It can be accomplished by sale or lease. It can be accomplished by the government selling 100% of an enterprise, or selling 51%, or even by selling a minority stake - so long as the private sector is given full managerial control. Without transferring control to the private sector, the government can rise money by selling a smaller share, but that is not privatisation as such. PROS
* Stops loss-making PSUs from adding to government debt;
* Depoliticises PSUs, remove governmental pressures for over-manning and the sub-optimal use of resources; * Gives new owners a strong incentive to turn around failing PSUs into successful businesses; * Gives new businesses access to investment capital that government cannot provide; * Raises more money for government through taxing former PSUs; * Expands an enterprise and an industry, in the long run creating more jobs and generating wealth for the country. Enterprises need to be efficient and competitive or they lose money, and the government cannot afford to subsidise such losses. And governments anywhere are not very good at running businesses. Whether the private owner is an individual, or a corporation with thousands of shareholders, peoples' own money is at stake, so they have a strong incentive to work night and day to ensure that their enterprise becomes successful and profitable. Government lacks those incentives, so government-managed enterprises fail to perform across the world. privatization change enterprises
Ultimately, privatization gives new life to an ailing PSU. But initially, privatisation changes three things -- incentives, priorities and access. * No one worries about economizing when they spend government money, but everyone worries about spending his or her own private...