Private vs state charity

Barely two weeks into her job, Siti Hardijanti Rukmana has plunged into her post as minister of social services doing what she is probably best known for: organizing a massive fund-raising campaign for charitable causes. She is entrusted with collecting the annual salaries of President Soeharto, Vice President B.J. Habibie, the entire Seventh Development Cabinet, all 27 provincial governors and first-echelon and other top government officials. She has also made a direct appeal to those in the private sector to jump on the bandwagon.

Hardijanti is preparing various programs to channel the money she is collecting to good use. The first of these, launched this week, is the distribution of free food to the needy, through Warung Tegal (inexpensive food stalls run by people from the Central Java town of Tegal) in Jakarta and other major cities.

In the past, the Ministry of Social Services has traditionally been a low-profile, technical department whose main tasks were rehabilitating and aiding socially deprived people and organizing disaster relief operations. Now, the ministry has suddenly become a high-profile government agency. This may be due to the call of time: the economic crisis has given greater cause for the ministry to be more proactive than in the past. But there is no doubt that the presence of Hardijanti -- the eldest daughter of President Soeharto, a politician, a businesswoman and a charity activist -- at the helm has contributed to the added sparkle.

While the government running its own charity movement is all well and good, even noble, we hope this will be an exception to the rule, say, until the economic crisis is over, if not before. At a time when many people are being deprived of their basic needs, the nation needs some symbolic gestures of solidarity from those who are better off. It is in this light that the campaign should be looked at.

In the long run however, the official campaign to collect the salaries of highly paid executives, from both the private and public sectors, will divert funds that traditionally have gone to privately run charities. Many of these groups have long existed to channel funds from donors to the needy. Most work quietly, as all charity groups should, but their work is no less noble. Private groups offer flexibility and work more effectively as they are not subject to bureaucratic constraints.

A sustained nationwide fund-raising campaign on the scale being run by the Ministry of Social Services could endanger the existence of these private groups. It could lead to unhealthy competition between private charity and state charity for the same pool of funds. In such a situation, in the Indonesian context, state charity will crowd out private charity.

While the official campaign is voluntary, the state has been known to be forceful, even overzealous, in managing such programs in the past. The recent "Love Rupiah" drive, for example, was twisted by some people into a campaign to paint those who did not participate, for whatever reasons, as unpatriotic.

Most people are charitable by nature. They cannot bear to see fellow human beings suffer. This is why many charity organizations have flourished in Indonesia. Without government prodding, many people already willingly donate part of their spare wealth to charitable causes, either through religious and charitable organizations or directly to beggars and street collectors. While many may not have any qualms about donating money to government-run charitable causes, this begs the question: whatever happens to the money people pay in income taxes and sales taxes?

If the government intends to raise more money from the public, for charity or other purposes, it should do so through taxes, and not by setting up a separate fund. The objection to a separate fund is clear: there is a high likelihood of poor administration and accountability. The scandal over the use of public money to finance last year's SEA Games should serve as a warning that government accountability for extra-budget funds is sorely lacking in this country.

Without intending to diminish the noble intentions of the ongoing official campaign, we feel Minister Hardijanti would be better off focusing her energy on helping and coordinating the work of the existing privately run charity organizations. There are many others deserving our charity in the present crisis and the private groups are often better equipped to act. Starving Irian Jaya villagers, for example, are as much in need of our helping hand, if not more, than the urban poor that the official free food campaign is targeting.

Given her immense experience in philanthropic activities in the past, Minister Hardijanti no doubt knows where and how the government can assist these groups. As a former activist herself, her voice in the cabinet will carry weight in lobbying for tax breaks for donors and charitable organizations.