<B> At a recent public exposé, you made a case against applying social engineering to economic democratization. What is the basis of your stance? </B>

Development is necessary for creating wealth and jobs. This comes through investment in new projects. The past government, I think, tried to address the issue of concentration of ownership in the economy by not allowing projects by companies showing concentration of ownership to go forward. The point I am making is that, if you actually do that, you are basically disqualifying 70% of the development capability of Mauritius. Because companies that can develop are those having this concentration of ownership. I don?t think it is good for the development process that government behaves in this manner.

<B> How would you react to the charge that family-owned businesses are a hindrance to the development process? </B>

I actually think that family-owned businesses are a key to the development process. The key element here is capability. Suppose you have a project. For some reason, you don?t want to give it to Mr. A, who in fact can do it. You want to give it to Mr. B who does not have the capability. Then neither Mr. A nor Mr. B gets the project. That?s the problem. Because people whom you would like to give the project to do not necessarily have the human or capital resource to do it. If you exclude the traditional private sector from the development process in Mauritius, you are excluding 70 to 75 % of the capability.

<B> To what extent is it correct to say that conglomerates usually generate captive markets for their member companies at the expense of fair competition? </B>

I can only speak for Rogers Group here. In Rogers, we have a policy where our companies are free to buy wherever they can find the best and cheapest source of supply. If we are getting the best conditions from a group company, only then will we buy from that source.

<B> But, in practice, it?s always difficult for group members to trade at arm?s length among themselves? </B>

You also have the issue of loyalty to consider. That?s the problem with any new entrepreneur who does not have a product that exists already. On the other hand, you have an established entrepreneur who already has his customers. He would try to make his customers happy. That?s a normal business process. The point about captive markets in conglomerates may be valid elsewhere. But, as far as our model in Rogers is concerned, we buy from the cheapest source.