The transformation and orientation of the government's role in the reform of state-owned enterprises in China is a controversial issue in the theoretical circle of China. This paper attempts to explain the necessity and urgency of government reform by reviewing the reform of state-owned enterprises in China for more than 20 years and how western developed countries position the government role in dealing with the relationship between government and state-owned enterprises, so as to clarify the transformation and positioning of government role in the new framework of government-enterprise relationship in China. In the reform of state-owned enterprises in China, the role of the government is defined as: the owner and supervisor of state-owned assets, the designer and regulator of macroeconomic objectives, the cultivator and purifier of the market, the maker of industrial policies and regulations, the law enforcer and supervisor of the market, the pioneer of foreign trade and the defender of social security. Around this orientation, this paper puts forward several problems that should be paid attention to in the transformation and orientation of government role.

Keywords: state-owned enterprises, state-owned enterprise reform, transformation and orientation of government role, functions of public-owned government

The reform of state-owned enterprises in China has been going on for more than twenty years. Logically, there is such a main line in the reform of state-owned enterprises for more than 20 years: the reform of state-owned enterprises has always revolved around how to correctly handle the relationship among government, enterprises and markets. In the process of reform, the government has been committed to creating a relaxed atmosphere and environment for the reform of state-owned enterprises, and tried to change the rigidity and lack of vitality of state-owned enterprises through various means such as decentralization and profit-making. However, due to the improper role and positioning of the government, it is always difficult for state-owned enterprises to obtain operational autonomy. Moreover, due to improper role positioning and the absence and offside of the government, it is difficult to further deepen the reform of state-owned enterprises. Therefore, the transformation of government's role and orientation is the focus of state-owned enterprise reform in the coming period, and it is also the foreshadowing of state-owned enterprise reform.

First, the role and disadvantages of the government before the reform of state-owned enterprises in China

In the reform of state-owned enterprises, the essence of the change of government's role is to change the form of state-owned ownership by the whole people. The government, which adapts to the traditional planned economic system, has great control over state-owned enterprises and is highly concentrated. Enterprises are not based on the market in their business activities, but obey the short, medium and long-term national economic plans formulated by the government, and people, money and things are uniformly distributed by the government. From the formulation and implementation of plans to the control of financial investment and credit scale, from the adjustment of industrial structure to the formulation and implementation of income policies, from the management of state-owned enterprises to the guidance of economic activities, they are all under the unified administrative control of the government. Things that should not be managed by the government should be intervened by the government. For example, government departments directly intervene in the personnel arrangement and internal management of enterprises, participate too much in direct production and business activities, and the government functions overlap to some extent, and the "repeated construction" of institutions causes unreasonable interleaving and overlapping of government management behaviors; Interregional infrastructure such as postal services, railways, water conservancy and ecological environment, social security services such as medical care, old-age care and unemployment provided by the central government, and urban public services provided by local governments at all levels, such as public transportation, water and electricity supply and public sports and health services, are in short supply and cannot meet the needs of enterprises and individuals. The disadvantages of this government role orientation have caused many social problems and contradictions, which has made the social economy stagnate for a long time. Mainly as follows:

1, enterprise management is backward and operating efficiency is low. The main feature of the old state-owned enterprise system is that the state is both the owner of property rights and the operator of the enterprise. So in this case, state-owned enterprises are collectively referred to as state-owned enterprises. The state is a very abstract subject, and governments at all levels should be entrusted to run enterprises. In the process of operation and management, the government operates enterprises in full accordance with administrative management. From the appointment of personnel to the production, operation and sales of enterprises, it is run by administrative orders. The natural function of the government is to manage the society, and the government should formulate relevant institutional norms to guide and restrict the activities of social subjects. In this way, when the government itself is the operator of the enterprise, there is a serious conflict between the administrative role of the government and the role of directly operating the enterprise, which leads to the failure of the enterprise to play an interactive role and exert its maximum effect when performing its management function or business function. However, it must be emphasized that the natural function of the government is the function of social administration. At the same time, the government's personal management of enterprises will not only reduce the efficiency of its management functions, but also reduce the efficiency of its management of enterprises, so that the government's management behavior can not be effectively supervised. Therefore, the management right of the enterprise belongs to the state, and the enterprise management is backward, which leads to the low efficiency of the enterprise.

