ABSTRACT
Seeking national political and public support signals the government's commitment to the process and more importantly to a transparent and publicly-accountable approach; it also reduces the risk of cancellation through a change in government. Governments that did not get the message were humbled, humiliated and even had their assets covertly and systematically confiscated as recompense within the International Monetary Fund and Bank supported privatisation framework. In non-industrial low-income countries in which reciprocity and redistribution continue to determine integration, privatisation having been automatically prescribed without much consideration to readiness in terms of institutions and to the inevitable social disruption arising there from was anything but successful. Privatisation effectiveness in countries where participation in civil society is controlled by the government either by suppressing freedom of expression, with-holding or restricting access to information or by limiting the public-comment process – aspects of social exclusion – must necessarily be less that optimal. Clearly, as demonstrated privatisation is multidimensional and multi-disciplinary.
