One might legitimately argue that Tata Steel didn’t raise prices. Nor did SAIL. But that reinforces rather than negates the point about examination. Both Tata Steel and SAIL are less exposed to global forces, since they have captive mines for ore and coal. Every once in a while, Paswan comes up with the idea of a regulator for steel, the assumption being this regulator will undertake such examinations and even set steel prices. Government-determined price fixation is a throwback to a different era. Hopefully, we no longer need a Bureau of Industrial Costs and Prices (BICP). In passing, though renamed, the BICP still remains and continues to be manned. What does it do and why does the country pay for its existence? However, on regulation, why do we need sector-specific regulators? Are we going to have separate regulators for edible oils, pulses, vegetables, fruits, steel and cement? That doesn’t make sense and we don’t need sector-specific competition authorities (not regulators), but an overall one. That’s precisely the reason the Competition Commission of India (CCI) was set up with a great deal of fanfare.

Has the CCI examined whether there is a cartel in steel? Like the dog that did not bark in the night, it has not, because it cannot. The CCI has no such powers and there is no exit policy for the MRTP Commission, just as there is no entry policy for the CCI. The present National Steel Policy dates to 2005, so the present steel minister signed off on it. This Policy said: “Following de-regulation of prices for integrated steel plants in 1991-92, the domestic prices of steel have become market-determined... This dispersal of the distribution chain has been the principal reason why no price regulation of the steel trade has ever been in force. Government has recently set up a Competition Commission to look into complaints of monopolistic pricing.”

... contd.