SAM Rainsyសហស្ថាបនិកគណបក្សសង្គ្រោះជាតិ

នយោបាយថ្មី អនុវត្តដោយរដ្ឋាភិបាលថ្មី ដើម្បីស្តារប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ចាប់ពីឆ្នាំ ២០១៨ Policies for a New Cambodia

ចែករំលែក ៖​

នយោបាយថ្មី អនុវត្តដោយរដ្ឋាភិបាលថ្មី ដើម្បីស្តារប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ចាប់ពីឆ្នាំ ២០១៨

Please see also separate summary in English below.

ទោះជាស្ថានការណ៍នយោបាយ បានតម្រូវឲ្យខ្ញុំលាចេញពីតំណែង ជាប្រធានគណបក្សសង្គ្រោះជាតិ ក៏ដោយ ខ្ញុំនៅតែបន្តការផ្តល់ជាគំនិត ដើម្បីជួយស្តារប្រទេសកម្ពុជា។ គំនិត ដែលខ្ញុំបញ្ចេញ លើគេហទំព័រនេះ ក៏ដូចជាលើទំព័រ Facebook របស់ខ្ញុំដែរ មិនមែនសម្រាប់គណបក្សនយោបាយណាមួយទេ តែជាគំនិត ដើម្បីជួយស្តារប្រទេសកម្ពុជា របស់យើងទាំងអស់គ្នា។

យើងត្រូវរៀបចំប្រទេសកម្ពុជាឡើងវិញ ក្នុងគ្រប់វិស័យ។ វិស័យណាក៏ដោយ បានរងគ្រោះ ដោយអំពើពុករលួយ និងអសមត្ថភាព នៃអ្នកដឹកនាំប្រទេស អស់រយៈពេលប្រមាណ ៤០ ឆ្នាំមកហើយ។ យើងបានកត់សម្គាល់ផងដែរថា អ្នកដឹកនាំប្រទេសទាំងនោះ មិនបានតម្កល់ផលប្រយោជន៍ជាតិជាធំទេ តែបានបម្រើតែផលប្រយោជន៍ផ្ទាល់ខ្លួន ក្រុមគ្រួសារខ្លួន និងបក្ខពួកខ្លួន ដែលជាហេតុធ្វើឲ្យសេដ្ឋកិច្ចប្រទេសកម្ពុជា មានលក្ខណៈទន់ខ្សោយ និងអន់ថយ ប្រៀបធៀបទៅនឹងសេដ្ឋកិច្ច នៃប្រទេសជិតខាង។

ដូច្នេះ ដើម្បីស្តារសេដ្ឋកិច្ចប្រទេសកម្ពុជា និងលើកកម្ពស់ជីវភាពរស់នៅ របស់ប្រជារាស្ត្រខ្មែរ យើងត្រូវជ្រើសរើសអ្នកដឹកនាំថ្មី ដែលជាអ្នកស្រលាញ់ជាតិពិតប្រាកដ មិនពុករលួយ និងមិនមានវប្បធម៌គ្រួសារនិយម និងបក្ខពួកនិយម ដូចអ្នកដឹកនាំប្រទេសសព្វថ្ងៃ។

ខ្ញុំបានបញ្ជាក់ពីកំណែទម្រង់ជាច្រើន ដែលប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ត្រូវអនុវត្ត តាមរយៈអត្ថបទ និងលិខិត ដែលចុះផ្សាយក្នុងសារព័ត៌មានដូចជាភ្នំពេញប៉ុស្តិ៍ និង ខេមបូឌាដេលី ព្រមទាំងក្នុងទំព័រ Facebook របស់ខ្ញុំ កាលពីប៉ុន្មានឆ្នាំចុងក្រោយនេះ។

ឧទាហរណ៍ នៃវិភាគសេដ្ឋកិច្ចរបស់ខ្ញុំ ដែលបានចុះផ្សាយកន្លងមក។

ភាគទី១ : http://rainsysam.com/page/message/35

ភាគទី២

តើគេវាស់វែង ផលិតភាព (productivity) យ៉ាងដូចម្តេច? (ចុះផ្សាយនៅលើទំព័រ Facebook របស់ខ្ញុំ ថ្ងៃ ២១ តុលា ឆ្នាំ ២០១៥)

