THE battle against price-fixing is getting more ammunition, with further leniency to be offered to industry insiders who come forward with information on cartel activities.

Cartels, often secret, are formed by companies in a particular industry which agree to limit the supply of a product or fix its price. This discourages competition and hurts consumers.

To step up its action against cartels, the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) plans to introduce two new measures to enhance its leniency programme for cooperative offenders.

One is a 'queue system' to ensure that the first to blow the whistle on fellow cartel members gets the maximum leniency benefits, even if it has insufficient evidence on the cartel at that point in time.

Being first in line grants full immunity from penalties, while the rest get decreasing 'discounts'.

Currently, whistle-blowers applying for leniency have to gather adequate evidence before turning a cartel in for investigation, said Associate Professor Burton Ong, who specialises in competition law at the National University of Singapore.

Now, they can 'mark' their spot in the queue by reporting the activities first and then gathering information later. This would encourage earlier disclosure of cartel activities, he added.

Also, businesses that are already being investigated for cartel activity can expose a second cartel they may be involved in, under a new 'leniency plus' sytem. This will net them a discount on the fines that may be imposed for the first cartel.

Mr Lim Chong Kin, a director at law firm Drew & Napier and co-head of its competition law practice group, said that since cartels 'operate on the basis of secrecy and trust', this may sow the seeds of suspicion and distrust within the group.

This 'significantly increases the possibility that someone will become nervous and blow the whistle', he said.

A spokesman for the CCS said these two new measures are already in place in other countries such as the United States, Britain and Australia.

In 2006, a company in Britain called Briggs Cladding & Roofing Limited won immunity from fines resulting from cartel activity because it was the first party to apply for leniency and voluntarily provide information, according to the Office of Fair Trading, Britain's consumer and competition authority.

So far, four applications for leniency have been received since the CCS implemented its leniency programme in 2005.

But both Prof Ong and Mr Lim said the efficacy of these new measures would depend on the ferocity of the CCS' enforcement efforts.

'In the US, where leniency programmes are fairly developed and successful, there is a correspondingly strong enforcement process - they can call in the FBI to investigate,' said Prof Ong.

'Merely building up one and not the other might not be enough to crack down on cartels.'