2. Highly centralized planning management seriously violates the law of value. The resource allocation, production and sales of enterprises implement a highly centralized planned management system, and the role of the government as the commander of overall management of economic activities completely violates the law of economic development. Enterprises run completely according to government instructions, which makes the creativity of enterprises lose all; The operation of the enterprise is carried out in full accordance with the plan instructions drawn up by the government in advance, and there can be no breakthrough. This makes the production and sales of enterprises blind, wastes social resources and reduces the opportunities to increase social wealth.

3. The egalitarian pot rice and the "iron rice bowl" restrict the development of enterprises. There are many disadvantages in the enterprise management system: the government artificially creates egalitarian cauldron for enterprise employees, doing more and doing less, and doing it or not is the same. Without scientific reward and punishment and incentive mechanism, enterprises will inevitably reduce the enthusiasm and creativity of employees, and the creativity of enterprises will inevitably decline. Enterprise employment is an "iron rice bowl" contracted by the government completely, which easily makes employees form an inert psychology and makes them not enterprising. In the social security of employees, enterprises, that is, the government, are responsible for the medical care and pension of employees, which has caused great financial pressure on enterprises and completely restricted their development.

4, the production results of enterprises have nothing to do with enterprises, enterprises lack the source of creativity. Under the old state-owned enterprise system, enterprises suffered losses and were subsidized by the state. On the other hand, enterprises cannot control their own production results, and all their profits must be turned over to the state. Enterprises have no right to control production profits. This management system of distributing production results makes the creativity of enterprises disappear and the ability of enterprises to create wealth is greatly weakened.

The above disadvantages make the production efficiency of state-owned enterprises low, the scale and competitiveness of enterprises are very limited, and cause a huge waste of social resources. The survival of enterprises is generally difficult, resulting in poverty and backwardness in the country. Therefore, the reform of state-owned enterprises and the transformation and orientation of government roles are problems that must be solved on the road of rapid development of the Chinese nation.

Second, the reform and development process of state-owned enterprises and the achievements made by the transformation of government roles.

In the past 20 years, the reform of state-owned enterprises has gone through several stages, such as "delegating power to benefit", expanding enterprise autonomy, implementing contract responsibility system, transforming enterprise management mechanism, establishing modern enterprise system, and focusing on the transfer of state-owned property rights. In these stages, the role and orientation of the government have changed to some extent.

1, "Decentralization and Profit-making" and the expansion of enterprise autonomy in the early 1980s. The main task is to reform the highly centralized planned economic system, endow enterprises with appropriate free management functions and expand their vitality. However, this is only a breakthrough. The right to operate an enterprise is basically in the hands of the state. All state-owned enterprises are still collectively referred to as state-owned enterprises, and the overall operation of enterprises is still carried out in accordance with government instructions.

2, the implementation of the contract responsibility system for the direction of a variety of modes of operation. Trial contracting and leasing operations, large and medium-sized enterprises across the country to implement a variety of business responsibility system. The separation of ownership and management rights has become an important theoretical innovation, which has enabled state-owned enterprises to operate in various forms, and the separation of ownership and management rights has begun.

The main feature of "delegating power to benefit", expanding enterprise autonomy and implementing the responsibility system for contracted management is that it does not touch the property rights of state-owned enterprises, but only gives them certain management rights, and the main management rights of enterprises are still in the hands of the government. In essence, the reform is still within the framework of planned economy, but it is loose. The whole China society, especially the government, has not been completely liberalized, and it is still bound by the planned economic system and rigid socialist concept. The role of the government is still positioned in the era of planned economy.

In order to ensure the state's fiscal revenue, the government implemented a two-step "changing profits into taxes" in 1983 and 1984. However, the marketization process of the whole economy lags behind the reform of the incentive mechanism of micro-enterprises, and the planning mechanism still plays a wide role. This form of reform reflects the efforts of China government to change its role in economic activities, and also shows that the mainstream thinking of China society about building a country has begun to change.