ផលិតភាព ឆ្លុះបញ្ចាំងប្រសិទ្ធភាព ក្នុងផលិតកម្ម។ ផលិតភាពកាន់តែខ្ពស់ ពេលណាផលិតផលកាន់តែច្រើន (មានតម្លៃកាន់តែខ្ពស់ដែរ) ហើយចំណាយផ្សេងៗទ្រទ្រង់ផលិតកម្មនោះ កាន់តែតិច។ គេអាចវាស់វែង ផលិតភាពទូទៅ ដោយយកខ្ទង់ចំណាយសរុប ទៅប្រៀបធៀបជាមួយនឹងតម្លៃផលិតផលសរុប។ តែគេអាចវាស់វែង ផលិតភាពពិសេសណាមួយ ដោយយកតែខ្ទង់ចំណាយណាមួយគត់ ទៅប្រៀបធៀបជាមួយនឹងតម្លៃផលិតផលសរុប។ ខ្ទង់ចំណាយ ទៅលើកត្តាផលិតកម្ម (factor of production) ដែលគេតាមដានជាងគេ គឺ ពលកម្ម (labour)។ អញ្ចឹងហើយ បានគេតែងតែវាស់វែង ផលិតភាពនៃពលកម្ម (labour productivity) ដែលស្មើនឹង ផលិតផលដែលសំរេចបានក្នុង ១ ម៉ោងធ្វើការ (Total output / Total labour hours devoted)។

ផលិតភាព ជាកត្តាកំណត់ជោគជ័យសេដ្ឋកិច្ច សម្រាប់សហគ្រាសនីមួយៗ ក៏ដូចជាសម្រាប់ប្រទេសនីមួយៗដែរ។ ការកើនឡើងនៃផលិតភាព នាំមកនូវការកើនឡើងនៃ ប្រាក់ចំណូលនិងប្រាក់ចំណេញ និង ការកើនឡើងនៃជីវភាពរស់នៅរបស់ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ។

ក្នុងប្រទេសនីមួយៗ ផលិតភាពរបស់ពលកម្ម មានកម្រិតខ្ពស់ ឬទាប អាស្រ័យលើការបណ្តុះបណ្តាលធនធានមនុស្សឲ្យមានជំនាញវិជ្ជាជីវះ ស្របទៅនឹងសេចក្តីត្រូវការរបស់ទីផ្សារអន្តរជាតិ ការស្រាវជ្រាវរកបច្ចេកវិទ្យាថ្មីមកប្រើប្រាស់ (research & development) និងការបង្កើនទុនវិនិយោគលើឧបករណ៍ សម្ភារៈ និង បច្ចេកទេសទំនើបបំផុត ក្នុងផលិតកម្មកែច្នៃ។ ក្នុងវិស័យទាំង ៣ នេះ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាសព្វថ្ងៃ មានលក្ខណៈទន់ខ្សោយណាស់ ពិបាកតាមគេណាស់ ដោយសារបញ្ហាអភិបាលកិច្ច។ ជាពិសេស ប្រព័ន្ធអប់រំ មានកង្វះខាតយ៉ាងធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ ហើយអ្នកវិនិយោគទុនសព្វថ្ងៃ ច្រើនតែវិនិយោគខុសទិសដៅ (ដូចជាជួញដូរដី និងកាប់ឈើ ដែលជាសកម្មភាព ធ្វើនំអត់ម្សៅ)។

គេផ្តោតអារម្មណ៍ទៅលើតួលេខមួយទៀតដ៏សំខាន់ គឺចំណាយលើពលកម្ម តាមឯកតាផលិតផល (unit labour cost) ដែលជាតម្លៃឈ្នួល ១ ម៉ោង ចែកនឹងផលិតភាពនៃពលកម្ម (hourly compensation / productivity)។ តួលេខនេះ បង្ហាញថា បើយើងចង់ឡើងប្រាក់ម៉ោងឬប្រាក់ខែ ដោយនៅតែរក្សាសមត្ថភាពប្រកួតប្រជែង (competitiveness) របស់យើង យើងត្រូវតែបង្កើនផលិតភាពនៃពលកម្ម (labour productivity) របស់យើង។

ភាគទី៣

តើធ្វើយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច ដើម្បីបង្កើន ផលិតភាព (productivity) សម្រាប់ប្រទេសកម្ពុជាទាំងមូល? (ចុះផ្សាយនៅលើទំព័រ Facebook របស់ខ្ញុំ ថ្ងៃ ២៩ ធ្នូ ឆ្នាំ ២០១៥)

