The incessant annual poultry tariff disputes in SA have aroused a lot of public interest. I am firmly opposed to protectionism. Government policies that are designed to shelter local industries via high tariffs cause more harm than good and limiting their product choices cannot be in the best interests of consumers.
It is also ultimately damaging to a country’s economy, while lowering quality standards. In the case of poultry it must surely harm consumers in SA, a country with a very high proportion of poor and even destitute people. I have googled chicken tariff actions over the past decade and, including various reviews, the number I have come up with is nine, which includes tariff applications, a safeguard application, as well as a number of dumping actions. I doubt there are many countries in the world that can “boast” of so many protectionist attempts against imports in a single industry.
Considering that nearly all of these actions have had some degree of success, it is tempting to ask why the local poultry industry, seemingly well run and profitable, needs so much government support, which seems to be quite easy to obtain. Over the past few weeks your newspaper has published a number of economic analyses prepared by an expert economist brought in by spokespersons for local industry with the result that his findings were embarrassingly debunked.
While there may be some justification for the current investigation, it appears to me that there has been more than adequate tariff support from government in the nine actions referred to earlier, that perhaps the time has come to cease these actions and let market dynamics determine chicken prices. My view is that all parties will benefit, including SA’s international trade credentials.JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an e-mail with your comments.