JP/ /POOR

JP/ /POOR

Accountability key to poverty eradication programs

A. Junaidi
The Jakarta Post
Jakarta

Indonesia has had a series of poverty eradication programs over
the past 20 years. Soeharto's New Order regime was hailed for the
decline in the number of poor, particularly from 1970 to 1995,
from 70 percent to 10 percent in 1995.

However, people living just above the poverty line, analysts
said, were highly vulnerable as long as they were without steady
jobs. This has become more evident since the monetary crisis
began in 1997.

As part of urgent programs carried out with international
financial institutions such as the World Bank, the Social Safety
Net program began.

But reports of leakage and that the funds were not reaching
the most needy eventually led to the halting of the program. In
its place programs like the disbursement of free rice to the poor
were introduced. Yet again, 74 percent of recipients are those
who are not poor, as noted by the World Bank's brief this month
to the donor group, the Consultative Group for Indonesia.

Despite such programs, the report said "households in
Indonesia are extremely vulnerable to falling into poverty" with
most people earning less than US$2 a day. It added that 53
percent of Indonesians lack access to at least one basic service
such as clean water.

Further, poor targeting of such programs led to the fact that
"of the Rp 4.83 trillion allocated to Bulog in 2003, over half
went as subsidy to the non-poor, almost a third was absorbed by
Bulog (National Logistics Agency) in operating costs and profits,
and only 18 percent went to the poor."

A lack of accountability has been blamed for the failure of
such programs.

"All the programs have 100 percent failed. After the funds
were disbursed, nobody reported it," Poverty Eradication
Committee (KPK) secretary Gunawan Sumodisastro told The Jakarta
Post recently.

While the government had failed, people could not help
themselves out of poverty either: Coordinating Minister for
Economic Affairs Dorodjatun Kuntjoro-Jakti has said the 7 percent
of economic growth needed to create jobs for an average annual
workforce of 2.5 million was not feasible in the next few years.

Poverty is simply the inability to meet certain standards of
basic needs, such as food, clothing and housing. BPS revealed
that the number of people living in poverty reached 37.1 million
in 2001 and increased to 38.5 million last year.

This year's poor people are predicted to increase due to
continued low economic growth, natural disasters and the
percentage of population growth approaching 2 percent. Major
incidents such as the Bali bombing affected the economy of
virtually an entire province, at the very least.

Since last year, programs related to poverty eradication were
coordinated by the KPK. Accountability is supposed to be more
clear; it is led by Coordinating Minister for Peoples' Welfare
Jusuf Kalla himself. The program now also involves universities
and business associations apart from non-government organizations
-- many of whose track records were questionable regarding
disbursement of funds to the poor in the Safety Net program.

Last year, the government allocated a total of Rp 2.96
trillion for poverty eradication programs, which were managed by
10 ministries and other government institutions.

The government allocated an additional Rp 4.4 trillion for the
poor in all provinces affected by fuel price hikes this year.

But according to a recent survey conducted by researchers from
several universities, most of the funds did not reach the poor.
Some ministries and institutions overlapped one another in work
related to similar targets. Abuse was reported in the form of the
inclusion of regular programs in proposals of poverty eradication
programs, in order to secure more funds.

Free health cards, financed by the fuel price increase subsidy
fund, were reportedly sold to wealthier people.

In Jakarta, subdistricts' officers could not identify the
poor, merely defined as people with Jakarta identity cards.

Officials with Bappenas said that regional administrators,
feeling empowered by regional autonomy, also arranged their own
programs while results could not be easily monitored.

The regional administrations often claimed they knew their
areas best and rejected government supervision.

Worse, no institution in the provinces submitted reports on
the disbursement of the funds. KPK so far has no data on how much
money has been used.

Now the government has announced new policies in its "White
Paper" including in poverty reduction. Things will be just the
same again if the main factors -- such as corruption -- which led
to the failure of earlier programs are allowed to be repeated.

Until problems related to, among other things, the absence of
a credible and clean body that can manage funds for the poor are
overcome, any poverty eradication program would only be a waste
of money without reducing the number of the poor in the country.