I quite obvious that the government is most likely to continue heavy protection of Proton even to the extent of violating the Asean Free Trade Agreement (Afta). The fact that such a possibility is even contemplated frankly scares me about how our government actually works.

Even if we do not care about high car prices, the high subsidy that benefits the few and the dubious other benefits including technology and skills, we cannot ignore the real possibility that the protectionism may not be good for Proton itself.

The fact of the matter is that the government must recognise that Proton has been slow to upgrade itself. It has had over 20 years to learn how to build a car and it still cannot do it on its own thus the recent deal with Volkswagen.

The government has also failed to see that only when the threat of competition was imminent did Proton actually move to improve itself with the purchase of the money-losing Lotus marque to make its first wholly-designed car.

The experience of competition leading to corporate improvement cannot be denied. Even with the much-admired Korean car makers, the best improvements for them came when their government eliminated tariffs.

One can argue that some form of protectionism still exists in South Korea and other countries with automotive sectors but the fact is they are not in the form of blatantly high tariffs or markups of up to two or three times the product's market price.

High competitive pressure will ultimately be good for Proton and Afta affords some 20 percent in tariff protection to help it along.

On top of affording high protection for Proton, the government is also setting a bad precedent in violating Afta. At a time of competition from India and China, a free market in Asean is essential to continue to attract investments and promote growth.

Malaysia has a good window of opportunity to take advantage of Afta given our good infrastructure. Any delay would not only hamper Asean economic integration, it could see Malaysia losing the opportunity to be a leader in Asean with other countries catching up with infrastructure and development.

Giving Proton protection will also lead to other industries asking for protection. It will essentially mean backpedaling instead of moving forward towards a more meritocractic system. It will mean the perpetuation of cronyism, poor performances, dependency on the government and further falling behind in building competitive strengths.

Protecting a company like Proton is not worth the risks no matter how glorious they look. The truth is, the death of Proton would only have a few real economic ramifications, given its small size.

The number of people who would be out of work would only number of a couple of thousand and they should be able to find alternate employment eventually if Proton subsidies were used for good spending programmes.

However, to continue with the high protection for Proton will have huge consequences too dark to contemplate. Like the fight against corruption, if the government is serious, it must have the nerve to face the unpleasantness of the real world. Running away from the real world never, ever lead to anything good.