The time is right for Indonesia, as the world's most populous Muslim nation, to assume a more prominent position in Asia and throughout the Muslim world. In response to President Obama's warm overtures to Muslim countries for a new phase in relations with the U.S., Yudhoyono can take the lead and chart a new course for the region.

Economists have agreed that in every regulatory case, governments can never attain the same level of information as the company. Companies always know more about their own situation compared with the governments that regulates them.

The danger with this information asymmetry is that companies may inflate their actual costs and pass it on to consumers to pay. They may choose to deal with particular suppliers related to them (possibly a subsidiary of their parent company) rather than other suppliers offering lower prices.They may refuse to expand their network to slums or scarcely populated areas citing the reason of lack of capacity, although they actually can. Or, companies may conflate the number of leakages to add to the cost component.

As a result, governments must then be very well-equipped to be able to regulate water companies effectively; they must have all the technical, financial and legal auditing capability to discern and decipher information about water utility. The problem in most developing countries is that governments lack these regulatory capacities both in terms of human resources, technology and budget.

One way to mitigate this problem is by introducing transparency to the sector. Stakeholders can complain if they know that the company prefers to strike a water supply deal with real estate developers rather than invest in poor areas.

Potential suppliers can complain that they have been discriminated against, despite their ability to supply with cheaper costs. With transparency, governments can have help in interpreting information from other water companies, creditors, suppliers, consumers, NGOs, academia, the press or other interested parties.

However, it is difficult to make water utility companies agree to transparency. This response is natural as it is always better for them to conceal information than to be transparent.
Companies protect their information through confidentiality clauses in contracts and through trade secret laws. Freedom of Information laws typically do not work as they provide a blanket exception to disclosure when it comes to commercial confidentiality.

Provision of water and sewerage services has traditionally lies upon the responsibilty of the state for ages. Internal market integration and liberalisation processes so far had always exclude water sector from its agenda. Even until today, there has been no sectoral regulation adopted by the EU concerning liberalisation of water and sewerage services. The Parliament in its Resolution makes clear of its position that it rejects water being put in a sectoral directive due to its regional characteristics, but calls for “…without going as far as liberalisation, for water supply to be ‘modernised' with economic principles in accordance with quality and environment standards and the needs of efficiency”.

However, the Comission had shown its interest in liberalising water and sewerage service. The annual turnover of the water sector in EU is estimated at 80 billion Euro, more than the turnover of the gas sector. The Commission has expressed concerns that horizontal and vertical restrictions from long term supply dealings “…may be harmful and contrary to EC law even where national law allows them”. In its internal market strategy for 2003-2006, water is listed as one of the area where” new action may be required”, by reviewing legal and administrative situation in the water and waste-water sector, which include an analysis of the competition aspects.