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.

7.1. Government vs. market-oriented steering

On the general level of principles, market-orientation is accepted to a relatively greater extent. Almost one in two (46%) agree that ‘electricity should be an ordinary commodity, and the markets should freely determine the production, pricing and sale of this commodity’. There are somewhat fewer who reject this claim (36%). This result is practically the same as in the previous year. The lack of change is significant in that it confirms the indication received last time that the trend in attitudes is stopping. Before this the opinion in favour of market-oriented steering gradually diminished over five measurements. The overall change from the 1998 level – when households were first within the sphere of the electricity competition, which in turn raised people’s expectations – to 2003 is fairly clear [Figure 31.].

Another follow-up measurement also indicates that the development of attitudes – the decline in belief in the markets – has stopped. 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 during the same period. Now this claim that emphasises the role of government receives the same attitudes as a year earlier. However, a clear majority (58%) is in favour of government control. One in four (24%) disagree [Figure 32.].

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 (79%) agree, while less than one in ten (7%) disagree. Even though the result does not substantially deviate from the previous one, a time series of six measurements indicates a trend towards stricter opinions rather than any slackening [Figure 33.].

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 widespread among the latter (e.g. 72% of the supporters of the National Coalition Party agree with this claim, not in the figure).

Distrust of ‘the energy market economy’ is also reflected in the fact that two out of three (67%) respondents agree with the claim that ‘the government and municipalities are better owners of energy companies than profit-seeking investors’. Only one in eight people disagree (12%). The distribution is practically the same as in the previous study. In the longer term, the popularity of public ownership has increased rather than decreased (no figure).

Naturally, ‘pure business’ and ‘stiff public’ are not the only operating models that can be thought of. As a sort of a third way a customer-owned model has been proposed and partially applied on a small scale (which does not mean, for example, industry’s resource company TVO, but joint projects of consumers and other such minor actors). The new proposal concerning this, 'To counterbalance market-based electricity generation, customer-owned (cooperative-based) production which sells electricity on an at-cost principle should be created in Finland’ is advocated by nearly two-thirds (62%, 7% disagree). Even though the support for the idea is extensive, the reception is not quite that of a top idea. It should also be noted in the interpretation that the claim contains a reference to profitable prices, which is likely to promote the support for the idea [Figure 34.].

On the whole, the results on this theme 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 in the best interests of the collective benefit of society.