Several matters on LPG regulations require legal clarity, says Armizan
The Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister said the memorandum should be submitted to the technical review committee on amendments, chaired by the ministry's secretary-general.
He said an engagement session with the 10 associations was held on Tuesday (June 10)
to scrutinise proposed amendments to restrictions on the use of subsidised liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in trade and business, including considering the needs of micro and small-scale food and beverage vendors.
"Various recommendations and views have been put forward. Among the matters to be considered are amendments to parameters related to the definition of the size of the businesses involved.
"Additionally, careful consideration is needed for business ownership status, quantity requirements, control and reporting mechanisms, monitoring and enforcement effectiveness, and strategies to curb leakages comprehensively," he said in a Facebook post on Tuesday.
The Cabinet meeting on June 5 had agreed to the ministry's recommendation to amend the regulations gazetted in 2021 but details on several matters need to be finalised to ensure legal clarity.
Also present at the session was Rasah MP Cha Kee Chin, who is the chairman of the Special Select Committee on Domestic Trade, Entrepreneurship, Cost of Living and Agriculture. – Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
11 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Targeted subsidy helps prevent RM40mil diesel loss to smuggling
KUALA LUMPUR: The government has prevented the loss of more than RM40 million in subsidised diesel to smuggling and misappropriation between 2023 and July this year, thanks to the implementation of the targeted diesel subsidy mechanism. Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister Datuk Armizan Mohd Ali said enforcement data has shown a steady decline in such cases since the mechanism was introduced. In 2023, 992 cases were reported with seizures amounting to RM18.04 million. This dropped to 655 cases in 2024, involving RM17.14 million in seized fuel. Between Jan 1 and July 8 this year, 261 cases were recorded, with seizures valued at RM5.24 million. He said diesel is a scheduled controlled item under the Control of Supplies Act 1961 and is subject to strict regulation. "Various measures have been implemented by the ministry to combat smuggling and misappropriation. "These include strengthening governance, maintaining continuous oversight of the sale and distribution of subsidised controlled items, and conducting joint enforcement operations with other agencies at the border, such as the police, the Customs Department, the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency, and Road Transport Department. "The government's targeted diesel subsidy mechanism has proven effective in addressing issues of misappropriation and smuggling, as evidenced by the declining number of recorded cases," he said.
The Star
2 days ago
- The Star
Doctors fight medicine price rule
Market imbalance: Doctors say unfair pharma competition harms clinics. PETALING JAYA: The medicine price display rule has been challenged in court by several doctors who want the order to be quashed. The doctors filed for a judicial review, saying the rule hurts small clinics and was introduced without proper consultation. They want the rule, which took effect on May 1, to be revoked. The lawsuit named the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister, Health Minister and the Federal Government as the first, second and third respondents, respectively. The applicants are the Association of Private Practitioners, Sabah (APPS), the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA), the Malaysian Association for the Advancement of Functional and Interdisciplinary Medicine (Maafim), the Organisation of Malaysian Muslim Doctors (Perdim), the Federation of Private Medical Practitioners Associations Malaysia (FPMPAM), the Malaysian Private Dental Practitioners' Association (MPDPA), the Society of Private Medical Practitioners Sarawak (SPMPS), and one Dr Saifulbahri Ahmad. The lawsuit was in relation to the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025, which came into effect on May 1. The medical practitioners are seeking an order of certiorari to quash the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry's Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Making for Drug) Order 2025 (ministry's order). According to the statement of claim of the suit filed on July 24, they are also seeking a declaration that the ministry's order was void and tainted with illegality, irrationality, unreasonableness, disproportionality and impropriety. They asked that the enforcement of the ministry's order 'insofar as its application to private healthcare facilities and/or registered medical practitioners and dentists' be stayed until the judicial review case is over. Among the grounds for the judicial review is the failure of the government to recognise the difference between drugs sold in retail and drugs administered for treatment purposes. It added that the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister had breached principles of natural justice by arriving at the decision without consulting registered medical practitioners represented by the MMA. They said that while the purpose of the regulation was to curb profiteering activities, it has created unwarranted competition among providers of drugs, with the singular denominator purely being the price of drugs. 'This means even small-scale community clinics operated by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists have to now compete with large-scale drug retailers, for example, international chain pharmacies who already enjoy a larger market control and the ability to gain further control of retail customers by selling drugs at a much lower price,' they said. They added that small-scale community clinics would be at a disadvantage if forced to enter into an unwarranted competition with large-scale pharmaceutical companies. They said drug prices in clinics are determined by variables such as manufacturers; freight charges; export or import duties; importers; distributors; volume purchased; location of the clinics; different formulations of the same product; provisions for wastage of expired unused drugs; and staff and administrative expenses. The price display rule was met with much resistance by private healthcare practitioners. A three-month grace period from May 1 has also been given, where no compounds would be issued and the government would instead focus on advocacy and education. According to the court's website, the suit is set for case management at the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Aug 22.
The Star
3 days ago
- The Star
Private doctors file lawsuit against government over medicine price display regulation
PETALING JAYA: Doctors from the private sector are suing the government over the rule governing the display of medicine prices. This comes after several private practitioners filed for judicial review on July 24 against the government in the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The application was filed on Tuesday (July 29) by the Association of Private Practitioners, Sabah (APPS), the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA), the Malaysian Association for the Advancement of Functional and Interdisciplinary Medicine (Maafim), the Organisation of Malaysian Muslim Doctors (Perdim), the Federation of Private Medical Practitioners Associations Malaysia (FPMPAM), the Malaysian Private Dental Practitioners' Association (MPDPA), the Society of Private Medical Practitioners Sarawak (SPMPS) and one Dr Saifulbahri Ahmad. The lawsuit was in relation to the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025, which came into effect on May 1. The Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister, the Health Minister and the government of Malaysia were named as the first, second and third respondents respectively. The medical practitioners are seeking an order of certiorari to quash the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry's Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Making for Drug) Order 2025, which is also the impugned order in this case. As part of the relief, they are also seeking a declaration that the impugned order is void as it is 'tainted with illegality, irrationality and unreasonableness, disproportionality and impropriety.' 'The enforcement of the Impugned Order, insofar as its application to private healthcare facilities and/or registered medical practitioners and dentists, be stayed until full disposal of the Applicants' application for judicial review,' read the statement of the claim of the case. Among the grounds for judicial review is the government's failure to recognise the difference between drugs sold by retail and those administered for treatment. It also added that the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister had breached principles of natural justice by arriving at the decision without consulting registered medical practitioners represented by the MMA. They said that while the purpose of the regulation was to curb profiteering activities, it has created unwarranted competition among drug providers, with the sole focus being the price of drugs. 'This means even small-scale community clinics operated by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists have to now compete with large-scale drug retailers, for example, international chain pharmacies who already enjoy a larger market control and the ability to gain further control of retail customers by selling drugs at a much lower price,' they said adding that small scale community clinics would be at a disadvantage if forced to enter into an unwarranted competition with large-scale pharmaceutical companies. They said that drug prices in clinics are determined by variables such as manufacturers, freight charges, import or export duties, importers, distributors, volume purchased, the location of the clinics, different formulations of the same product, provisions for wastage of expired or unused drugs and staff and administrative expenses. The price display rule that came into effect on May 1 was met with much resistance by private healthcare practitioners. A three-month grace period has also been given, where no compounds would be issued and the government would instead focus on advocacy and education. The case management has been set for Aug 22.
