Port project needs rethink

       The Port Authority of Thailand has never kept secret the fact that it would like to see the land it owns put to more productive use than simply playing host to the capital's biggest slum community. Now it has gone a step further and drawn up a five-year plan to split the area into four prime commercial and office zones requiring an investment of at least 20 billion baht. But, admit the developers, some fine-tuning still needs to be done.
       That is one way of putting it. Conflict resolution might be a better way because an abundance of such skills will be needed if there is to be a forced resettlement of the tens of thousands of people who live and work in the area. Then there is the certainty of a renewed showdown with the Klong Toey market vendors who are already incensed by the renovation efforts of a private concessionaire. That is a situation that should have been handled with a great deal more tact and diplomacy. Experience gained in the remodelling of other city markets should have taught the authorities that the velvet glove is more effective than the iron fist.
       Klong Toey slum dwellers are used to threats of eviction. Although there has been a welcome upgrading in recent years, there are continual problems with regular water supplies, electricity and waste removal,sanitation, hygiene, child care, education, crime prevention and health services because they have no legal right to the land they occupy. They are not there out of choice. This has been going on for over 50 years and will continue until the Port Authority gives serious consideration to expanding low-cost housing on more of its ample land reserves to absorb the community.
       Do that first and it will eventually pave the way for some of the big business developments it has in mind to improve the value of its assets. Right now its priorities are skewed. It is sheer folly to think it can turn the slum problem over to the Community Organisations Development Institute (CODI) and expect it to resettle so many people, probably far away from the area in which they work, in a relatively short space of time. Without proper planning and a suitable time frame, such an attempt would quickly come to grief. It would be reminiscent of the mass evictions and attempted resettlement of slum dwellers on the city's outskirts two to three decades ago. Those resettled could not find work deep in the suburbs or afford to spend hours in a long commute to their old jobs so they just abandoned their new locations and moved back to their old ones.
       The underfunded CODI works through the respected Ban Mankong home-building and land-sharing projects to replace the slums and avoid forced relocations. But progress is slow. Its sister project is Ban Ua-arthorn which was initiated by the National Housing Authority and involves the private sector. These projects were touted as the solution to the shortage of affordable accommodation and, while there were some successes,Ban Ua-arthorn schemes gained notoriety as showpieces of corruption. This took the form of ill-fitting doors,roofs prone to blow away in the wind, holes and cracks in foundations, walls and ceilings, dangerous electrical outlets and all-round substandard construction. It can only be a matter of time before such low-quality, but not inexpensive, public housing projects revert to slums again, completing a vicious circle. Ban Mankong projects,on the other hand, are community-based, better organised and hold out real promise for the future.
       Although the economic downturn caused migration patterns to slow and people to return home as factory jobs dried up, communities such as Klong Toey seem unaffected and likely to be with us for a long time yet.