ការបង្កើតការងារថ្មីឲ្យប្រជាពលរដ្ឋនៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ធ្វើទៅបានពេលណាយើងបង្កើនផលិតភាព នៃកសិកម្ម និង ឧស្សាហកម្មរបស់យើង ពីព្រោះការបង្កើនផលិតភាពនេះ គឺជាការបង្កើនសមត្ថភាពប្រកួតប្រជែង (competitiveness) របស់យើង ដើម្បីអាចប្រកួតឈ្នះគេបាន លើទីផ្សារអន្តរជាតិ។ ប្រកួតឈ្នះគេបាន មានន័យថា យើងអាចបញ្ចេញដាក់លក់លើទីផ្សារនូវផលិតផល (products) ប្រកបដោយគុណភាពខ្ពស់ (ល្អមិនចាញ់គេ ឬល្អលើសគេ) និងក្នុងតម្លៃទាបសមរម្យ (លក់មិនថ្លៃជាងគេ ឬថោកជាងគេ)។
ដើម្បីបង្កើនផលិតភាព នៃពលកម្ម (labour productivity) នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា យើងត្រូវ ៖
១- បណ្តុះបណ្តាលធនធានមនុស្ស ឲ្យមានជំនាញបច្ចេកទេស ស្របទៅនឹងសេចក្តីត្រូវការ របស់ទីផ្សារអន្តរជាតិ។
២- រៀបចំប្រព័ន្ធស្រាវជ្រាវរកបច្ចេកវិទ្យាថ្មីមកប្រើប្រាស់ (research & development)។
៣- ជម្រុញឲ្យបង្កើនទុនវិនិយោគ លើ ឧបករណ៍ សម្ភារៈ និង បច្ចេកទេសទំនើបបំផុត ក្នុងផលិតកម្មកែឆ្នៃ (processing industries)។ ជម្រុញឲ្យមានការផ្ទេរបច្ចេកវិទ្យាពីស្រុកគេមកស្រុកយើង។

ក្នុងវិស័យទាំង ៣ ខាងលើនេះ រដ្ឋាភិបាលសព្វថ្ងៃមិនអាច ធ្វើបានត្រឹមត្រូវទេ ដោយសារបញ្ហាអភិបាលកិច្ច (ខ្វះចក្ខុវិស័យ ខ្វះឆន្ទៈនយោបាយ ខ្វះសមត្ថភាព និងខ្វះភាពសុច្ចរិត)។ ជាពិសេស ប្រព័ន្ធអប់រំសព្វថ្ងៃ មានកង្វះខាតយ៉ាងធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ ហើយអ្នកវិនិយោគទុនសព្វថ្ងៃ ភាគច្រើនចេះតែសូកប៉ាន់ ហើយវិនិយោគខុសទិសដៅ ដូចជាជួញដូរដី និងកាប់ឈើ ដែលជាសកម្មភាព ធ្វើនំអត់ម្សៅ គ្មានបង្កើតការងារអ្វីទេឲ្យប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ។

ដើម្បីឲ្យប្រជាពលរដ្ឋ ជាពិសេសយុវជន មានការងារល្អប្រសើរគ្រប់គ្នា ត្រូវតែប្តូរនយោបាយសេដ្ឋកិច្ចទាំងស្រុងតែម្តង។

ភាគទី៤

ភាពចាំបាច់ នៃការបង្កើនផលិតភាព ក្នុងវិស័យកសិកម្ម (agricultural productivity)។ (ចុះផ្សាយនៅលើទំព័រ Facebook  របស់ខ្ញុំ ថ្ងៃ ១៧ មករា ឆ្នាំ ២០១៦)

យើងឃើញហើយថា សព្វថ្ងៃ សូម្បីតែបន្លែ និងផ្លែឈើ លក់នៅស្រុកយើង មួយផ្នែកធំនាំចូលពីប្រទេសជិតខាង។ ទម្រាំលើទីផ្សារអន្តរជាតិ ផលិតផលកសិកម្មពីស្រុកខ្មែរ រឹតតែពិបាកប្រកួតប្រជែងជាមួយបរទេស។ ហេតុនេះហើយ បានជាកសិករខ្មែររាប់លាននាក់ ធ្វើស្រែចំការ ខាតរាល់ឆ្នាំ ជំពាក់លុយគេ វ័ណ្ឌក ហើយចំណាកស្រុករាប់សែននាក់ (ចូលជាងមួយលាននាក់ហើយ) ទៅប្រទេសថៃ។ បញ្ហាទាំងអស់នេះ បណ្តាលមកពី កម្រិតទាបពេក នៃផលិតភាពកសិកម្មនៅស្រុកយើងសព្វថ្ងៃ។

