Many leaders have talked about that, but how many have actually done so? (Is it even possible to "push" for that or is the required action fundamentally different?) Why will China be any different? ("Because they must" isn't enough - lots of orgs have died rather than make changes required for their survival.)
Opening China to foreign banks would help a lot. The first consumer banks move into China on 2009, I think, but that might be pushed back.
People are smart there. Given the choice between a state owned bank which had 25% non-performing loans just a few years ago, and a citibank, they will choose the citibank almost every time. This transition could be blocked by the people on top.
My poorly-expressed point is that that's not really a "push" so much as it is a pulling back by the leader's organization, a giving up of power. Worse yet, it's allowing potentially competitive powers.
Orgs and their leaders gain power by controlling. Creating by giving up power is very different.
Put another way, you'll never get dynamic distributed growth through top-down decision making.
Yes, they need to give up power. If they don't, the change won't happen.
The ending note is interesting. I'd like to hear more about expectations of change in China. The growth of a middle class could help out a lot. The inevitable failure of the Great FireWall will help.
The biggest push will probably come from the top, as insightful leaders see the need for independent thinking and creativity -- the opposite of rote memorization.