Trade associations can help to counter profiteering

Setting up an anti-profiteering task force may not necessarily help to rein in price hikes owing to the water price increase (Case to monitor possible profiteering as utility tariffs rise; April 4).

It may be useful to invite trade associations to recommend fair adjustments to the prices of daily items. That this mechanism has not been available after the Competition Act kicked in is lamentable.

Singapore’s trade associations knew the intricacies of their trade best to recommend a practical, uniform price during a tax hike or import supply disruptions.

I have observed, over the past 40 years, that they were socially responsible organisations that reined in profiteering, balancing the interests of members and consumers.

I remember that the prices of commodities such as bread, rice, vegetables, egg, pork and coffee were moderated effectively to achieve small increments and stabilise the market.

Except for professional organisations like in health care and law, I could not find any member of these trade associations being sued for excessive charging for essential items following price recommendations.

One criticism of trade associations is that they are fronts for cartels to protect their members’ interests and other anti-competitive activities against public interest.

I beg to differ because since the early 1930s, these commodity associations in Singapore had done invaluable work to keep the rise in prices of items gradual. The sceptical among us may argue that trade associations are no benefactors of consumers, but in the Singaporean context, the recommended prices were not exploited for profiteering.

In contrast, since the Competition Act took effect, frequent and unjustifiable price increases by essential service providers and conglomerates became the new normal.

Individual consumers are left to fend for themselves, with no obvious choice available.

The Competition Act and the Consumers Association of Singapore have not protected the interest of consumers.

We should not deny the social good of daily-essentials associations in countering profiteering.