ដើម្បីបង្កើនផលិតភាពកសិកម្មនៅកម្ពុជា ឲ្យទាន់ប្រទេសជិតខាង យើងត្រូវតែ ៖
១) ចែកចាយដីធ្លីឲ្យកសិករជាទូទៅ ហើយធានាឲ្យគ្រួសារនីមួយៗមានដីស្រែ ឬដីចំការគ្រប់គ្រាន់ដើម្បីចិញ្ចឹមជីវិត។ ត្រូវលុបចោល សម្បទានរយៈពេល ៩៩ឆ្នាំ ទំហំផ្ទៃដីសរុបប្រមាណ ៣ លានហិតា ដែលរដ្ឋាភិបាលសព្វថ្ងៃ បានផ្តល់ឲ្យក្រុមហ៊ុនបរទេស។
២) រៀបចំប្រព័ន្ធធារាសាស្ដ្រ ឲ្យមានបណ្តាញចែកចាយទឹក ទាំងខ្នាតធំ ទាំងខ្នាតតូច ប្រកបដោយគុណភាព និងប្រសិទ្ធភាព ដូចនៅប្រទេសជិតខាង ដើម្បីធានាឲ្យកសិករមានទឹកប្រើប្រាស់គ្រប់រដូវ ដូចនៅប្រទេសជិតខាង។ 
៣) រៀបចំប្រព័ន្ធហិរញ្ញវត្ថុពិសេសមួយ ដើម្បីផ្តល់ទុនឲ្យកសិករខ្ចី ដោយយកការប្រាក់ទាបបំផុត ហើយជួយឧបត្ថម្ភដល់កសិករ ពេលណាមានគ្រោះធម្មជាតិ។
៤) រៀបចំមជ្ឈមណ្ឌលបច្ចេកទេសកសិកម្ម ឲ្យបានច្រើន ដូចនៅប្រទេសជិតខាង ដើម្បីស្រាវជ្រាវ ពិសោធ វាយតម្លៃ និងណែនាំកសិករ ក្នុងការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសទំនើបបំផុត ទាក់ទងនឹងការជ្រើសរើស ពូជសត្វ និងពូជដំណាំ និងការប្រើប្រាស់គ្រឿងយន្ត សម្ភារៈផ្សេងៗ ជី និងថ្នាំផ្សេងៗ ព្រមទាំងបច្ចេកទេសដាំដំណាំនិងចិញ្ចឹមសត្វ ក្នុងគោលបំណងបង្កើន ផលិតភាពកសិកម្ម។
៥) លើកទឹកចិត្តកសិករម្នាក់ៗ ឲ្យចងក្រងជាសហគមន៍កសិកម្ម តាមតំបន់នីមួយៗ ដើម្បី ចែករំលែកបទពិសោធន៍ និងបង្កើនកម្លាំងក្នុងការចរចាតម្លៃជាមួយអ្នកផ្គត់ផ្គង់ឥវ៉ាន់ឲ្យពួកគាត់ និងអ្នកទិញកសិផលពីពួកគាត់់។ 
៦) រៀបចំទីផ្សារឲ្យកសិករ ដូចគេធ្វើនៅប្រទេសជិតខាង ដើម្បីធានារាល់ឆ្នាំ នូវតម្លៃកសិផលគ្រប់ប្រភេទ (ដូចជា ស្រូវ ពោត សណ្តែក ដំឡូង -ល-)។ រដ្ឋអំណាចត្រូវរៀបចំ យន្តការ និងថវិកាពិសេស ដើម្បីប្រមូលទិញកសិផលទាំងអស់នោះពីកសិករ ក្នុងតម្លៃមួយសមរម្យ មិនឲ្យកសិករខាតជាប្រចាំដូចសព្វថ្ងៃ។
៧) រៀបចំបណ្តាញគមនាគមន៍ (ជាពិសេសផ្លូវថ្នល់) ឲ្យបានល្អប្រសើរ ដើម្បីងាយស្រូលដឹកជញ្ជូន កសិផល ឲ្យបានឆាប់និងធូរថ្លៃ ពីកសិករទៅដល់ទីផ្សារ។

ភាគទី៥  

តើអ្វីទៅ ដែលហៅថា តម្លៃបន្ថែម?

ពេលណាតម្លៃបន្ថែមកើនឡើង ពេលនោះប្រាក់ខែពលករក៏កើនឡើងដែរ។ (ចុះផ្សាយនៅលើទំព័រ Facebook របស់ខ្ញុំ ថ្ងៃ ២៦ កុម្ភៈ ឆ្នាំ ២០១៦)

តម្លៃបន្ថែម កើតចេញពីសកម្មភាពកែច្នៃ ពីវត្ថុធាតុដើម ទៅជាទំនិញប្រើប្រាស់ផ្សេងៗ (value added results from a processing activity)។

- ឧទាហរណ៍ទី១ (1st example) ៖ ឧស្សាហកម្មកាត់ដេរ នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា ដែលមានតម្លៃបន្ថែម ទាប (garment industry with low value added) ៖
+ ចំណាយលើក្រណាត់ និងសម្ភារៈផ្សេងៗ ទិញពីក្រៅប្រទេស (cost of fabric and accessories) ៖ តម្លៃ ១០០ ដុល្លារ (100 USD)
+ រោងចក្រកាត់ដេរ កែច្នៃក្រណាត់ឲ្យទៅជាសម្លៀកបំពាក់ ហើយលក់ចេញទៅក្រៅប្រទេស (sale of finished products) ៖ តម្លៃ ២០០ ដុល្លារ (200 USD)
+ តម្លៃបន្ថែម (value added) ៖ ២០០ - ១០០ = ១០០ ដុល្លារ។ តម្លៃបន្ថែម ១០០ ដុល្លារនេះ ប្រើប្រាស់ ឬបែងចែកដូចតទៅ (200 - 100 = 100 USD broken down as follows) ៖
- ប្រាក់ខែកម្មករ (salaries) ៖ ៣០ ដុល្លារ (30 USD)
- រំលស់សម្ភារៈ (depreciation) ៖ ២០ ដុល្លារ (20 USD)
- ចំណាយផ្សេងៗ (various expenses) ៖ ២០ ដុល្លារ (20 USD)
- ពន្ធដារ (taxes) ៖ ១០ ដុល្លារ (10 USD)
- ប្រាក់ចំណេញ (profit) ៖ ២០ ដុល្លារ (20 USD)

- ឧទាហរណ៍ទី២ (2nd example) ៖ ឧស្សាហកម្មអេឡិចត្រូណិក ដូចជាការផលិតកុំព្យូទ័រ ទូរស័ព្ទដៃ នៅប្រទេសគេ ដែលមានតម្លៃបន្ថែម ខ្ពស់ (electronic industry with high value added) ៖
+ ចំណាយលើ វត្ថុធាតុដើម ជ័រប្លាស្ទិច ខ្ចៅខ្ចង និងគ្រឿងបន្លាស់ផ្សេងៗ ទិញចូល (cost of components) ៖ តម្លៃ ១០០ ដុល្លារ (100 USD)
+ ផលិតផលសម្រេច លក់ចេញ (sale of finished products) ៖ តម្លៃ ១០០០ ដុល្លារ (1,000 USD)
+ តម្លៃបន្ថែម (value added) ៖ ១០០០ - ១០០ = ៩០០ ដុល្លារ។ តម្លៃបន្ថែម ៩០០ ដុល្លារនេះ ប្រើប្រាស់ ឬបែងចែកដូចតទៅ (1,000 - 100 = 900 USD broken down as follows) ៖
- ប្រាក់ខែកម្មករ (salaries) ៖ ៣០០ ដុល្លារ (ច្រើនជាងប្រាក់ខែកម្មករឧស្សាហកម្មកាត់ដេរ ១០ ដង) (300 USD, meaning 10 times as high as in the garment industry)
- រំលស់សម្ភារៈ (depreciation) ៖ ២០០ ដុល្លារ (200 USD)
- ចំណាយផ្សេងៗ (various expenses) ៖ ១០០ ដុល្លារ (100 USD)
- ពន្ធដារ (taxes) ៖ ១០០ ដុល្លារ (100 USD)
- ប្រាក់ចំណេញ (profit) ៖ ២០០ ដុល្លារ (200 USD)

នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជាសព្វថ្ងៃ សហគ្រាសផ្សេងៗ ដូចជារោងចក្រកាត់ដេរ ផ្តល់ឲ្យតម្លៃបន្ថែមទាបណាស់។ អញ្ចឹងហើយបានជាប្រាក់ខែកម្មករ ក៏ទាបដែរ។ ដើម្បីឲ្យពលករខ្មែរ ទទួលបានប្រាក់ខែខ្ពស់ច្រើនដងជាងសព្វថ្ងៃ ប្រទេសយើងត្រូវតែទាក់ទាញឧស្សាហកម្មកែច្នៃ ដែលនាំមកនូវតម្លៃបន្ថែមខ្ពស់ ច្រើនដងជាងសព្វថ្ងៃ ដូចជាឧស្សាហកម្មអេឡិចត្រូណិច (electronics) ថ្នាំពេទ្យ និងសម្ភារៈក្នុងវិស័យទំនើបបំផុត ដូចជាជីវបច្ចេកវិទ្យា (biotechnologies) និង មនុស្សយន្ត (robotics)។ តែដើម្បីទាក់ទាញឧស្សាហកម្មបែបនេះពីក្រៅប្រទេស ឲ្យមកវិនិយោគបង្កើតរោងចក្រ និងការងារល្អៗ ឲ្យពលករខ្មែរ នៅប្រទេសកម្ពុជា យើងត្រូវតែរៀបចំប្រទេសយើងឡើងវិញ បោសសម្អាតអំពើពុករលួយ ប្តូរនយោបាយសេដ្ឋកិច្ច និងអប់រំបណ្តុះបណ្តាលពលករយើង ជាពិសេសយុវជន ឲ្យមានចំណេះដឹងទូទៅ និងជំនាញវិជ្ជាជីវៈ ប្រកបដោយគុណភាព ដែលឆ្លើយតបទៅនឹងសេចក្តីត្រូវការ របស់សហគ្រាសធំៗ ដែលមានលក្ខណៈអន្តរជាតិ ដ៏ល្បីល្បាញ។

Policies for a New Cambodia

Please follow the links at the bottom for my policy writings, and for some of my letters on policy issues to the press.

