Controversy over bill on water resources

Nila Ardhianie, Coordinator, Indonesian Forum on Globalization, Surakarta, Central Java

With the delayed discussion of the bill on Water Resources (RUU-SDA) by the House of Representatives (DPR) and the proposed article on irrigation considered by the World Bank a divergence from its original accord with the Indonesian government, this financial institution is likely to cancel the Water Resources Sector Adjustment Loan (WATSAL) and the disbursement of its third or last phase fund worth US$150 million.

This World Bank threat has been one of the most recent issues arising along with the heated debate about RUU-SDA lately. Indeed, until the end of the House Working Committee's assignment and DPR-government sessions, legislators could not yet decide on such important matters as water export, the drinking water and sanitation regulating body, and irrigation management. It is the last issue that has triggered protracted tension between the government, the DPR and the Bank.

In line with the objective of WATSAL, the initial draft of the bill already directed irrigation management toward the Association of Water User Farmers (P3A), but the manuscript submitted by the government to the DPR was reportedly changed, in which irrigation management remained the government's responsibility.

The Minister of Settlements and Regional Infrastructures as the key official in the RUU-SDA discussion, only five days before the committee started working, announced a moratorium on the implementation of the Irrigation Reform Policy Program (PKPI), which basically delegated the regional government's irrigation management authority to P3A.

Government Regulation No.77/2001 on irrigation, issued to meet the requirement for the second tranche disbursement of WATSAL, stipulates that irrigation management is to be turned over from the government to P3A as a legal entity. Meanwhile, through his letter the Minister of Resettlements stated that the DPR disapproved of the delegation of authority.

It was also indicated that article 42 of RUU-SDA already reflected the DPR's view, which expected the irrigation management authority to remain in the government's hands. This article was later rejected by the Minister of Home Affairs in his letter dated Sept. 18, with the argument that the government regulation as the basis for P3A's authorization had been communicated to all farmers with very positive response, so that this matter should become a major consideration in drawing up RUU-SDA.

Before the completion of WATSAL, the World Bank had prepared a big project designed for 19 years to support the implementation of rules as WATSAL's output in half of the Indonesian territory. The WB support for Indonesia's Water Resources and Irrigation Sector Project, scheduled for 2004 -- 2014, will be assisted by the Asian Development Bank and the Japan Bank for International Cooperation so that it can be realized all over the country.

The other crucial problems in RUU-SDA are drinking water and sanitation regulating body and water export, which only started to be raised when the working committee was functional and may apparently be a new stumbling block in the passing of the bill into law. The regulating body was proposed by the Ministry of Resettlements and water export by the Indonesian military/police faction of the DPR.

Some circles have questioned why the two major topics began to be considered when the process of legislation had reached such an advanced stage. WATSAL was started in April 1999, whereas RUU-SDA as a government initiative was officially submitted by the Minister of Resettlements to the DPR in November 2002.

While the article on irrigation is closely related to the World Bank, the proposed Indonesian Drinking Water and Sanitation Regulating Body (BRAMSI) is part of the ADB technical assistance project of the Regulatory Framework for Private and Public Water Supply and Wastewater Enterprises.

It is a grant from the Japanese government worth US$790,000, channeled through the Asian Currency Crisis Support Facility for the development and operation of a regulatory framework to protect the interests of relevant parties, including poor communities, and create conditions conducive to the private sector's participation.

Amri Husni Siregar, a member of the RUU-SDA working committee, warned that the government proposed regulating body was very dangerous because it would become a point of entry of privatization in the water supply sector due to its regulation to ensure smooth investment inflows. Besides, with its authority to fix subscription rates, this body will later certainly favor investors' interests.

The charges that RUU-SDA is more focused on how to utilize water for economic or commercial purposes than on its conservation aspect have at least been proven by the DPR's own proposal to regulate or permit water export.

There has been fairly strong opposition to water export, particularly because the majority of the population is as yet without proper access to clean water.

This export involves the extraction of water and its shipment to other countries for profit making, which usually requires the displacement of large quantities of water from its natural reservoirs, including rivers.

With the impact that may arise from the provisions in the bill now still pending, it seems that the statement by the environment minister as reported by several mass media can serve as a guide.

The minister warned the government and the DPR against producing RUU-SDA only out of lobbying without examining long- term interests. He also emphasized that the formulation of a legal product concerning water as a public asset should be based on the management concept of resource sustainability.

The approach put forward by the environment minister deserves our affirmative response. Only by applying sustainable resource management can the availability of water to the human race on this planet be guaranteed in the future.