The Rise and Fall of Pheu Thai’s Populist Policies
Pheu Thai, once a dominant political force in Thailand, has seen its influence wane significantly. Its previous success was largely built on populist economic policies that resonated with the public. However, recent initiatives such as the digital wallet and the 20-baht flat fare for electric train rides are now under scrutiny, raising questions about their long-term viability.
The party’s economic strategies, which were instrumental in its past electoral victories, have lost their luster. When Pheu Thai returned to power in 2023, it aimed to revive its reputation for bold economic populism, reminiscent of Thaksin Shinawatra’s era. This included introducing two major policies: a 10,000-baht digital wallet for all citizens over 16 and a flat 20-baht fare for electric train rides in Bangkok. These initiatives were designed to attract public support through immediate financial benefits.
However, as the next general election approaches, these policies may no longer be effective. Instead of being seen as vote-winners, they could become liabilities. Three key factors—fiscal credibility, fairness in benefit distribution, and long-term political trust—are causing concern among observers.
The Digital Wallet Scheme: A Controversial Initiative
The digital wallet scheme, intended as an economic stimulus, faced significant criticism even before its implementation. It aimed to distribute 10,000 baht to every citizen over 16, restricted to local community purchases. However, the funding source became a major point of contention. Economists and former allies questioned whether the government could finance such a large program without destabilizing public finances.
The estimated cost of 500 to 600 billion baht raised concerns about debt sustainability, especially during a period of shrinking tax bases and sluggish economic growth. While Pheu Thai argued the scheme would be funded through borrowing and revenue reallocation, doubts remained about its feasibility.
Delays and legal debates further eroded the scheme’s credibility. Opposition parties labeled it a “phantom promise,” suggesting it was more about gaining votes than delivering tangible benefits. For voters facing rising living costs and stagnant wages, the failure to implement this policy damaged Pheu Thai’s image as a reliable economic steward.
The 20-Baht Train Fare: Limited Benefits and Implementation Issues
The 20-baht train fare initiative aimed to make mass transit more affordable in Bangkok. Initially, it seemed appealing for urban middle-class voters and workers. However, the plan stalled before the change of administration, leading to delays in essential legislative processes.
Outgoing Transport Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit admitted that delays in passing necessary bills would likely push back the fare reduction. Critics accused the government of misusing taxpayer money to subsidize urban residents, highlighting the geographical limitations of the policy.
The benefit is primarily confined to Bangkok, leaving rural voters—who form Pheu Thai’s traditional base—excluded. This perceived elitism has led opposition parties to brand the policy as “Bangkok-centric,” ignoring the needs of rural communities struggling with agricultural debt and inflation.
Additionally, the implementation of the flat fare has been inconsistent. Due to fragmented rail line ownership, the policy has not been uniformly applied, leading to confusion among commuters. Instead of celebrating cheaper transport, voters have grown skeptical of yet another unfulfilled promise.
Erosion of Trust and Political Challenges
Beyond economic concerns, Pheu Thai faces a deeper issue: declining trust. Populist policies rely on credibility, but the delays, fiscal controversies, and half-fulfilled promises surrounding the digital wallet and train fare have weakened the party’s reputation.
Rivals argue that Pheu Thai has reverted to “old-style populism” without sustainable plans. Even within its base, doubts have grown. Rural supporters, once drawn to Thaksin-era welfare schemes, now question whether the party still prioritizes their needs. Urban voters, meanwhile, demand more credible and meaningful economic reforms rather than temporary subsidies.
Trust erosion is particularly dangerous as it fuels a narrative that Pheu Thai has lost touch with its identity. Once a champion of rural empowerment, the party now appears caught between trying to please Bangkok’s middle class and clinging to its populist past. This ambiguity risks splitting its voter base and driving supporters toward rivals offering progressive reform or conservative stability.
Clinging to Hope
Despite these challenges, some loyal members of Pheu Thai believe that Thaksin’s decision to return to prison could help improve the party’s image. His actions are seen as demonstrating leadership and accountability, potentially drawing support from undecided voters.
Thaksin’s return to Thailand after 15 years in self-imposed exile has sparked mixed reactions. While some see his compliance with the court’s order as a positive step, others remain skeptical about whether this will translate into electoral gains.
As the party faces internal and external pressures, it must focus on assessing its mistakes and identifying new strategies before the next election. With time to rebuild support, Pheu Thai aims to engage closely with voters and repair its image. However, without a clear strategy and renewed focus on grassroots support, the party may continue to weaken.