Policies for a New Cambodia

The latest amendment to the Law on Political Parties adopted in Cambodia in July 2017 makes it illegal for my image, voice or writing to be used by the Cambodian National Rescue Party, of which I am the former leader.  This will not prevent me from exposing the truth, which is the basis for justice. My new status puts me above conflicting political parties in a way that I can better serve our nation as a whole, without referring to any party. Ideas and proposals published on my Facebook page and elsewhere will be available for everybody -- which covers all political parties without exception and without exclusion -- in that they are conceived to serve the national interest. My newly-imposed position that is intended to be a punishment and to stifle my activities, is actually a blessing in disguise and will make my voice louder. 

The government has always refused to allow the opposition to create an official shadow cabinet. This has not reduced the impact of its policy proposals. Reforms proposed from opposition can work. Before the 2013 election, Hun Sen said that the CNRP's promise to increase the minimum wage for civil servants from $120 per month to $250 would be impossible without massive increases in taxes for farmers. But in November 2016, he said that the salary would hit $250 at the start of 2018 - in time for the national election. In 2013, the CNRP pledged to increase the monthly minimum wage in the garment sector from $80 to $150; this too has been adopted by the CPP, as has the CNRP's call for a program of health insurance for the poor. Maximum microfinance interest rates have been reduced to the regional norm of 18%, in line with my proposal to Hun Sen. The CNRP's 2013 pension proposal, however, has not been acted on. The party insisted that those aged over 65 should have a minimum pension, starting at the very low level of $10 a month and then increased.

Poverty reduction should not be simply an electoral strategy, but a national mission. Interest rates remain too high and must be reduced. Youth unemployment rates of under 1% given, for example, by the World Bank, are a bad joke. In other countries, when governments talk about jobs, they refer to decent jobs that allow workers to live with dignity. For Cambodia however, the World Bank and the International Labour Organisation have a different definition of “job”: they consider anyone that works at least an hour per week as having a job, regardless of what this involves. In Cambodia, this “working time” is often spent begging or in prostitution; more than 250,000 Cambodians are estimated to live in slavery. The real rate of youth unemployment in Cambodia may be as high as 70% if we take into account the hundreds of thousands of Cambodian youths who have to leave the country as migrant workers because they cannot find jobs. About one million Cambodians have to work in Thailand to survive; the most unfortunate become trapped as slaves, for example in Thailand’s fishing industry.

According to the UN, Cambodia is not going to cease being counted as a Least Developed Country until after 2025, and at that date is set to be the only country in Asia still classified as such. Future Cambodian governments, whoever they are, must do everything to avoid this. The human costs of failure would be too high. To this end, an emergency program to increase agricultural productivity is required. Our rice sector is in danger of collapse. Cancelling the land concessions handed out to foreign companies would free up nearly 3 million hectares of land, which could be given to farmers who need it. Tribunals should be created to adjudicate on the land grabs that have plagued our country for decades, and to redistribute land to its rightful owners where possible. A non-profit credit system designed for farmers is needed, along with minimum guaranteed prices for their produce. Widespread, small-scale irrigation works and technical centers would help farmers lift productivity. Voluntary farm cooperatives would increase the bargaining power of farmers, and improved infrastructure, especially roads, would allow more cost-efficient distribution of produce. 

Cambodia currently fails as an agricultural exporter and instead finds itself flooded by products from Thailand and Vietnam. Farmers must he helped through rice support mechanisms and low-interest loans. Lower microfinance interest rates are welcome but insufficient on their own: many microfinance institutions have lost their original poverty-reduction vocation and must be regulated. Agricultural production costs must be reduced if the improvement in competitivity that is urgently needed is to be achieved. The culture of bribes and kickbacks that lifts costs for many farmers must be attacked head on. The monopolies that exist in many commercial sectors also raise farming costs and must be dismantled so that the free market can allow input costs to fall to rational levels. Salaries in the garment sector would likewise increase if companies didn't have to pay bribes to government officials to be able to operate. I have repeatedly underlined the need for Cambodia to move away from cheap labor industries such as garments and to attract new industries generating higher added value: electronics, pharmaceuticals, biotechnologies, robotics. But high electricity prices, among the highest in ASEAN, remain a major obstacle to attracting new industries to Cambodia. Energy consumption should not be taxable, and the culture of corruption in which the national grid operates must be uprooted.

