Tuesday, June 10, 2008

The high cost of subsidies

The high cost of subsidies

JUNE 10 — Subsidies encourage consumption and wastage. Period.

Nobody likes to pay more for fuel or for food. And there is certainly no argument against the assertion that the lower-income group is the least equipped to deal with spiralling food and fuel costs.

But consider the cost of subsidies and artificial price controls.

The Health Ministry has been telling the public for years that Malaysia has among the highest rates of obesity and diabetes in the world.

And yet, sugar is considered sacred, and there is much hue and cry over any attempts to raise prices.

Newspapers are full of complaints about how expensive this would make a cup of tea.

But no one in Malaysia mentions the health cost. That is probably because health care in this country is effectively free. Sorry, I am wrong about that. It is subsidised by the taxpayer.

Diabetes and obesity are conditions which can be avoided but for the culture of consumption and the underlying feeling that it is a fundamental right to have cheap sugar.

Just as it is a fundamental right for Malaysians to have cheap oil.

Again, Malaysians must consider the price of cheap fuel for cars.

Two days ago the Education Ministry announced it was giving up RM800 million of its own budget so that the government could continue with existing subsidies which, by the way, the opposition and many Malaysians feel should be increased further.

So, effectively, Malaysians are insisting that the country builds fewer schools, or hospitals, or spends less on infrastructure, so that they can continue driving on cheap petrol or diesel.

Much has been said in the media about how the government has failed to provide adequate public transport in the cities, leaving people with little choice but to use their cars.

And for that, the government is guilty. The emphasis on building what is now a failed national car industry has meant there has been little motivation towards subsidising a comprehensive public transportation system.

But still, public transportation in KL is much better than what it used to be. Still, there are many Malaysians who still refuse to take a bus, a train or a taxi. Probably because it is just not as nice and convenient as a car.

If demand for public transport goes up, the quality would too.

But as long as Malaysians continue demanding cheap fuel, there will never be any money left for improving bus services or building new train lines.

The opposition has argued that the situation Malaysia finds itself in now is largely due to mismanagement by the Barisan Nasional government.

They may well be right.

But even if they are, does it mean that any future government, either from the BN or Pakatan Rakyat coalition, should increasing subsidies to ensure cheap oil?

If leakages are actually plugged, corruption is reduced, and productivity increased, shouldn't the extra revenue be used to build more schools, hire more doctors and upgrade infrastructure?

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who says he is the future PM of the current PR government-in-waiting, is effectively proposing Malaysia builds fewer schools and spends less on healthcare than we should.

Malaysians should start counting the cost of demanding subsidies.

Much has been said about how the lower income and the poor will suffer. No doubt they will, and should be helped with direct relief and aid.

But the loudest protesters are the middle-class Malaysians, most of whom drive one, if not, two cars.

Continuing or increasing subsidies will encourage these Malaysians to continue with a wasteful, consumption-driven lifestyle.

Removing subsidies encourages responsibility, innovation and competitiveness.

(Malaysian Insider)

No comments:

Post a Comment