Land reform answer to urban poor problem

Various programs targeted at the urban poor have yet to show results. Wardah Hafidz of the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC), a non- governmental organization working with the urban poor, spoke to The Jakarta Post's Soeryo Winoto on the issue. The UPC recently held the Asian People's Dialog in various cities in Indonesia.

Question: Has the central government and the Jakarta administration sufficiently addressed the complaints of the urban poor?

Answer: There have been no concepts or visions (regarding the issue). They (the central government and the Jakarta administration) tend to maintain all the problems (relating to urban poverty) and exploit the issue to become projects which involve huge money. Unfortunately there is no clear mechanism in the usage of the funds.

Some time ago the Jakarta governor distributed Rp 25 million in poverty alleviation program funds for each subdistrict. But how should the officials show accountability for the money? There was no clear ruling on accountability.

The program for people to switch professions has also been improperly implemented. Asking a becak (pedicab) driver to become a three-wheeled motorized vehicle (bajaj) driver is not simple. The officials should have studied and found out what kind of professions have (adequate job) markets before carrying out the "change of profession" scheme. In this way the (former) becak drivers could easily get a new (better) job.

Q: During this political and economic crises what should the government do to help the poor?

A: The "informal" economic sector needs protection and security. It should be adapted as an integral part of the national economic system. Don't classify it as illegal and informal. Why doesn't the government try to legalize the poor, who are mostly squatters. The government should make an inventory on land ownership and take over the use of vacant plots, which have been neglected by the owners for more than five years.

There must be particular courage to issue certificates for the plots occupied by squatters. The authorities should not have evicted them. This could happen only if the government considers the poor and their informal sector legal.

This is what the government should do if they want to help the poor -- not by seeking debts and distribute the money without public control and clear mechanisms of accountability.

The informal sector is a supporting factor to the national economy system, isn't it?

Q: Can we expect the business circle to help the poor?

A: Businesspeople must cooperate with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or other credible institutions which have adequate and proper field experience in dealing with the poor. Businesspeople usually don't have time for that, therefore such cooperation is a must.

Q: Demolishing slum areas and constructing apartment buildings for former slum dwellers has never been a success in helping the poor. Why?

A: How could such a maneuver help the poor? The apartments constructed by developers are too expensive for the poor to buy.

The poor families should be given the opportunity to rent the apartments. Or the authorities should make plots available for the poor families and ask them to buy the plots in installments. During the installment period, the (poor) people could collect money to build their own houses without the interference of a developer (which is profit oriented). The poor families could ask NGOs or other institutions with the design for their houses.

Thailand and India have carried out such a concept successfully. In India the poor families enjoy such a scheme as the price of the house they built was one-tenth of the price set by the developer. The government of Thailand has issued land certificates for 170,000 poor family heads. The land is located downtown where the poor families can do their daily businesses easily. If the land is located in the city outskirts they will need roads and means of transportation.

What the poor families need is guidance on how to save their money.

Q: The idea on land reform for urban poor has reportedly also been implemented successfully in Manila and Rio de Janeiro. Can the concept be applied in Jakarta, given the attitude of the bureaucracy toward the poor?

A: The paradigm must be totally changed. So far the Jakarta administration has thought that the biggest revenues are from the private sector (businesses) and formal sector. Why doesn't (the Jakarta administration) consider the informal sector as its asset, not a burden. The existing paradigm is outdated. Treating the poor and the informal sector as an asset means that the city administration takes care of them carefully and does its best to empower them.

There must be a strong political will at the central government level. There must be key figures who could assure the Jakarta administration, which is still in the euphoria of regional autonomy, about the new policy. The central government must fully support it. The key figures must be able to make the Jakarta administration understand and accept the policy.

Q: What's the criteria of being poor? What's the latest figures of the poor in Jakarta?

A: A very poor family -- with between three and five members -- earns Rp 150,000 per month. An average poor family -- with three or five members -- earns between Rp 300,000 and Rp 400,000 per month.

In terms of jobs, the poor work in the informal sector; in terms of residence, the poor are squatters.

In term of citizenship, they don't have any Jakarta ID cards and always feel insecure for possible eviction.

The number is between 30 percent and 40 percent of the 9 million people living in the metropolis.

Q: Our Constitution says the state takes care of the poor and neglected children (Article 34). It also guarantees that any citizen has the right to jobs and a decent, humane life (Article 27). However, the government has never succeeded in achieving this. Does this give the poor the right to sue the government for this?

A: Yes, absolutely. They deserve that. The problem is that the Constitution has been negated by gubernatorial or provincial decrees. Paragraph 2, Article 27 of the Constitution guarantees the citizens jobs and a humane life, but there is a Gubernatorial decree banning the operation of becak in Jakarta. A gubernatorial decree can nullify the Constitution in Indonesia.