Anti-trust laws can defeat protectionism

Anti-trust laws can defeat protectionism

SEPT 7 – Opponents of economic liberalisation fear, among many other things, the possibility of giant foreign companies dominating the local market at the expense of local businesses.

For those who are simply interested in better quality goods and services, market liberalisation introduces competition in the market, much to the benefits of consumers.

While the war between the two camps is much relished, there is a middle ground for both to tread on and it involves anti-trust laws.

Increasingly in Malaysia, protectionist argument is becoming less and less relevant each time the sun rises and sets to rises again. Intellectually, it is bankrupt. Empirically, it has resulted in missed opportunities and sufferings. Examples of protectionist failures and its subsequent ejection are aplenty for all to observe.

Proton, for instance, is still unable to compete fairly despite years of protection granted by the government to the national enterprise. It has also cost Malaysia an opportunity to become a regional centre of vehicle manufacturing that Thailand has become.

Thankfully, such government protection that once resulted in effective Proton’s monopoly of the local car market will be ending by 2010, in line with the Asean Free Trade Area Agreement.

Another example relates to the imposition of cabotage policy between peninsular Malaysia and east Malaysia. With the intention of nurturing local shipping companies, it has caused unnecessary increase in cost of living of Malaysians in Sabah and Sarawak by hiking up transportation cost. Tradable goods became more expensive than it would have been under free trade environment.

Again, thankfully, despite protest from local ship owners, the removal of the protectionist policy has been successful. Malaysians in Sabah and Sarawak can expect their real wages, ceteris paribus, to go up, thanks to liberalisation.

Even as the roles of government see expansion all over the world in the aftermath of the global recession through massive fiscal policy and more, the rationale of liberalisation in Malaysia continues to take root.

While guarded optimism is called for, the recent liberalisation of multiple service subsectors as announced by the Najib administration is a proof that – to paraphrase slightly the Iron Lady Margaret Thatcher – liberalisation is on the move.

The liberals are winning the intellectual jousting. Yet, this is no time for liberals to rest. This excellent opportunity to push for greater freedom – either economic or individual freedom, although the two should be inseparable – does not come as frequently as it should.

With a government seemingly friendly to liberalisation policy, there is no better time to push for greater liberalisation.

Greater liberalisation is required because illiberal market structure like price and supply control mechanism on essential goods such as sugar and flour are still imposed by the government. Just weeks ago, shortage occurred to unnecessarily and rudely disrupt routine to remind all of that fact.

With momentum on the side of the liberals, they can afford to push liberalisation forward. Shoving the agenda is especially easy when discredited protectionist ideas are demonstrable as actual and not merely theoretical failures.

In spite of cache available for liberals to rely on, continuous shoving of liberal economic agenda does not create ally and it only alienates losers of liberalisation.

As a sidetrack, liberalisation does create losers but the rationale of liberalisation, or actually, free trade, is not that it does not create losers, but rather, on average, it lifts all boats up. This should be juxtaposed harshly with the effects of protectionist policy, which may or may not create winners but guarantees everybody, on average, worse off.

Liberalisation exercises are definitely colliding with the New Economic Policy, or whatever is left of it. While it is unclear if there is a majority supports the policy any longer, there is no doubt that there exists a large segment within Malaysian society who do support it and see liberalisation exercise as a threat.

On top of that, local business owners, Malay or non-Malay alike, are likely to be hugely unexcited with liberalisation effort that inevitably invites large multinational corporations with enjoy economies of scale that these locals could only imagine off.

Together, these groups have the political power to derail liberalisation exercise in the future.

In order to reduce that possibility, it is imperative for liberals to reach out to the potential losers and their sympathisers to partly, wherever reasonable, alleviate their fear. And their fear of monopoly is reasonable.

Perhaps, the act of reaching out should be an afterthought. The fear of monopoly, after all, should not exclusively belong to only protectionists and their cohorts.

Economic liberals celebrate competitive market. Purely competitive market is of course unachievable due to a myriad of factors but that does not prevent liberals for achieving second best solutions that approximate idealised environment.

The practice of anti-competitive behavior especially by companies with excessive market power hurts the prospect of superior competitive outcomes associated with the ideas of free market.

Read all in the Malaysian Insider

*At maddruid.com, Hafiz Noor Shams practises equality.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: