Govt must face up to Y2K threat, advocate says<\/p>\n
By Primastuti Handayani and Reiner S.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Indonesia is already behind schedule in dealing
\nwith the Y2K problem. What preparations are now being drawn up?
\nThe Jakarta Post interviewed Ichyar Musa, head of the national
\nY2K awareness division, a unit of the government task force in
\ncharge of handling the millennium bug problem.<\/p>\n
Question: Indonesia will also face the Y2K problem in the near
\nfuture. What steps have been taken by the government?<\/p>\n
Answer: Frankly speaking, we are already too late because
\nthere's only 293 days to go. But this doesn't mean there is
\nnothing we can do. Theoretically, we should have dealt with Y2K
\nproblems in sequential steps -- dissemination, inventory, risk
\nanalysis, prioritizing, and implementation. Due to the limited
\ntime available, it's impossible to do it this way. We must do it
\na parallel way.<\/p>\n
Secondly, we must prioritize important sectors. We can't solve
\nall problems but we must be able to handle emergency situations.<\/p>\n
So we have to prepare a contingency plan.<\/p>\n
Q: What sectors receive priority?<\/p>\n
A: My team sets priorities.<\/p>\n
First, utilities and energy. For instance electricity, fuel,
\ntelecommunications, water and gas. Those are utilities that
\nshould be secured because they are vital to the public.<\/p>\n
Second, the financial sector. The most crucial sector is the
\nbanking sector because of its dominant role in our lives. But the
\nmain concern is not our banking future failure in servicing
\npeople but lack of confidence in the public that the banks can
\novercome the problem. It could be fatal if there is a rush. We
\nhope it won't happen.<\/p>\n
The insurance sector also faces the same problem because it
\nuses information technology. It also concerns our people's
\ninterests.<\/p>\n
Our stock exchange system will also have to deal with it.<\/p>\n
Third, the transportation sector, especially air
\ntransportation which must be tightly secured because it concerns
\npeople's lives. There are two factors; the aircraft and the air
\ntraffic control system (ATCS) in airports.<\/p>\n
For example, Caltex Indonesia makes its aircraft the top
\npriority for its Y2K program.<\/p>\n
We know that air transportation is linked to international
\norganizational agreements. Aircraft components, which are
\nserviceable, are scattered around the world because they can be
\ninstalled in different aircraft.<\/p>\n
Some foreign airlines have predicted that there may be closure
\nof some airports due to the problem. Is Indonesia ready? We still
\ndo not know because the government has yet to make any official
\nstatement on our preparations.<\/p>\n
Land transportation -- buses and cars -- will not really be
\naffected by Y2K. There will be some individual cases which have
\nmodern technology such as cars with embedded chips, containing
\ndates. But the rich people will have no substantial trouble
\nsolving the problem.<\/p>\n
The problem could occur in our rail system. But trains have
\ntheir own manual security system, especially for signaling. For
\nthe ticketing system it does not really matter.<\/p>\n
Ships, maybe only tankers, which are computerized and only
\nhave small crews, are likely to be affected by the problem. What
\nwe are really concerned about is our harbor support devices,
\nwhich use an embedded system with logical controls.<\/p>\n
Fourth, safety and mass industries such as pharmaceuticals,
\nfertilizers. Our country's security system is likely to be
\naffected -- if our F16s are malfunctioning, we must be able to
\novercome the problem.<\/p>\n
Last, public services such as immigration. Those sectors can't
\nhave systemic failures due to Y2K problems.<\/p>\n
Q: What is the state of preparation?<\/p>\n
A: Well, the state of preparation is not really pleasing. For
\nexample, PT Telkom has reached the implementation stage. But the
\nimplementation has only reached the procurement level by holding
\nopen tenders to solve the Y2K problem.<\/p>\n
Telkom may not be ready because it just opened its tender. I
\nthink they can finish the crucial sectors including management
\nservices; revenues and billing system.<\/p>\n
More important are their services and telephone centrals???.
\nTelkom has effected the right steps but has yet to complete them.
\nIf in October it can't finish in time, it has a contingency plan.
\nMaybe there are several services which are deteriorating.<\/p>\n
But basic telecommunication services like telephone
\nconnections must be secured for people's basic needs.
\nSophisticated services like data communications could be at risk.<\/p>\n
Q: What about the electricity company (PLN)?<\/p>\n
A: It's the same because the electricity supply business also
\nuses IT (information technology). There are three divisions; IT
\ndomain, embedded system and business chain.<\/p>\n
The IT domain will save the billing and accounting systems.