3. Transform the operating mechanism of enterprises. The state grants enterprises the right to operate in accordance with the principle of separation of ownership and management. Enterprises have the right to possess, use and dispose of the property authorized by the state. In the reform of transforming the management mechanism of enterprises, the responsibility system of contracted management constitutes the main content of the reform of state-owned enterprises. There are many forms of contract management responsibility system, the main form is the contract system of two guarantees and one hanging. However, the determination of the contract responsibility system is a "one-on-one" negotiation between enterprises and competent departments. This makes the short-term behavior, equipment assembly and predatory use of resources serious during the contract period.

The characteristic of the reform of state-owned enterprises in this period is that, under the premise of retaining the state ownership of enterprises, the state completely handed over the management right of enterprises, realizing the separation of enterprise ownership and management right, separating government from enterprises, and actively changing the role of government in managing the economy. However, there are many disadvantages in the reform during this period: although enterprises also implement joint-stock operation and corporate operation, in the management of enterprises, the management of enterprises is full of strong administrative color, the senior managers of enterprises are completely appointed by the government, and the major decision-making power of enterprises is completely in the hands of the government.

4. Take the establishment of modern enterprise system as the reform direction of state-owned enterprises. The 14th National Congress of the Communist Party of China clearly announced that the goal of China's economic system reform is to establish a socialist market economic system. The modern enterprise system with clear property rights, clear rights and responsibilities, separation of government from enterprise and scientific management has outlined the basic framework of the socialist market economic system, and China's economic system reform has since entered a new stage of overall promotion.

5. The reform of state-owned enterprises focuses on the transfer of state-owned property rights. The 16th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and the Third Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee demanded that public ownership should be realized in various effective forms. The establishment of a modern property right system with clear ownership, clear rights and responsibilities, strict protection and smooth circulation put forward by the Third Plenary Session of the 16th Central Committee from June 5th to 10, 2003 is an important idea guiding this reform. Under the guidance of this idea, state-owned enterprises transfer state-owned property rights in the process of corporate transformation, except for important industries and key fields that are related to national security and the lifeline of the national economy. For some small state-owned enterprises, the property rights of the whole enterprise can be transferred.

Establishing a modern enterprise system with the transfer of property rights of state-owned enterprises as the core is the focus of state-owned enterprise reform. Because, after the founding of New China, the state practices ownership by the whole people in enterprises, and the property ownership of enterprises all belongs to the state, and the state does not allow other non-state-owned entities to master the property ownership of enterprises. However, the singleness of the subject of enterprise ownership has shown great disadvantages, and the withdrawal of state ownership in some fields has become an inevitable trend. Therefore, the transfer of property rights of state-owned enterprises has become the last barrier to the reform of state-owned enterprises. The result of this reform may be that state-owned enterprises will no longer be state-owned, and some state-owned enterprises will be transformed from state-owned to non-state-owned From then on, any reform of these enterprises is not a problem of state-owned enterprise reform. Therefore, the transfer of property rights of state-owned enterprises is the final form of state-owned enterprise reform.

Looking back on the road of state-owned enterprise reform in the past 20 years, the achievement is that the country has broken through the barriers of planned economic system and embarked on the road of developing socialist market economy. The national economy has advanced by leaps and bounds, the country's economic strength has been greatly enhanced, and the people's living standards have improved significantly. These achievements should be attributed to the government's positioning and efforts in the reform of state-owned enterprises. However, with the reform of state-owned enterprises, there are still great problems in the role transformation of the government, which restricts the further advancement of state-owned enterprise reform. The government's special position as the agent of state-owned assets' property rights makes it still retain the right to intervene in the operation of enterprises, so that the operation of enterprises is subject to the administrative objectives of the government rather than the objectives of the asset owners. That is to say, the policy burden of enterprises has not been alleviated, the separation between government and enterprises is not complete, and there is "over-control" on enterprises in administration. Although most state-owned enterprises in China are ostensibly appointed and supervised by the board of directors. However, the situation of "one share is dominant" of state-owned shares has not been fundamentally changed, and the state-owned holding company is actually a flop company under the influence of the party and administration. Therefore, it is necessary for us to analyze the role and orientation that the government should play, and strive to change the current unfavorable situation in order to promote the deepening of the reform of state-owned enterprises.

