Local Equity Ownership in the telecommunications space

Removal of the 30% local shareholding will attract foreign investment, promote competition and access to global markets…A general case study of Malaysia led to a boost in foreign investment. However, there are also some risks associated with the removal of the requirement. One risk is that it could lead to decreased knowledge transfer and skills development to locals. When foreign investors have a local partner, they are more likely to share their knowledge and expertise with their partners. This can help to boost the skills and productivity of the local workforce. Another risk is that it could lead to increased competition in the local market. This could put some local businesses at a disadvantage, as they may not be able to compete with the resources and expertise of foreign investors. In my opinion, the government should do away with the 30% local shareholding requirement, but in its place, it should introduce guidelines and subcategories for compliance on foreign investment. These guidelines should be designed to ensure that foreign investors still have a vested interest in promoting local skills development and knowledge transfer. The government could also look at the Singaporean model, where the Information Development Authority (IDA) provides guidelines and incentives for foreign investors. The IDA has been successful in promoting foreign investment in Singapore without leaving out local collaboration. I believe that a similar approach could be successful here. By removing the 30% local shareholding requirement and introducing clear guidelines and incentives for foreign investors, the government could attract more foreign investment while still promoting local skills development and knowledge transfer.