CONSUMERS have been forced to pay more for sugar because only “certain” companies are allowed to import sugar.
Being able to control the supply, they could easily manipulate prices. They were selling their sugar beyond “free” market prices and therefore made lots of money.
Thus, when the government liberalised the import of sugar by allowing more Approved Permits, these companies which manipulated prices were unhappy and requested the authorities to restrict competition. They want to continue to enjoy higher profits.
It is interesting that although there is a Competition Act and Competition Commission, these chosen few are blatantly seeking greater protection at the expense of consumers.
Are there fruits, vegetables and other food products that are also subject to price manipulation via market protectionism?
The Federation of Malaysian Consumers Association (Fomca) demands that the government be transparent and open on essential food products.
Fomca also calls on the Competition Commission to act. Investigate the food chain to ensure that throughout the supply chain, at every level, there is a free and fair market, and the prices reflect the “actual” and is not distorted through protection or any form of collusion.
Without subsidies, consumers should benefit from a free and open market. Consumers should also benefit by getting the best value for their hard-earned money.
When prices go up, we need to ensure that it is because of genuine supply and demand in the market, and not price distortion by a small number of players who are manipulating the market. The sugar experience clearly indicates that with market liberalisation, consumers gain through lower prices.
Datuk Paul Selva Raj, Secretary-general, FomcaKuala Lumpur