Third, the theoretical and practical analysis of the government's role orientation.

(A) the theoretical analysis of the role of the government

In the process of state-owned enterprise reform, there are two popular views on the role orientation of the government in theoretical circles:

One view is that state-owned enterprises should control the lifeline of the national economy and cannot quit competitive industries. The government controls the national economy through state-owned assets in state-owned enterprises and non-state-owned enterprises. The main point is that the nature of a socialist country should be guaranteed by the subject of public ownership, and to explore various effective forms of public ownership, especially state ownership, we must adhere to the government's control over the national economy. It is a basic economic system in the primary stage of socialism in China that public ownership is the mainstay and various ownership economies develop together. The main position of public ownership is mainly reflected in: public assets occupy a dominant position in the total assets of society; The state-owned economy controls the lifeline of the national economy and plays a leading role in economic development, which is mainly reflected in its control. Establishing modern enterprise system is the reform direction of state-owned enterprises. It is considered that the property right system of enterprise legal person with clear property right is the key to establish modern enterprise system; Scientific corporate governance structure is the management mode of modern enterprise system; Joint stock limited company system is the main way to transform state-owned enterprises; State-owned enterprises cannot quit competitive industries, but should maintain the socialist nature with public ownership as the main body. China is a developing socialist country. In order to maintain social equity and make use of some advantages of the state-owned economy in the implementation of the strategic goal of catching up with and surpassing developing countries, the government has the characteristic of "concentrating on doing great things", and the state-owned economy must maintain certain control over the national economy.

The second view, based on modern western economic theory, holds that the reform of state-owned enterprises should break through the traditional concept of ownership in which public ownership occupies an absolute subject and control position in the national economy, and be carried out in full accordance with the requirements of the market economy, and there is no need for the state to control the lifeline of the national economy. This view holds that clear property rights are the key to the reform of state-owned enterprises, and the corporate property rights in modern enterprises should be clear and owned by the company's decision-making body, that is, the corporate representative body, and the corporate legal person has the right to possess, use, dispose of and benefit from the company's property according to law. The property right owned by the whole people is not the property right of natural persons. It is not clear who will represent the shares of China, a joint-stock state-owned enterprise. After the restructuring, the state-owned enterprises are still public ownership, so the state-owned shares must be controlled, so that the government representatives of state-owned shares must control the board of directors, and the legal person property rights cannot be independent of the original property rights. To this end, state-owned enterprises have withdrawn from competitive industries. Because only when "operating" enterprises are privatized can their property rights be truly clear, and the corporate property system and corporate governance structure can be established according to the requirements of modern enterprise system; Only in this way can the national economy maintain both the micro-level benefits and the macro-level total balance.

The author believes that the first viewpoint is in line with the discussion on ownership structure in the theory of the primary stage of socialism, and it is an important theoretical basis for the transformation and positioning of the government's role in the reform of state-owned enterprises. Reform is not a stormy revolution, but a gradual revolution. In other words, it was not carried out quickly under the condition of regime change, but gradually realized under the leadership of the original ruling party and government. Therefore, the reform of state-owned enterprises should adhere to the dominant position of public ownership, and it is necessary for the government to control the lifeline of the national economy. This is because the economic foundation of China's socialist countries is that the public ownership economy must be dominant, especially at this stage, we must explore various effective forms of public ownership. The advantage of the socialist system lies in the fact that the government can concentrate on doing great things and realize the common prosperity of the people. In the process of economic restructuring in China, there are still many places where the national economy needs government regulation. Macro-economy cannot be separated from the guidance and intervention of the government, and the government cannot lose control of the national economy. The latter view is not in line with China's national conditions in practice, and it is hard to be accepted ideologically. It involves the socialist nature of a country and the position and influence of a country's government in the whole national economy, and it has great political risks. Russia tried this model in the economic system reform, but it ended in failure.

(B) the experience of state-owned enterprise reform in western developed countries

In the reform of state-owned enterprises in Britain and Germany, the change of government role has played an important role. In this process, the government has mainly done the following work:

1. Provide necessary financial support for the reform of state-owned enterprises. For example, after the reunification of East and West Germany, Germany experienced a peak period of state-owned enterprise reform. At that time, the task of setting up the trusteeship bureau was to transform the state-owned enterprises in the former GDR. Due to the huge gap between East and West Germany in the basic economic system and economic development level, in order to eliminate this gap as soon as possible and make the reform of these state-owned enterprises go smoothly, the subsidy invested by the state finance is equivalent to 20 billion euros, which has paid a huge price.

