In Bangladesh, price instability and essential goods’ price hikes have become common. Recently, an economic advisor told Ittefaq that market monitoring would be enforced but “without excessive measures.” While this oversight is positive, the term "excessive" raises questions. Why this caution around “excess”? And who is it for?
Market monitoring has a long history in Bangladesh. Many current policymakers have overseen similar initiatives in the past, yet market stability remains elusive. Monitoring alone can’t fully address the underlying issues—monopolies and syndicate dominance—that make stabilization challenging.
Market monitoring itself is often misunderstood. Small and medium businesses frequently face harassment and extortion, while large corporations control imports, distribution, and dealership, shaping the market to suit their needs. Effective monitoring must be transparent and impartial, without the fear of “excess.”
To restore stability, the government needs robust policies and decisive actions. Breaking monopolies over essential goods is critical to controlling prices. The Competition Commission should actively enforce the 2012 Competition Act to curb illegal collusion, monopolies, and oligopolies, promoting fair competition.
A well-planned approach to monitoring is essential. For items like potatoes, onions, and eggs, accurate data on production and demand are crucial. Previously, the Agriculture Ministry reported surplus potato production, yet storage owners claimed a deficit, causing artificial shortages that benefit certain groups.
Therefore, the government should gather reliable data and enforce effective market regulations to control prices. True market stability requires dismantling syndicates, employing data-driven policies, and supporting small and medium businesses. Market monitoring is a necessary first step, but not the full solution. Given the longstanding issues, experienced voices suggest allowing the market to operate freely and fairly.
