Video Thaivisa interview with British Ambassador to Thailand

[emptypockets]

2 hours ago, jimn said:

I am afraid the choice of Dan Cheesman to ask these questions was ill advised. The whole interview was structured to give the ambassador a chance to showcase himself and the embassey in glowing terms and only fleetingly addressed the two major issues. (1) Dan asked him about the ceasing of the embassey letters but he didnt follow up and press him why embassys from many other countries are still providing them. What are they doing that is acceptable to the Thais but the British Embassy cannot. (2) Insurance for OA visa. Dan only asked him about problems for people over 75 and those with pre existing medical conditions. He did not ask about why insurance from the UK were not easily accepted without the completion of the stupid form. He did not ask about insurance in the 2nd year of the visa. He did not ask about the totally inadequate and expensive Thai policies.

In my view a totally wasted opportunity. Dan Cheeseman should have done his research better and pushed the ambassador much much harder I am afraid.

Most of the questions you pose need to be asked of a Thai government representative, not a British one. It is Thai policy not British policy.

[P100]

3 hours ago, bluesofa said:

While I'd like to think there could be things going on behind the scenes, being a 'diplomat' demands you sound positive and not openly criticise anyone.

Someone once said that a good diplomat is one who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you look forward to the journey.

Quotation stolen from the Ted Turner documentary on CNN. But still, its a nice one even in this sence.

[Proboscis]

4 hours ago, bluesofa said:

While I'd like to think there could be things going on behind the scenes, being a 'diplomat' demands you sound positive and not openly criticise anyone.

Someone once said that a good diplomat is one who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you look forward to the journey.

The saying you mention is usually attributed to Churchill.

[Chazar]

73000 brits  did  he  say? in  which  case  we  can  all  pay 5k  a  year  into a  fund for insurance, should easily cover each years deaths maimings etc  = 365  million a year  , the insurance companies  must be raking it in

[Moonlover]

2 hours ago, UKJASE said:

my mate was held for overstay in tough conditions for over 2 weeks before he got any visit from UK Embassy. 

 

pretty safe to say he felt left down, and somewhat scared

Due to his own inept behavior your 'mate' found himself in detention and HE felt let down!

 

There's a simple answer to that isn't there.

[Sheryl]

3 hours ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

try open on Youtube & select 'Open transcript' (its on the 3 dots menu next to the title)

 

its too long to post here

 

 

I watched this on a computer with no sound so selected subtitles.

 

If the transcript resembles those, forget it.  A complete bungled mess despite thw fact that he presumably spoke ib English so only needed to transcribe.

 

Entertaining at times though (the mangled transcription)....

[Sheryl]

12 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Due to his own inept behavior your 'mate' found himself in detention and HE felt let down!

 

There's a simple answer to that isn't there.

He felt let down that 2 weeks passed before the Embassy contacted him.

 

Since their main functions at such times are to provide information on processes/options, facilitate communication with relatives back in the UK and adbocate for UK detainees to receive proper treatment/access to health care if needed, they obviously need to make contact sooner than that.

 

 

[peter14]

Did not talk about al those brit leaving amd TM30

[Sheryl]

5 hours ago, Dogmatix said:

 The Thai position that an affirmation in front of an embassy official is more than just an affirmation, i.e. the foreign government has to verify the information and take responsibility for its accuracy, is absurd.  Thai government departments are happy to accept documents from Thais that are just certified by the owner and could easily be fake.  The UK decision to cave in to that ridiculous opinion was a matter of convenience to let them stop providing a service they wanted to get out of anyway, particularly in view of their move to cramped but expensive office accommodation. 

 

I have thought from the very start that this was a miscommunication or at least that the Foreign Office officials back in the UK who made the final decision did so based on an excessively literal and Western-style legalistic interpretation.

 

Definitely  what the US and Australia were doing -- issuing letters based on "affirmations" sworn to by their citizens with no supporting documentation whatsoever -- was not what Thai Immigration expected/found acceptable and who can blame them.  The whole point to having Embassies issue letters was that (1) Embassies would be  able  to understand and review supporting documentation held by their nationals whereas Thai Imm officers obviously could not, and (2) Embassies would presumably be objective and impartial in doing so. It was never expected that Embassies would carry out detailed "validation" of documents to rule out any counterfeits and none of the Embassies still issuing letters do that either, nor does Thai Immigration with Thai bank letters etc et. 

 

Complete nonsense and I doubt anyone seriously thinks there are many retirees putting together convincing looking forgeries of pension statements and tax returns. 

 

If has has been reported by many the previous procedure was for the UK Embassy to ask for and review supporting documentation of the income stated, then there was no need to discontinue issuing the letters.

