We Need a Government That Thinks Long-Term—Two Sessions Salon, Lei Jufang

　　Lead-in: For a long time, China has adopted a “big-government” model in which the government has been the primary driver of economic and social development. The state has concentrated too many social resources, which on the one hand have led to low efficiency and widespread corruption; on the other hand, they have squeezed the room for survival and growth of market-oriented entities—especially private enterprises—and stifled the public’s enthusiasm for innovation, entrepreneurship, and wealth creation. What does an ideal government look like through the eyes of entrepreneurs? How can economic system reform strike the right balance between government and market? And what is holding back Chinese private enterprises from growing stronger and bigger?

　　This issue’s salon is themed “What Kind of Government Do Enterprises Need?” Over a two-month period, China Entrepreneur magazine conducted a survey of 100 enterprises to identify their voices and concerns. At the 15th China Entrepreneur “Two Sessions” Salon, we’ll join forces with renowned entrepreneurs and scholars to discuss strategies for the future.

　　Lei Jufang, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and Chairwoman of Tibet Qizheng Tibetan Medicine Co., Ltd., said when participating in this salon that we need a government that thinks long-term. “Right now, whether it’s the smog or the alarming levels of land and water pollution along the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, we’re seeing serious problems. Yet, in some new development zones and in attracting investment, there’s clearly insufficient careful consideration of these issues. I believe that in these areas, the government needs to adopt a more long-term perspective.”

　　The following is a transcript of Lei Jufang’s remarks:

　　Lei Jufang: As I understand it, General Guo (Guo Guangchang) pointed out that China’s pharmaceutical R&D has now reached a level comparable to that of other countries. There are increasingly more so-called “functional” products being marketed under the guise of medical device names—simply because they’re inexpensive and require minimal investment. Actually, we could issue a specific regulation prohibiting this practice. It’s fine to develop an electronic device; it’s also fine to create a physical one—but both would still need government approval. We’ve done some statistics: in recent years, for instance, there have been numerous cases where people with the same name and surname have developed drugs, and as soon as one of these drugs is launched, many others with the same name immediately appear across the country. During my previous term as a deputy to the National People’s Congress, I started raising this issue. Back then, there were just a dozen or so such cases; today, the number has grown to over a hundred.

　　I feel that this area really gives the impression of a particularly long road ahead. We’re encouraged by the confidence instilled by the new administration, and we hope that in this regard, the government will ensure strict adherence to the law—and that there’ll be coordinated efforts from top to bottom. Now that this administration has a clear vision, provincial governments, with their own interpretations of development goals, won’t engage in such practices anymore.

　　We need a government that takes a long-term, strategic approach. Right now, the situation—whether it’s smog or land and water pollution along the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River—is already extremely serious. Yet we’ve seen that in some new development zones and in certain investment promotion efforts, despite considerable pressure on local governments, there’s been insufficient careful consideration of these issues during the process of attracting investment and driving project development. In my view, the government needs to adopt an even more long-term, strategic perspective in addressing these challenges.

　　Another point I’d like to make is that I hope we can create an environment characterized by faith and tolerance. When it comes to Chinese citizens, there’s indeed a gap compared to Japan—but I’ve noticed that in certain regions of our country where people are particularly devout, we still see signs of reverence and inner light remaining alive and vibrant. I think when we go shopping or watch a show, it’s inevitable that some people will get frustrated after waiting in long lines. Yet those individuals don’t seem bothered at all; they’re remarkably calm and composed. Of course, not all of us are like that—why is that? Because they have faith. And having faith is undoubtedly a good thing for any nation.

　　I’ve always felt that such a belief clashes somewhat with our values, which is why I choose not to tolerate it. When our government engages with the public and allows these two beliefs to complement each other, we’ll be able to embrace tolerance and provide them with a more harmonious world.