Consultation matters

Consultation matters

The government should be commended for its handling of the
economic crisis. It has literally bent over backwards in trying
to fix the crisis, negotiating with the International Monetary
Fund, securing nearly US$40 billion in aid, intervening in the
currency market, working out a new deregulation package, closing
a number of insolvent banks, and bailing out small depositors and
helping out displaced bank employees.

But as the rest of the nation waits -- with anticipation if
not in disquiet -- for each next government move, there is a
nagging question about this whole show: the government has been
going it alone. There has been little, if any, public
consultation as it introduces one measure to the next. The House
of Representatives, and therefore the people it is supposed to
represent, have been virtually sidelined from all of these
efforts as the government deals with the crisis.

Very few of us doubt the sincerity of the government's
intention, and, judging from the positive reactions in the
currency and stock markets this past week, even fewer would
question the measures that have been taken. With few exceptions
-- such as the Bank Andromeda's lawsuit against the Ministry of
Finance at the Jakarta State Administrative Court -- the general
response to the government's measures, at home and abroad, has
been very positive.

But that still does not excuse us from doing away with the
process of public consultation, an essential element in
democracy. This is a crisis that the government cannot, and must
not, handle alone. Public participation in the government's
decision-making processes is even more imperative at times like
these. With the economy now heading towards a recession, people
will soon be asked to make many sacrifices. They are more likely
to accept the bitter pills prescribed by the government if they
are involved in the process from the very beginning.

Since the monetary crisis began in July, we can recall only
one instance when the government consulted the House: by Minister
of Finance Mar'ie Muhammad on Sept. 16 prior to his announcement
to postpone dozens of costly government projects. That decision
won immediate House support. Opposition eventually came from
within government agencies affected, and some of the projects
shelved have since been revived because of powerful vested
interests.

We can think of many other measures that should be, or should
have been, subjected to consultation with the House since then.
The deal with the IMF is one. Some of the IMF's tough terms --
like ending the fuel subsidy -- would deeply hurt the poor. The
government's decision to spend Rp 2.3 trillion on depositors of
the liquidated banks, and to pay for the salaries and severance
pay of staff of the closed banks, should also be subject to the
House's scrutiny. Even if the money comes from fresh foreign
loans, and not out of the state budget, taxpayers should be
informed because they are the ones who will have to pay off the
loans eventually.

The House, which has just been installed on Oct. 1, has been
watching almost idly, never once questioning the
constitutionality of the government's measures. This is happening
even as the honorary members were debating about the need for a
stronger and more effective House, vis-a-vis the executive
branch.

Given Golkar's huge majority and its backing from the Armed
Forces faction, the government can always count on the strong
support of the legislative branch. There is no doubt the latest
economic measures would have been swiftly passed and endorsed
with little opposition had they been brought before the House.

This may appear to be a mere formality, but the least that the
administration should do is to respect the process of
consultation as required by the present political system,
irrespective of all its shortcomings and imperfections. It would
be as good a way as any to start toward a more democratic life.