Future governments must  address the root problem of inadequate tax collection. This was top of my agenda when I was finance minister. Teachers need proper salaries; children must be in school rather than begging on the streets or at tourist sites. A decent healthcare system must be created and paid for. But without proper tax collection, the country will remain dependent on foreign aid from donors whose patience has already been stretched to the limit. Aid, in our case, simply feeds corruption and makes it bigger. Transparent national budgets together with higher civil service wages are needed to reduce the incentives for corruption, and to channel tax revenues to where the country really needs them. Any future government must act to tackle the scandalous fact that Cambodia remains a health-care desert.  As I have argued, here is a desperate need for Cambodia to train public health-care economists and analyse health-care models to find the best way forward. Donors can start now by exerting pressure on the government to overhaul the sector.

Further progress towards full democracy must be achieved by making it easier for our own migrant workers in Thailand to register to vote at border stations, rather than forcing them  to make costly journeys home. The electoral under-representation of Cambodia’s urban population in relation to the countryside still constitutes a grave flaw and will be rectified. Historically, democratization and higher living standards formed a virtuous cycle that underpinned the emergence of the world’s successful economies. This process can, and must, be repeated in Cambodia.

My own policy positions have been explained as follows:

·         The Need to Balance Development With Cultural Preservation: http://tinyurl.com/ybbn3gwv

·         Government Should Do More to Help Returning Migrant Workers: http://tinyurl.com/ya5umn23

·         Workers $160 Wage Demand Not Excessive, Simply Necessary: http://tinyurl.com/y6vdg7e8

·         Facebook posts on economic policy: http://www.cnrp7.org/en/uncategorized/president-sam-rainsys-articles-on-economic-and-social-issues (Khmer and English versions).

The following letter was published by the Cambodian daily in February 2017.

Dear Editor,

In "Mobile Firms Told to Spread Message: MFIs Not State-Run" (February 23) and "’We Are Private Institutions’ – Banks and MFIs Heed PM" (February 24) there are reports that Prime Minister Hun Sen is pulling the country’s mobile operators into his campaign to portray microfinance institutions (MFIs) as private entities. MFIs have also been ordered to change their logos if the ones they are using now resemble those of national institutions, such as the Finance Ministry or the National Bank of Cambodia.

This sudden government determination to distance itself from the MFIs is officially explained by its political concern – three months before the commune council elections scheduled for June 4 – that ordinary people might wrongly believe that the MFIs are owned and run by the government. This might in turn lead to the government being called to help those millions of desperate citizens, especially small and poor farmers who are heavily and increasingly indebted to the often abusive MFIs and are struggling daily to make ends meet, with many of them having already lost their property, especially farmland, used as collateral.

The government is in fact refusing to take responsibility for the plight of citizens living and working under its rule   – who are entitled to turn to the authorities for help –  and demonstrating that there is no government plan whatsoever to address the catastrophic financial situation of Cambodian farmers. This requires an urgent legal ceiling to interest rates and regulating some major private MFIs, which started as non-profit organisations, but ended up as huge profit-making companies, having totally lost their original poverty-reduction vocation.

But a more comprehensive approach is needed. This must include fundamental reforms in the fields of land protection and redistribution, forest and environment preservation, intelligent irrigation, improvements in agricultural productivity, and constant technical and commercial support to farmers so as to help ensure international competitiveness for Cambodia’s farm products.

Through their current hardship, the rural population are seeing the effects of decades of government neglect, incompetence and corruption.

It’s time for a change.

Sam Rainsy

Former CNRP President

The following letter was published by the Cambodian Daily in November 2016:

Dear Editor,

In "Cash Influx a Band-Aid for Failing Rice Sector" (November 23), your reporters rightly pointed out that the government's recent measures in the face of the deepening rice sector crisis are nothing but short-term and clumsy expedients that may bring a slight, artificial and temporary relief but do not solve at all the problem of Cambodia’s collapsing agriculture. 

We are actually approaching the moment of truth when nothing can hide the failure of the government’s economic policy in general and agricultural policy in particular, if we can call "policy" a combination of neglect, incompetence, corruption and plunder that has been in action for decades and has led to the destruction or disorganization of entire sectors of Cambodia’s economy.

Injecting cash at the last minute in grossly inadequate amounts through the most unusual channels and calling for the "generosity" of government officials, the armed forces, wealthy businesspeople and other "friends" to personally "help" buy, store, dry and process rice -- meaning doing the work of the cash-strapped professional rice millers in order to save them from bankruptcy -- is a pathetic "policy" on the part of an unprofessional and desperate government having to deal with a situation that is getting more and more out of control.