2. Amend the existing laws to create a good environment for the reform of state-owned enterprises. In the past, both countries had laws on compulsory nationalization of enterprises in certain industries. Therefore, the British and German governments have done a lot of preparatory work in this regard, including amending the national constitution and deleting the restrictive clauses on the reform of state-owned enterprises in the original laws.

3, properly handle the problem of former state-owned enterprise employees. In the process of state-owned enterprise reform in Britain and Germany, employees are also faced with the problem of job transfer and diversion. In order to fully protect the interests of employees, their practices include: first, the transferee bidding for state-owned shares must provide enterprise development plans, the most important of which is the commitment to employees' income and welfare; Second, the relevant government departments are responsible for supervising the relevant commitments, so that employees of enterprises can get stable economic security in training, medical care, unemployment and pension; Third, the state set up a special pension fund for former state-owned enterprise officials; The fourth is to allow employees of the original enterprise to buy shares of the company at preferential prices.

4. Ensure the transparency of government supervision. Members of the board of supervisors of German state-owned (holding) enterprises include shareholders' representatives and trade union representatives. Under the guidance of the government, representatives of state-owned shareholders openly select directors or managers, mainly composed of directors or managers of private companies, bankers and economic experts, with few government officials. The government also guides the election of the chairman of the board of supervisors, stipulating that the chairman of the board of supervisors shall be recommended by state-owned shareholders and the vice chairman shall be the employee representative. Only with the consent of the board of supervisors can the board of directors make a final decision on major issues in the company's operation.

The reform of state-owned enterprises in Britain and Germany has achieved great success, which is mainly manifested in: clarifying the property rights relationship and improving the operational efficiency of enterprises; Introducing competition mechanism; Reduce the financial burden of the government. These successes provide a good experience for the transformation and orientation of the government in the reform of state-owned enterprises:

1, realize the separation of responsibilities between government and enterprises, and avoid simple privatization reform of state-owned monopoly enterprises. Because each government department independently reforms its state-owned enterprises, it often delays the reform process because of the interests of the department. Therefore, the correct approach should be to establish a separate agency to be responsible. German state-owned enterprises are managed by professional government departments according to the nature of the industry. For example, the federal railway is managed by the Ministry of Communications. In the process of state-owned enterprise reform, the financial department is responsible for formulating various policies and coordinating with relevant departments, and is responsible for the management of state-owned shares after listing on behalf of the federal government. Once listed, the Ministry of Finance will exercise the rights of state-owned shareholders on behalf of the federal government. The purpose of the reform of state-owned enterprises should be to generally improve their economic and social functions, so that state-owned enterprises can be transformed into real market economy subjects, but can not undertake social public functions. If state-owned enterprises want to undertake certain social functions, the government will give certain financial subsidies through financial subsidies. As the investor of state-owned enterprises, the government should not interfere in the management of state-owned enterprises, but should be restrained as a boss from the perspective of maintaining and increasing value. When reforming state-owned enterprises with monopoly nature, necessary competition policies and industry rules should be formulated at the same time. If the operating efficiency of state-owned enterprises can be improved before privatization or sale, there is no need for privatization, and the reform is not to completely abandon and deny state ownership.

2, step by step, don't worry. The shareholding system reform of state-owned enterprises cannot be privatized for the sake of privatization; The government can't set goals and time limits. It must transform one family when conditions are ripe according to the actual situation. If the government is eager to speed up privatization to obtain short-term benefits quickly and expand the scope of joint-stock system before designing appropriate competition and control measures, then the long-term goal of privatization to improve economic efficiency will be greatly reduced. Because many state-owned enterprises are sold at prices lower than the market price, the result of privatization can only be to reduce the government's net asset value, thus causing the loss of state-owned assets. In order to ensure the national interests of state-owned enterprises in the process of reform, the government has strengthened the role of supervision in the reform of state-owned enterprises and adopted the way of state holding.

