What safety net?
What safety net?
The National Police's announcement before the New Year that
the country's crime rate increased by 10 percent in 1998 was not
as disturbing as learning the main cause for the upward trend:
With poverty rapidly rising, more and more people are resorting
to crime as a matter of survival. These past few weeks we have
heard reports of highway holdups, targeting trucks carrying food
supplies destined for urban centers. Some warehouses storing food
stocks have been looted.
And there are reports of people raiding plantations and shrimp
ponds to help themselves to the harvest. Many neighborhoods and
streets throughout the country have also become unsafe in recent
months.
Many of these robbers, looters and thieves did not hesitate to
use violence. In some cases, security forces were helplessly
outnumbered, or simply helpless. In others, they were even the
target of mob attacks.
Deplorable as they may be, these were acts of desperation
reflecting the increasing impoverishment experienced as a result
of the economic crisis. These crimes, and the impotence of the
security forces to stop them, raise the specter of anarchy, of a
breakdown in law and order or, worse still, of the social
revolution that several experts are already warning about. We are
certainly not far off from Aristotle's assertion in Politics:
"Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime".
For the security forces chiefs, the rising crime rate has
strengthened their argument for expanding the police force, and
hence their controversial proposal for establishing a civilian
militia. But a more thorough examination of the condition we are
in tells us that no police force, however great, and armed with a
cache of sophisticated weapons can prevent the hungry from
stealing when it is their only survival option. We will instead
end up fighting violence with violence; when that happens, the
spoken about social revolution becomes reality.
The increasing tendency for some to resort to crime to keep
themselves fed raises questions about the effectiveness, or
rather the sorry lack thereof, of the government's heralded
social safety net programs. The government has allocated nearly
Rp 18 trillion (US$2.4 billion) for programs precisely aimed at
cushioning the poor from the impact of the economic recession.
Last year, the World Bank also led an international consortium to
pledge Indonesia $14 billion in fresh assistance, mostly destined
for such programs.
The National Development Planning Board has admitted that only
30 percent of funds allocated for the programs for the current
1998/99 fiscal year ending on March 31 have been channeled so
far. Fears the money could be siphoned off by unscrupulous
government officials have slowed down the disbursement. Given the
notoriously sticky fingers of the bureaucracy, these are pathetic
yet valid concerns. The temptation to embezzle must be even
greater among corrupt officials today when times are hard.
The government has instead relied on grassroots non-
governmental organizations to help disburse most of the money
directly to the needy. This, too, means lengthy procedures and
administrative steps, including in selecting and supervising the
organizations involved, hence the delay.
As the crime figures attest, the provision of the social
safety net programs is the one and only viable solution to stem
their continued rise. We know what the problem is, and also that
there is no shortage of money to finance the solution, the
programs. Lacking, however, is a credible and capable
administration to push the programs through. It is up to the
government to get its act together, and quickly, to put the
social safety nets where they are desperately needed.