Abhisit advises the government not to lose its way on fiscal discipline issues. He warns against cutting ThaiHealth's budget into the Treasury as it would affect health promotion work, noting that state banks cause more debt.
On 3 Nov 2026, Abhisit Vejjajiva, party-list MP and leader of the Democrat Party, commented on the amendment to the ThaiHealth Promotion Foundation Act that abolishes earmarked sin taxes for ThaiHealth and shifts funding into the regular budget, citing fiscal discipline. He understands the government's policy to bring off-budget funds into the budget due to the budget crisis. However, he finds it odd because commissions on courts, independent organizations, the Attorney General's office, state enterprises, public organizations, and the Thai House of Representatives fund—which he is part of—have reviewed this with no government legal proposals yet. Instead, it is only the ruling parties' legislation. The commission understands that the major fiscal discipline problem does not stem from this fund. When the fiscal discipline law was enacted, a transitional clause allowed existing arrangements to continue if they weren't problematic. The real fiscal discipline issue now lies with the government's heavy use of state banks and other state agencies, which have huge debts running into trillions. This is the urgent fiscal discipline problem.
He pointed out that state banks incur more debt.
Abhisit further said that while all organizations under scrutiny must accept audits, the solution to budget spending or fund allocation issues—such as with ThaiHealth—should focus on improving oversight mechanisms and disclosure standards rather than debating the organization's revenue sources.
When asked how this amendment might affect public health promotion work overall, Abhisit said the stability of health promotion work is fundamental. As the person who initiated it when he was Minister attached to the Prime Minister’s Office under Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai, they adhered to principles.
First, they wanted financial stability so that workers could be confident there would be funding to support health promotion activities.
Second, they wanted the work to operate outside bureaucratic constraints, relying on civil society to drive health promotion initiatives.
Therefore, shifting to the regular budget system risks significantly impacting these efforts. Moreover, the Treasury will face difficulties recalculating excise taxes to avoid changing the burden on current alcohol and tobacco companies. If the sin tax is removed and replaced by excise tax, calculations must ensure revenue remains the same.