3, to avoid the privatization of enterprises to intensify social contradictions. First of all, privatization of state-owned enterprises is usually accompanied by an increase in the number of unemployed people. Because the microeconomic benefits after privatization have become the only goal pursued by new enterprises, new enterprises often dismiss a large number of original employees, which has caused great employment pressure to society. Secondly, after privatization, some social welfare may be damaged. Before privatization, state-owned enterprises, especially infrastructure and service-oriented enterprises, generally provided products and services to the public at lower prices, which had great social welfare nature. After privatization, profit has become the most important goal of enterprises, and the social welfare of ordinary people will inevitably be greatly affected. Therefore, the role of the government in this process is the builder and service provider of social security.

4. Give full play to the effective supervision role of the government. After the privatization of state-owned enterprises, especially those that provide social products and services, it is necessary for the government to retain a certain say, because other capital will pursue profit targets and will be very different from state-owned enterprises in business philosophy. Therefore, it is very important to deal with the issues of government supervision and protection of the interests of other investors. In this regard, the practice of Britain and Germany is to make corresponding provisions on the division of enterprise management rights through agreements. For example, in Britain and Germany, for those enterprises that are not controlled by the state, state-owned shareholders still have veto power over major issues involving the national economy and people's livelihood or important infrastructure areas, and strategic investors are specifically responsible for daily operations. The government will also put forward corresponding requirements for strategic investors who participate in the transfer of state-owned shares, not only considering the price and financial strength, but also putting forward practical enterprise development plans.

Fourthly, the role orientation and corresponding responsibilities of the government in the reform of state-owned enterprises in China.

Under the condition of socialist market economy, the general requirement of the relationship between government and enterprises is to separate government from enterprises, and the government manages industries regardless of enterprises. In the reform of state-owned enterprises, the overall role of the government should be positioned as: the owner and supervisor of state-owned assets, the designer and regulator of macroeconomic objectives, the cultivator and purifier of the market, the maker of industrial policies and regulations, the law enforcer and supervisor of the market, the pioneer of foreign trade and the defender of social security.

The separation of government from enterprise is an important link in the transformation and orientation of government role in the reform of state-owned enterprises. Separation of government from enterprise means separation of government from enterprise. Enterprises are not affiliated to a government professional department, and the government only enjoys the owner's rights and interests in the capital invested in enterprises, and assumes limited liability for the debts of enterprises. Enterprises operate independently, be responsible for their own profits and losses, pay taxes according to regulations, and pursue market share and economic benefits. Enterprises are responsible for maintaining and increasing the value of state-owned assets. The government sends management representatives to enterprises, and does not interfere in the decision-making, investment and operation process of enterprises, but only monitors the results.

The government should manage industries, not enterprises directly. The government should take care of the planning, policies and regulations of the industry, that is, the development direction, industrial policies and administrative regulations, and face all kinds of industries, including large enterprises and small enterprises, as well as state-owned enterprises and other economic sectors.

The government can manage the political power of enterprises. Political power management is a general form of government management of enterprises, and its basis is that the government has state administrative power. Political power management applies to all enterprises in society, including state-owned enterprises and non-state-owned enterprises, that is, all enterprises in society must accept government management.

Through the above analysis of the positioning of the government in the reform of state-owned enterprises, the author believes that the government should do the following when dealing with the relationship between the government and enterprises in China:

(A) play a role in cultivating and purifying the market system

China is a developing socialist country with its own special national conditions. At present, we are faced with the arduous task of leading the people of the whole country to build a well-off society in an all-round way under the leadership of the party. The reform of state-owned enterprises is the main task of our government in the future, which determines that our government should play a different role from the former Soviet Union and eastern countries, developed countries and small countries with national conditions. As a developing country, the government's leading role in the economy should first be reflected in formulating a reasonable economic development strategy and a medium-and long-term development plan, that is, determining and giving play to its own advantages, promoting industrial upgrading and structural transformation, and realizing economic growth. As a government in a transitional country, the leading economic entry point should be to cultivate the market, improve the competition mechanism, improve the competitiveness of enterprises and industries in the international market, and realize the optimal allocation of resources. In this important historical period, whether out of the pressure of "catching up" or the need of promoting system transition, China government must play a leading role and play the role of "strong government". We should do something, not "govern by doing nothing". China is establishing and perfecting the socialist market economic system. Market economy is an economic model in which market forces determine the allocation of resources in the whole society. The government only carries out comprehensive macro-control over economic behavior, and generally does not directly intervene and influence it. The main activities of resource allocation are determined by market forces. In short, the government makes rules, administers according to law, and enterprises operate independently. In a developing country, in order to take advantage of the advantages of backwardness, the government must play a considerable role: effectively control the economic operation, guide the adjustment of industrial structure, standardize the behavior of market participants, cultivate and improve the market system, and purify the market environment; Accelerate the construction of the market system. The key point is to speed up relevant legislation and strengthen law enforcement; Accelerate the construction of social credit system; Introduce anti-monopoly law as soon as possible and establish corresponding law enforcement system; Severely crack down on all kinds of improper behaviors of administrative market segmentation.

(B) to play a macro-management role

Under the condition of market economy, especially in the process of state-owned enterprise reform, the government can act as a forward-looking strategist, predict future changes and formulate corresponding risk prevention plans. What the government has to do is what enterprises and markets can't do or operate badly. The government's way of economic management should be indirect control, that is, through the role of the market and the law of value, using "invisible hands" such as prices and taxes to guide enterprise activities, rather than directly guiding enterprise management through administrative orders. Only in this way can the market live without chaos, and the government can manage without death. The government should adjust the macroeconomic aggregate (price or quantity) instead of intervening in microeconomic activities. At present, the important means of government management is the control of investment projects. In the market economy and the reform of state-owned enterprises, individual project investment is a microscopic problem, which is a matter for enterprises and banks. Government macro-control should focus on the total investment and formulate effective fiscal and monetary policies. At present, there are many things that our government needs to do, for example, the government should formulate and implement correct industrial policies and regulations to make the economy run stably and develop at a high speed; The government should strengthen enterprises to improve legislation and law enforcement, and establish effective legal supervision. The government should oppose monopoly, protect fair competition, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers, stop unfair competition, establish good market behavior norms and so on.

(C) play the role of enterprise supervision

In the reform of state-owned enterprises, it is necessary to establish a normal market environment and let the reform of state-owned enterprises really participate. In order to ensure the normal order of the market economy, the government needs to strengthen or improve the advertising law, anti-monopoly law and labor protection law through a series of economic legislation, so as to establish a relatively complete set of corporate behavior norms. At present, the loss of state-owned assets, serious tax evasion by enterprises, increasingly serious environmental pollution, and violations of workers' labor rights have occurred from time to time, all of which require the government to strengthen supervision in this regard. The government supervision department should change from a single compulsory type to a guiding service type. We should not only use legal and administrative means to regulate the market, but also actively guide enterprises to regulate their operations and strictly self-discipline, effectively coordinate contradictions among enterprises, and solve problems and contradictions in the bud, so as to achieve twice the result with half the effort. With the intensification of market competition and the acceleration of the reform of state-owned enterprises, more and more new problems and contradictions are encountered in market supervision. In order to understand and master the first-hand information, on the one hand, the government should go deep into the grassroots to conduct research and convene enterprises for discussion; On the other hand, analyze, identify and judge all kinds of related problems, comprehensively summarize the key and main problems, find out the countermeasures and methods to solve the problems, highlight the key points, and strive to create a harmonious industry development environment. The supervision work should also be based on the actual development of the industry and the inherent laws of the market economy, adjust the working ideas in time in the management work, and clarify the work focus. In the reform of state-owned enterprises, corporate governance structure needs to be gradually established, modern enterprise system needs to be improved, self-discipline awareness needs to be strengthened, and management measures need to be standardized. Therefore, in the process of state-owned enterprise reform, the government should go deep into the market to conduct research, track the market trends in time, further understand the problems and difficulties existing in enterprises, formulate scientific and reasonable countermeasures and measures, touch the truth, make practical moves, do practical things, give play to the role of policy guidance, support and guarantee, serve the market players, serve the development of the industry, take the initiative to help enterprises, and combine some relationships.