Views on Finland's electricity generation system and its future development were also investigated in the study. Attitudes towards the deregulation of competition and the increase of market-based energy generation and distribution have been the principal focus of attention. Questions concerning this subject matter have been increased as and when the process of change in the national and international deregulation of the markets has progressed and its consequences have become visible in the everyday lives of electricity consumers.

8.1. Government vs. market-oriented steering

On the general level of principles, market-orientation is accepted to a relatively greater extent. Almost one in two (45%) agree that 'electricity should be an ordinary commodity, and the markets should freely determine the production, pricing and sales of this commodity'. There are somewhat fewer who reject this claim (37%). A clear trend of change can be detected when comparing this result with the earlier ones. The opinion in favour of market-oriented steering has gradually diminished over five measurements. The total change from the 1998 level - when households were first within the sphere of the electricity competition, which in turn raised people's expectations - is fairly clear [Figure 29.].

Another follow-up measurement also indicates that the belief in the markets has waned within the same period. The proportion of those who think that 'free competition is fairly unsuitable in the energy sector, which should be clearly steered and controlled by society' has increased year by year. In the latest results this claim emphasising the government's role is advocated by the clear majority of Finnish citizens (60%). One in four (25%) disagree [Figure 30.].

There are even more results communicating a similar kind of thinking, which almost smacks of socialism in the present situation of market liberalisation. The claim that 'the government should retain a sufficiently great share of ownership and voting rights in energy companies in order to guarantee the sufficiency and safety of energy' mainly evokes one type of reaction among the citizens - more than three out of four (78%) agree, while less than one in ten (8%) disagree [Figure 31.].

This claim has further strengthened from the previous year. Closer inspection of the opinions also reveals that they do not include any particular political or ideological charge. Although the supporters of left-wing parties emphasise the government's role more strongly than those of right-wing parties, this way of thinking is also wide among the latter (e.g., 70% of the supporters of the National Coalition Party agree with this claim, no figure). In the previous study, it was assumed that the sharpening of opinions may have been a result of the threats of the expected shortage of electricity at that time (the sufficiency of energy was discussed in the claim). As such claims have not been presented now, these attitudes may also be based on other factors.

Distrust of 'the energy market economy' is also reflected in the fact that two out of three (68%) respondents agree with the claim that 'the government and municipalities are better owners of energy companies than profit-seeking investors'. Only one in ten people disagree (14%). This distribution also reflects a somewhat wider acceptance than before (no figure).

On the whole, the results on this claim are ambivalent. Although there is trust in the beneficial power of the so-called invisible hand of the markets as such, electricity generation is regarded as an infrastructure in which the market powers should not be given a leading position. However, there are no wishes to amputate this hand, not even to handcuff it; it is mainly a question of ensuring that this hand acts for the collective benefit of society.