• Home
• GOVERNMENT CXO
• E-GOVERNMENT
• CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
• TAX AND REVENUE MANAGEMENT
• GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
• GREEN GOVERNMENT
• GOVERNMENT DATA MANAGEMENT
• GOVERNMENT SECURITY
• GOVERNMENT CLOUD
• GOVERNMENT ANALYTICS
• GOVERNMENT GIS
• CONNECTED GOVERNMENT
• DIGITAL INCLUSION
• EDUCATION IT
• HEALTHCARE IT

Central Government, Citizen Engagement, Policy

Asians split on the future role of government

By Robin Hicks | 19 November 2009

Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union, and just as the global economy begins to recover from a painful downturn, Asian citizens have mixed feelings on whether government should have more control over industry and the distribution of wealth, according to a global BBC poll.

Photos

View photos

Related Articles

• Malaysia automates traffic rule enforcement
• Celebrating Asia's best practices in green government
• Vietnam aims to lead in e-government

Related Categories

• CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
• CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
• POLICY

From this Section

• NEWS

In China, seven in ten citizens think the government should play a more active role in regulating business and distributing wealth more evenly. Indonesians feel the same way. Sixty-five per cent say government should have more control over industry, while three in four want government to do more to redistribute wealth.

“There’s a sense that people feel cheated or, at the very least, short changed by free enterprise,” Rico Hizon, a BBC Correspondent and Presenter of the Asia Business Report on BBC World News, told FutureGov. “Many have lost their life’s savings because they invested in funds, stocks or property, and feel they have been hoodwinked by the private sector along with bogus fund managers and greedy traders.”

“And what did they get in return? Nothing,” he added. “All thanks to tumbling markets triggered by the sub-prime crisis. What’s more, they’re now seeing banks turning in big profits again, not to mention the return of big bonuses.”

In Australia, 59 per cent says they support the government taking a more active role to regulate business, while the same proportion believes that free market capitalism has problems, but those which can be addressed through more regulation in reform.

An Australian commentator told FutureGov: “I think that most Australians believe in free market capitalism, but are mindful of the fact that we have witnessed some spectacular corporate collapses through greed as a result – Ansett Airlines comes to mind, as well as the issue over access to infrastructure now owned by Telstra but which used to be a national asset.”

The commentator added that, in her view, the Australian government should have a controlling interest in industries that are of national significance, such as telcos, utilities and airlines. “This might not mean a 100 per cent stake; there is merit in partial privatisation. However, I am of the view that safeguards should be in place to avoid 100 per cent ownership going off shore.”

An overwhelming majority of Australians – 62 per cent – say that they want their government to play a larger role in redistributing wealth, with only 10 per cent calling for a smaller role. However, the commentator took issue with this, reckoning that the system works well as it is.

“Australia’s redistribution of wealth is through the taxation system and then redistributed through payments to those in need,” the commentator said. “Australians have one of the highest personal tax rates as well as the GST, so I’m not sure a more active role would be welcome.”

The commentator added: “Australia is attempting to streamline its regulatory regime. Regulation shouldn’t be overly prescriptive and we shouldn’t bind up the private sector in red tape. Regulation should be there to safeguard the public interest.”

Support for government intervention is similarly strong in India. One third of Indian citizens favour their government doing more to control and own major industries; only 29 per cent want government to intervene less.

However, Dr Didar Singh, Additional Secretary, National Highways Authority of India, is not convinced by the survey’s results. “Remember that the respondents are probably from a limited set, English speaking and mostly urban based,” he noted.

That aside, Dr Singh said that the survey threw up some interesting issues. “India has followed a conscious policy of government-led economic development to address issues of poverty alleviation and equitable distribution. It is probably for this reason that one-third of respondents in the survey have favoured more government control of the economy and a larger role in redistributing wealth.

However, he added: “The role of government in my opinion cannot be filtered from the responses to this survey. We have had, and continue to have, a strong and stable government and a robust democratic environment. India’s performance to through the recent global economic crisis has shown clearly the strength of our economy and its robust regulatory framework.”

Not all Asian citizens wants government to tighten its grip on the private sector or the redistribution of wealth, even those countries hit hardest by the economic downturn.

One third of Japanese think that government should play a smaller role in controlling the private sector. Only 14 per cent want more control. And more Japanese (51 per cent) are happy with how the government distributes wealth than any of the 27 countries surveyed.

In the Philippines, more people think there should be less regulation of businesses than in any country polled apart from Turkey, with more than one half of Filipinos saying they think government should play a less influential role in industry.

“The findings for the Philippines do not surprise me,” Ray Roxas-Chua, Chairman of the Commission on Information and Technology (CICT) told FutureGov. “I believe there is a general distrust of the government, whether justified or not. On the part of the CICT, we also believe in less government intervention in the ICT sector, except in cases where the public good is at stake.”

“Deregulation has certainly worked in some cases, such as in the telecom sector,” added Roxas-Chua. “The industry was deregulated in the 1990s and the private sector has driven infrastructure development since then. This has resulted in the growth of the mobile sector, which boasts a subscriber base of about 70 million out of a population of 90 million. It has also produced innovations such as mobile payment and wireless/landline packages.”

However, Roxas-Chua said that he believes some aspects of communications still require government intervention. “One area is the Philippines’ broadband penetration, which remains among the lowest in the region. Because of the economics of broadband infrastructure, the telecom operators have not focused their investments in this area. The CICT is currently in the process of formulating a universal broadband access policy that will hopefully bridge this gap.”

Another area where citizens want more regulation in the Philippines is the oil industry, because of a perception that the major oil companies are manipulating oil prices, said Roxas-Chua. “Of course, the fact that oil prices are dependent on the world market and that regulation will result in heavy government subsidies that the government cannot afford are conveniently forgotten.”

He concluded: “I believe that deregulation is the general direction major industries should migrate to, but it will only be successful if it fosters true competition. If the result is a monopoly or oligopoly, then the public might be better served with some form of government regulation. In the end, the people will prefer the model that they believe will best serve their interests.”

Pakistanis share a similar viewpoint to Filipinos. The majority of those asked are in favour of a less active role for government in controlling industry and they want less government regulation of businesses. And only in America do they believe more strongly that free market capitalism works well enough as it is and that more regulation would only create inefficiencies.

So why so much difference in opinion between countries? “I believe it all depends on how their respective governments work,” said Hizon. “Are they efficient and clear of red tape? Are they really working for the people and making the right investments? Are they free from corruption? If a government is competent and trustworthy, citizens will have faith in it. If not, it will find itself under pressure come election time.”

And what does the survey say about the changing role and perception of government in the wake of the economic downturn? Hizon said: “Without governments’ stimulus measures, and without central banks cutting interest rates, economies wouldn’t have recovered from the onslaught of the economic and financial crisis. Governments could now be viewed as the banks’ saviours, the lynchpin of the recovery.”