 

Even now I believe the UK could go back to Immigration (who have been much inconvenienced by the withdrawal of these letters, it has greatly added to IO workload) and offer to resume issuing letters with the understanding that these would be issued based on a review of supporting documentation that appeared accurate to the best of the Embassy official's  knowledge. 

 

I can't imagine Imm rejecting that, they must know that this is the most that can be expected and all that any other Embassy does.

 

Possibly at the time of the initial talks TI was pressing harder in the hopes of getting more or - more likely - just trying to apply some heat so that Embassies would be as diligent as possible. They did not want and  did not anticipate that Embassies would stop issuing letters altogether and the fact that 3 big ones did, with all the resulting problems, would likely result in a second round of talks going more smoothly. If the UK could ever be induced to start them.

 

The US/Oz situation is another story.  Clearly what they were doing was not acceptable and I am surprised it went on as long as it did. Perhaps it  did not matter in the past when cost of living in Thailand was much lower and thus almost any retired American or Aussie could easily afford to live here,  then as cost of living rapidly rose it became increasingly evident there were expats here  who really couldn't pay their bills etc.   It is of course not true that there is no way US and Oz could issue letters after reviewing supporting documentation voluntarily provided by the applicant (hence not a  privacy issue). But it would entail doing something very different from what they previously did, with attendant workload implications. 

[Jane Dough]

36 minutes ago, alzack said:

The British embassy has gone from a good service to e xpats to a crappy 7/11 standard place in just 20 years

I completely refute your remark.

 

They were just as bad 20 years ago.

 

Rooster

[007 RED]

During the interview, the Ambassador said that he estimated that some 73,000 British citizens are currently resident here in Thailand.

 

How on earth did he, or his Consular colleges, arrive at this figure?

 

Firstly:

In my passport, under section 4 of the NOTES on page 2, it states: 

 

“British nationals resident overseas who are entitled to the protection of the United Kingdom authorities should contact the nearest British High Commission, Embassy or Consulate to enquire about any arrangements for registration of their names and addresses.  Failure to do so may in an emergency result in difficulty or delay in according them assistance or protection”.

 

When I retired to Thailand, some 10 years ago, I contacted the British Embassy in order to register as advised in my passport.  I was informed at the time that the Embassy no longer maintains a register of British national living in Thailand.

 

Without such a register, how do they know, or even estimate, how many Brits live here?

 

My only guess is that Thai Immigration provide them with numbers of British citizens who currently hold long term permission to stay.  If my assumption is correct, then like figures produced by Tourist Authority of Thailand they are more than likely highly over inflated.

 

Secondly

Following the BE announcement that they were no longer able to provide income letters late last year, I made a series of Freedom of Information requests via the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London.  One questions being… How many letters did they (the BE) provide in each of the previous 5 years?  The reply for the last year (2018) was just under 3,000 letters.

 

So, if the Ambassador’s estimate that some 73,000 British citizens are currently living in Thailand is to be believed, then only 4% of those living here used the income letter to support their extension of stay, the other 96% used alternative methods to support their application.

[theoldgit]

Troll posts removed

[jimn]

2 hours ago, emptypockets said:

Most of the questions you pose need to be asked of a Thai government representative, not a British one. It is Thai policy not British policy.

Oh come on get real will you. The questions I posed are ideal gor the ambassador to raise with Thai authorities. He has that opportunity we do do not. Cheeseman did not ask any follow up questions nor did he try to contest some of the answers. In my opinion it was just an opportunity for Cheeseman to promote his useless video channel. Why TV has got involved with him heavens knows.

[NoshowJones]

2 hours ago, Moonlover said:

Due to his own inept behavior your 'mate' found himself in detention and HE felt let down!

 

There's a simple answer to that isn't there.

It would depend on the circumstances.

[jimn]

1 hour ago, metempsychotic said:

why do you suppose they agreed to the interview?

I agree, thats why I was disappointed it was on Dan about Thailand. The interview should have been conducted not on video in my opinion with maybe a panel of respected TV people like Ubon Joe and Jonathan Fairfield

[007 RED]

54 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Complete nonsense and I doubt anyone seriously thinks there are many retirees putting together convincing looking forgeries of pension statements and tax returns. 

You may be right in so far that there weren’t many, but unfortunately it only takes a few to spoil it for the majority.

 

It should also be borne in mind that British citizens applying to the Embassy for an income letter did not have to supply original documents to support their claimed income. The applicant could submit their application via email and attach a photo or PDF of their supporting documents.  Unfortunately, both photos and PDF’s can be easily altered.

 

Also, you may recall that it was reported here in TVF a couple of years ago that a few Immigration Offices in and around Bangkok were insisting that applicants presenting a British Embassy income letter to support their application for permission to stay  have the letter (or at least the signature) authenticated by the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Consular Division. 

 

The reason given to me by my local IO, when I present my letter, was that they (Immigration) had detected a number of letters which did not appear to be genuine.

