On the last quarter of 2010, residents of Indonesia were bemused of the news upon the planning of House of Representative (DPR) building construction. It appeared to be one of the very first lists on government budget for this period. Controversial between some parties happened in order to support or even oppose it. Society rejection also happened while DPR still believe that this planning will be implemented on this period.
According to Marzuki, the chairman of DPR RI, the new DPR building construction is one of two institutional reinforcement program which has been prepared in the DPR strategic plan 2010-2014. In order to strengthen these institutions, there are two ways of program conducted. First, support management program and enforcement of other technical duties. Second, facilities and infrastructure improvement program.
“DPR Construction building supposedly began in 2010 and completed in 2014, but considering social and political aspect, the plan have to be delayed and is planned to be implemented in 2011,” he said.
The general secretary of the Parliament, Nining Indra Saleh, explained that the 32 meters square working area is filled with members of the House of Representative and one assistent and experts. Hence, lots of complaints about the need for new building. She also said that preparation and building plans have been made since the period of 2004 – 2009. This plan and policy is final and has been determined through the consultation meeting, the council and Domestic Affair Agency (BURT) DPR on October 19, 2010. The decision also has been established at Plenary Meeting of the Law on Ratification Budget (UU APBN) 2011 on October 26, 2010. Inside UU APBN, it contains the allocation of new building construction.
Based on state revenue and expenditure budget (APBN), DPR building construction cost on 2010 spent IDR 383.231.827.000. This year allocation for DPR building construction increases become IDR 8 billion while the cost for DPR building construction that has been planned is about IDR 1,1 trillion and revised to IDR 770 billion.
Consideration toward budget and government spending in Indonesia that created lots of debts in the past make this construction building controversial either from society or even the parties that involved as the members of House of Representative itself. Not to mention the social gap in Indonesia that is really big makes this building construction not feasible to be accepted by society. This also happen to majority faction in DPR which was originally approved the plan of building construction turn into against it. As the criticism from society increases, some fraction of DPR decided to reject the plan. Fraction that rejected this plan are Gerindra, PAN, PKS, PDIP, PPP, and PKB. Demokrat, Golkar, and Hanura are still consistent in supporting the plan of building construction.
Another point of view comes from vice coordinator of Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW), Emerson Yuntho. He said that Marzuki’s action in the case of building construction is out of the official policy of Demokrat party which state to support government’s performance and make the 2011 – 2013 period as the years for working for citizens, not political.
“In the case of DPR building construction, a question arises. Does Marzuki Ali work for people, himself, the political elite, or contractor?” Emerson added.
In order to face various kinds of problems related to this building construction, Marzuki hopes, members of DPR should have commitment and consistency in attitude. “This is very important to build state and nation. How is it possible to build the state and nation if the character of the nation is far away to sportive, and how we can be trusted if there is no commitment and consistency,” he added.
Controversial happens between the budget that assessed too high seeing the economic and social condition of Indonesia’s society right now and the need of members of DPR upon the new building since the last time DPR building constructed was in 1965. The general secretary of DPR believes that this is needed to increase the performances of members of DPR since the current building is seen to be less appropriate. Construction of building based on the needs that has been indicated by the condition of existing space work currently.
Seeing those controversial from two sides of the house, society doesn’t see any urgency in order to build the new building. The urgency comes when it significantly harm people if it doesn’t conducted. Poverty, education, inflation, debt, starvation here and there are several kinds of urgency problems that should be solved immediately. The stance of society in opposing the plan is stronger than the stance of chairman of DPR has. Society has so many reasons to oppose it, while there are lots of people out there suffering from starve, small people living conditions are mostly difficult. Those problems coupled with the luxury houses of members of parliament, luxury facilities, power they have, and now will be completed with luxury building work. It shows how the urgency comes up for those of society who needs to get help with the fund rather than to build some building that still appropriate for working. But however, Marzuki believes that in order to build DPR building, we should not only imagine the next 5 years, but also 50 years because the next period, the number of parliament members can be increased.
The later effect of this building construction is that society will probably lose their credibility to government. The transparency of the budget is not exists. Nominal fund that has been told to public is only for the physical structure, 1,138 trillion. While the cost of furniture, IT, and security systems are not described. Potential loss of the government financial would be enormous if this building keep continues. It also convinced by General Secretary of Indonesia Human Rights Committee for Social Justice (IHRCSJ), Gunawan, that the action of Marzuki ignored the signal from President toward budget savings. President has instructed the delay and cancellation upon new building construction within either the governmental or non-governmental institutions if it is not necessary. That will resulted into less credibility that society has for government.
The urgency and the feasibility of this mechanism to build new parliament building are not supported by some reasons behind it. It will be resulted into disappointment from the society. This society rejection should be one of the biggest influences in deciding the using of government budget to conduct the new parliament building.
Della Karina
Economics Studies of BEM
Faculty of Economics
Padjadjaran University
No comments:
Post a Comment