\nBut if PLN can't fix them in time, it still can look for the
\nthree month average of the costumers' bills. As long as the
\ncomputers can print the bills, it doesn't really matter because
\nPLN's system is scattered. It's manageable, it's not included in
\nthe critical mission system.<\/p>\n
The embedded system in PLN is autonomous, except in Java, Bali
\nand Madura which use an inter-connection system with so-called
\n"scada" facilities. The most important thing is scada which can
\nbe switched off and changed to manual. Some of their power plants
\nuse old technology without embedded chips.<\/p>\n
All PLN reps have said the equipment complies.<\/p>\n
Q: Is PLN still testing the claim?<\/p>\n
A: Yes. But in PLN there are power plants, transmission and
\ndistribution, each of which has possibilities of having embedded
\nchips. The most likely parts to have such chips are power
\ngeneration and transmission. PLN said it needs some fixing and
\nwill be ready in time. New power plants must be fixed or changed,
\nwhich will require more funds. We want PLN to recheck the
\nstatement that the equipment complies with the Y2K program. In
\nPLN, some systems can be defaulted and set manually. It's no
\nlonger a matter of fixing the problem but of contingency.<\/p>\n
Q: What about air transportation?<\/p>\n
A: Some aircraft manufacturers like Fokker have guaranteed that
\ntheir products are Y2K-compliant. But Garuda has many kinds of
\nplanes. Fly-by-wire planes are fully equipped with chips.
\nAir transportation runs on very tight secured disciplines so we
\nbelieve the manufacturers' guarantee.<\/p>\n
The big question mark is over the ATCS because it has mixed
\ntechnology, mechanical and fully electronic. Our ATCS preparation
\nconcerns Indonesia's reputation. If we fail, no airlines will
\nland here. Jakarta will be a black spot. It's not about losing
\nmoney but our reputation.<\/p>\n
Q: Will the government announce its preparation in October?<\/p>\n
A: Well, we divide the year 1999 into four quarters. The first
\nquarter is until D-day minus 300 (March 7) and we are still
\ndisseminating information about the Y2K problem. The second is
\nfrom D-300 to D-200 (in June) and we'll inform the people if
\nthere is anything going on. It's about our effort to solve the
\nproblem. The third from D-200 to D-100 is the crunch. From D-100
\nto D-day is totally different -- it's about contingency and
\nurgency. We're fooling ourselves if we talk about fixing the
\nproblem, as we don't have time.<\/p>\n
Now is the time for contingency. Don't wait until October. In
\nOctober we will only disseminate the contingency measures.<\/p>\n
Q: Which sectors are the most prepared?<\/p>\n
A: It's difficult to say. For example, in Caltex, its IT domain
\nis 90 percent ready. The rest will be ready soon. Embedded
\nsystem, let's say, only 50 percent ready but the remaining 50
\npercent is not ready but they know how to finish it. But the
\nbusiness chain is only 10 percent ready. Caltex must do it and
\nask about the preparations.<\/p>\n
BCA is also ready. The IT domain and embedded system may be
\nready but what about the business chain? What if the telephone
\nlines are off?<\/p>\n
In general, IT-related problems in many industries can be made
\nY2K-proof. But the question is what about the business chain, the
\nproblem that may arise due to non-compliance of other sectors but
\nrelated to the companies which are Y2K-proof. A manufacturer and
\nits supplier is one example of a chain relationship.<\/p>\n
Unilever Indonesia is great. Since 1997, they have asked for
\nhelp in preparing the business chain.<\/p>\n
Q: What is the estimated cost for Indonesia?<\/p>\n
A: Foreign consultants have predicted that we need about US$1.6
\nbillion. If we calculate that Telkom will need more than $50
\nmillion, Caltex needs more than $15 million and Exim more than $7
\nmillion, then I think the figure is realistic. Don't think it's
\ncheap.<\/p>\n
The World Bank gave $32 million and Japan $18 million to
\nTelkom. We don't have the money.<\/p>\n
Q: Considering our limited money, human resources, what should
\nthe people do?<\/p>\n
A: Don't panic. Y2K may be terrifying but we can handle it.
\npeople must know exactly what Y2K is and how bad its impact on
\nsociety is. Don't overreact because this could trigger other
\nsocial problems.<\/p>\n
People must not rush to withdraw their money from the bank. By
\nthe end of April, internal and external auditors will supervise
\nbanks reporting their Y2K preparations to the central bank (Bank
\nIndonesia). BI must announce which banks are ready for Y2K and
\nwhich are not.<\/p>\n
The government must be straight and honest. It can be trusted.
\nDon't lie to people. Without trust, it will be disaster. If
\nsomething bad happens, we must know about it.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/govt-must-face-up-to-y2k-threat-advocate-says-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}