 

FYI… The letter was produced by a standard LaserJet printer, on bog standard paper (no water marks or security ink).  The letter (in the last few years) did have an embossed red paper sticker attached to the letter.  The paper sticker was cheap and the embossing very poor, thus enabling someone with a minimal computer and handicraft skills to easy to replicate the letter.

[BigC]

British  embassy  dues not want to help at all 

 

They want to send them money then give us  all the responsibility so if anything  is wromg they can swallow our check and blane us

Now we have to  take our  own passpoet photos  

Very strict 

 

Mo shadow  or nothing 

 

They aw useless 

[wotsdermatter]

7 hours ago, bluesofa said:

I gave up after 11 minutes

You waited that long?  I turned off when he talked about being with his husband Scott.  Just my own preference based of my beliefs and my profession.

'nuf sed.

[Eligius]

A pleasant chap - but really gave zero definite, hard information about anything. I was surprised that he was not asked about the abysmal TM30 / TM28 insult to all of us. Mind you, if he had been asked, he probably would simply and merely have said: 'We are still consulting with the Thai government on that one'.

Fat lot of good that would do (when the regime does not even listen to the wishes of its own people!).

[norfolkandchance]

I wonder what Visa has Scott got.

[Golden Triangle]

Well, in a way I'm glad I didn't waste any of my valuable time viewing the video, all your comments have confirmed that it would be a waste of time watching it.

 

I am even more surprised that some of you are still allowed to comment on the content and in particular the interviewer, last time I did that I had a posting holiday, it would appear that the truth hurts, still as the saying goes " Least said, soonest mended" ???? 

[NoshowJones]

1 hour ago, possum1931 said:

It would depend on the circumstances.

and what if he was in an accident and unconscious which caused him to overstay?

I will say it again, it depends on the circumstances.

[evadgib]

7 hours ago, The Preacher said:

"His Excellency"?  Are you kidding me?  What kind of nonsense is this?  How about "British Ambassador Brian Davis," or just "Mr. Davis."  The Brits are as bad as the Thais.  Do they get on the floor in front of the guy, too?

It will presumably come as a surprize that your own representatives abroad are addressed in the very same manner as stated in the appropriate convention.

[Sheryl]

7 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

What evidence is there that TI has singled out the British, US & Australian embassies? The more likely reason is that those embassies have seized on the demand for "verification" to mean exactly what it says - "verify the income as true" - rather than other embassies who've stuck with "we'll believe any old tosh you tell us as verification"

 

Certainly TI did not single out these three Embassies.

 

They held essentially the same conversation with every Embassy. 

 

The UK seems to have reacted/ interpreted differently than their Continental counterparts.

 

I would not assume they were right and the latter wrong.

 

Given a choice between:

 

Taking Thai govt statements completely literally in a strict legalistic sense and assuming their choice of words in English mean exactly what they would to a UK lawyer

 

Vs.

 

Taking a pragmatic view focused on the general concern expressed:

 

I know which I think is usually more appropriate in Thailand.

 

But perhaps their impression/ knowlege of their expat countrymen played a role. If as another poster said there have actually been UK retirees forging UK Embassy letters and supporting documentation then the Embassy would know that....and I have underestimated the audacity of impecunious Brits in Thailand. Doesn't jive with claims  that the decision was reached by  FO legal staff back in the UK though. 

 

 

 

[pixelaoffy]

News to me about a British Embassy in Laos. Only recently had to go to Australian Embassy for help 

[pixelaoffy]

Where is the consulate now in Bangkok? its gone from Wireless road!

[bluesofa]

5 minutes ago, pixelaoffy said:

Theres no British Embassy in Laos

I noticed that was said, and assumed I was behind the times and now there must be one. Still not one then??

[pixelaoffy]

2 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

I noticed that was said, and assumed I was behind the times and now there must be one. Still not one then??

Just checked and I see there is now. Never used to be up to a year ago  https://www.gov.uk/government/news/change-of-her-majestys-ambassador-to-laos-august-2019

[bluesofa]

4 minutes ago, pixelaoffy said:

7 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

I noticed that was said, and assumed I was behind the times and now there must be one. Still not one then??

Just checked and I see there is now. Never used to be up to a year ago  https://www.gov.uk/governmentYes, a quick check reveal/news/change-of-her-majestys-ambassador-to-laos-august-2019

Yes, a quick check reveals it to be here:

British Embassy Vientiane

Rue Yokkabat
Phonexay,
Saysettha District,
Vientiane
Laos

From the website: 'We opened as a fully functioning embassy on 2 April 2013 after a 27-year absence from Laos.'

 

[topt]

10 minutes ago, pixelaoffy said:

Just checked and I see there is now. Never used to be up to a year ago

 

4 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

From the website: 'We opened as a fully functioning embassy on 2 April 2013

How time flies..............