and eroding competitiveness.

It has made “fair-game competition” a cornerstone of its economic agenda, pledging to amend laws to level the playing field and grow the economy for everyone.

One of the group’s founders, Mr Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, has described this election as a “wager on Thailand’s future and that of our children.”

“What we’ve seen in the past has been a coalition that’s sort of a marriage of convenience, without a real common vision or purpose,” former prime minister

Abhisit Vejjajiva, who’s returning as Democrat Party leader

this election, said in an interview.

“Too often governments that have come and gone had just focused on short-term stimulus or projects that aren’t enough to really transform the economy.”

Mr Abhisit’s Democrat Party – Thailand’s oldest political group – could become a potential player in the formation of any government.

Mr Abhisit, who led Thailand from December 2008 to August 2011, echoed some of the People’s Party’s concerns over monopolies, saying they reflect “the need to create a level playing field, more competitive environment, stimulating new industries”.

A group of academics, led by a former competition watchdog, published an open letter warning Thailand is approaching a “breaking point”.

It urged voters to shun political parties hostile to long-term development, with dismantling monopolies among its core proposals. 

The top 5 per cent of companies control over 85 per cent of the total revenue across the Thai economy, according to a report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development.

Companies linked to some of the country’s richest men – including those of Mr Sarath Ratanavadi, Mr Charoen Sirivadhanabhakdi and Mr Dhanin Chearavanont – hold outsized influence in energy, food and beverages, retail and telecommunications, and together account for nearly a fifth of the benchmark SET index.

Both Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai’s policy platforms largely leave the status quo, elite-controlled economic structure intact, opting instead for short-term and consumption-driven measures.

The ruling Bhumjaithai party had only been in power for three months when Mr

Anutin dissolved Parliament

in December, and it promises to bring back another round of its popular consumption stimulus programme, where the government subsidises 50 per cent of consumer purchases.

It is an initiative that began under the military-backed government of prime minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to boost spending at the depth of the Covid-19 pandemic, during which Mr Anutin was a health minister.

Pheu Thai – founded by former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, whose populist policies have helped retain his influence in Thai politics over the past two decades – is going even further, pitching a similar programme where the government covers 70 per cent of purchases.

It is also touting a daily national lottery that would give one-million-baht cash each to nine lucky winners, who could be farmers, seniors, community-health volunteers or taxpayers, and pitching to top up earnings for people who make less than 36,000 baht (S$1,500) annually, near the national poverty line.  

Yet the reality is that whoever wins government will inherit an economy with little fiscal or monetary room.

Public debt stands near 66 per cent of GDP, close to the government’s self-imposed 70 per cent ceiling, and both Fitch Ratings and Moody’s Investors Service in 2025 shifted Thailand’s outlook to negative.

The Bank of Thailand’s policy interest rate of 1.25 per cent is already among the world’s lowest, while high household debt and tight credit conditions limit the impact for further easing. 

Thailand’s Finance Ministry sees gross domestic product growth slowing to 2 per cent in 2026, while its central bank sees potential 1.5 per cent growth, which would be the slowest pace outside of pandemic years since 2014. 

All key political parties pledge to boost output gains to between 3 per cent and 5 per cent, but economists are sceptical.

Oxford Economics’ Jun Hao Ng, for example, sees a realistic growth ceiling at just 3 per cent.

“The real issue is a lack of willingness to commit to reforms that may cause short-term pain but deliver long-term gains,” Mr Ng said.

“Fiscal stimulus and cash handouts are popular, yet they don’t address the fact that key growth engines – tourism, foreign investments, and goods exports – are facing a decline in competitiveness and are struggling to recover.”

Structural issues have already curbed foreign investment inflows.

Between 2015 and 2023, Thailand accumulated foreign direct investment worth 11 per cent of annual GDP, compared with Malaysia’s 25 per cent and Vietnam’s 42 per cent, according to the OECD.

Even Thai conglomerates and investors are increasingly looking abroad to seek higher gains. BLOOMBERG