THE Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations (Fomca) is right. While the four interventions announced by the government on Monday are good to minimise short-term problems of rice shortages, they are neither adequate nor sufficient to put an end to the country's grain problem. Here is why. Start with the Agriculture and Food Security Ministry's move to empower the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (Fama) to distribute local white rice.
This assumes that the rice supply problem that Malaysia is facing is one of inadequate distribution. However empowered Fama or any other government agency is, there just isn't enough of the grain to distribute, not just to rural and suburban areas but also urban areas.
Hypermarket chains such as Mydin are screaming hoarse that rice bags aren't heading their way. Lost in transition? It was very likely, as one hypermarket owner told this Leader when the rice story was boiling hot. Not that it isn't a big concern now. But still, it doesn't explain the whole story.
Neither does the dissection of the rice scarcity issue by some economists. The Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) on Tuesday urged the government to break monopolies and facilitate the transition to an open market.
True, monopoly is a problem, not just in the rice industry. We are not against breaking monopolies but what we are puzzled about is the complete surrender of economists of a certain stripe that the open market is a panacea for our rice ills.
Remove regulations and the market will regulate itself. This is a dream of economists, but often a nightmare for consumers. There isn't a country in the world where the market is "free". Is IDEAS redirecting the cause of the issue at hand? We surely think so.
Let's not rely too much on textbook economics, where supply and demand are said to be in equilibrium when the market is open. The real world is not an economics textbook. Let's get real. How real? India's export ban on rice is a good example.
The market — open or closed — just can't handle interventions such as this. From the point of view of New Delhi, export ban on rice is valid because its priority is to keep its people fed before feeding others. We would do the same. There is only one solution to Malaysia's rice problem. It must grow more rice.
As it is, all the rice fields put together produce only 60 to 70 per cent of Malaysia's needs. Some say that at times, supply can hit lower than that.
Consider another "drastic " measure: the establishment of the Special Task Force for the Enforcement of White Rice Operations. This ropes in a few agencies under one enforcement roof. The hope is to maintain control of padi and rice as the ministry announced on Monday.
But if there is not enough padi coming out of the farm, there will still be a scarcity of local white rice. Malaysia must grow more rice. Not that we don't have land.
There is plenty, but it is left idle. Sure, not all the idle land is ideal for rice cultivation. But with the help of technology, the productivity of such land can be improved. The point of all this is this: Malaysia must grow more rice to feed its growing population.
Thirty-three million mouths mean more rice fields, not more imports.