In my previous letter to The Cambodia Daily on the same topic ("Struggling Local Rice Sector a Result of Government Neglect," March 17) I pointed to the fact that the looming collapse of the sector would have far-reaching economic, social and political consequences given the Cambodian population’s heavy reliance on agriculture in general and the rice industry in particular. But I also stressed that the government had completely ignored the real and structural causes of the crisis and therefore could not think of, and work on, the needed remedies.

In agriculture, as in many other sectors, the key word is productivity with its corollary: competitiveness. Even though world market prices for rice have recently declined, some producers still make profits and continue to thrive while others start to incur losses and face possible bankruptcy. The difference in financial situation lies in the fact that the first group of producers are simply more competitive than the second one, and those who are more competitive are in such a favorable situation because they achieve higher productivity than their competitors.

It is undeniable that Cambodia’s agricultural productivity is much lower than that of neighboring and competing countries. Therefore, any genuine solution to the crisis requires that we address this regional structural productivity gap.

The first requirement for an increase in productivity is a reduction in production costs. As a matter of fact, Cambodian farmers have always incurred relatively and excessively high production costs when it comes to fertilizers, transportation, electricity and interest rate. Any responsible government must strive to suppress “unofficial taxes,” bribes and other kickbacks that eventually and unduly increase production and distribution costs. Besides, commercial monopolies in countless sectors that are solely based on government corruption, must be abolished so as to ensure free and fair competition necessarily leading to a further and significant reduction in prices and costs.

But above all, long-due structural reforms need to be implemented in order to ensure -- through an increase in productivity -- the immediate survival and long-term prosperity of Cambodia’s agriculture: land reform and redistribution (instead of participating in land-grabbing the government should ensure all farmers have enough land to viably cultivate); small-scale, widespread and effective irrigation works throughout the country to help farmers diversify and achieve several crops per year; a non-profit credit system especially designed to help farmers; agriculture technical centers to assist and guide farmers; the establishment of farm cooperatives, on a voluntary basis, that would increase farmers’ bargaining power; a government price-support policy with consistent mechanisms to ensure decent selling prices for farmers; good communication networks (especially roads) to reduce the cost of transporting products from farms to markets, and the time it takes.

Sincerely,

Sam Rainsy

CNRP President

--

The following letter was published by the Cambodian Daily in March 2016:

--

Dear Editor,

Your article "Under Fire, Rice Federation Vows Action" (March 10) exposes the crisis facing Cambodia’s rice sector. The looming collapse of the sector would have far-reaching economic, social and political consequences given the Cambodian population’s heavy reliance on agriculture in general and the rice industry in particular.

However, what has been discussed so far is only a reflection of the symptoms of the crisis but does not address its causes and, therefore, cannot point to the appropriate remedies.  Worse, some of the stakeholders have been led to suggest dangerous solutions such as arbitrary restrictions to imports, which would only prolong and – in the long run – deepen the crisis by ignoring its real and structural causes.

The current crisis is actually the result of decades of neglect on the part of the government regarding a sector everybody knows is crucial for the country’s prosperity, not to say survival given the astonishing number of Cambodian farmers whose livelihoods depend on rice cultivation.

As for many other industries in our present world, the key words for survival and prosperity are productivity and competitiveness. If we need to restrict imports just to survive, it means that we are not competitive. We are not competitive because our productivity is too low compared to that of our competitors, meaning other rice-growing countries in the region.

To address now this regional structural productivity gap, long-due measures and adequate policies need to be immediately implemented, which are contained in the CNRP seven-point political platform on agriculture: land reform and redistribution (instead of participating in land grabbing the government should ensure that all farmers have enough land to effectively work on); small-scale, widespread and effective irrigation works throughout the country to help farmers achieve several crops per year; non-profit credit system especially designed to help farmers; agriculture technical centers assisting and guiding farmers in all areas and all fields to help improve productivity; establishment of farm cooperatives on a voluntary basis in order to increase farmers’ bargaining power; government responsible price-support policy to ensure decent selling prices for farmers like in neighbouring countries; building of a good communication network (especially roads) to reduce cost and time for transport of farm products from farms to markets.

In the 1960s Cambodia was the world’s third largest rice exporter. Now it’s a net importer of this basic staple. This shocking change in status is not due to any natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster. The current government’s failure to properly manage our agriculture can also be seen in the fact that hundreds of thousands of Cambodian farmers have become so destitute that they have no choice but fleeing their country to become migrant workers in Thailand, a sad situation Cambodia has never known before.

Sam Rainsy

CNRP President

Opposition Leader