http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditorial.asp?fileid=20070619.E03&irec=2
A few good people and local government Sugeng Bahagijo, Jakarta What is the best way to halve the number of Indonesian poor, ensure all children complete primary education and cut the maternal mortality rate by three quarters, as set out in the UN's Millennium Development Goals? Certainly money does matter. But how much money is enough to achieve these MDGs by 2015? Indonesia's Human Development Report in 2004 recommended that Indonesia double its social spending from 3 percent to 6 percent of GDP to fulfill the MDGs. According to the government estimate, Indonesia requires Rp 5 trillion per year to provide the public with access to clean water and sanitation alone. What will happen if the government and international donors fail to allocate that amount of money? What other factors are instrumental in helping Indonesia achieve the MDGs? There is a widely accepted consensus that the achievement of the MDGs requires efficient and equitable public services, especially when it comes to water, electricity, healthcare and education. The debate rests with the choice of policies. Commercialization and privatization of public services is possibly a choice, but the experiences of some regional governments has convinced me that revitalization of local government is the best answer. A number of local governments have pursued more creative and innovative policies and practices than those of the central and provincial governments in the delivery of basic public services. Compared to central and provincial governments, regency and municipal administrations stand a greater chance to expand and improve the accessibility, affordability and quality of public services and help raise people's welfare. Consider the three success stories of Kupang, Jembrana and Makassar. The Kupang regency administration in East Nusa Tenggara is looking for 100 more physicians in order to provide reasonable public healthcare and meet the minimum health services. While it remains uncertain how the local, the provincial and the central governments will cope with the deficit, the recruitment is a pressing need. Starting this year, Kupang administration also plans to implement health insurance for all residents. Driven by the regent and learning from good policies and practices of other administrations, among others Jembrana, Kupang has adopted better health policies. The case of the Bali regency of Jembrana is more interesting. With its rural context and modest regional budget of Rp 300 billion, Jembrana administration has managed to provide better public services for residents. All of Jembrana residents are currently covered by health insurance. Schools, teachers and students enjoy subsidies and scholarships. Through efficiency in personnel and financial management, Jembrana is able to save money and allocate it for public services. Jembrana Regent Winasa is also well-known for his visionary ideas and achievements in implementing his ideas. Many local government officials from all over Indonesia have visited the regency to compare and to learn from its bold policies. Makassar, a city of some 500,000 in South Sulawesi province, is a growing and economically important hub for eastern Indonesia. But many of its children are out of school because of expensive fees and bad the poor physical condition of many of the school buildings. Many poor also have difficulty in accessing community health post (Puskesmas) services. Makassar Mayor Ilham Arief Sirajuddin, after announcing his pledge to improve the Human Development Index ranking of the city, introduced several bold steps: free healthcare at Puskemas and free education in selected areas, especially those with large numbers of poor and disadvantaged residents. The free healthcare began last year, while free education took effect this year. Thousands of poor residents have benefited from these policies. The three cases above prove that local governments are moving in the right direction, albeit in stages and despite some problems. Regardless of their political background, the three local political leaders share the same concerns and are capable of diagnosing the issues and coming up with solutions. The key factors are their vision and leadership, which evidently serve as the "soft power" that enable them to drive the bureaucracy, money and hardware to do different kinds of work and to achieve better results. In short, as shown by these three cases, money is necessary but not the determinant factor in delivering better and broader public services. There are more than 15 regencies and municipalities that are engaged in reforms and innovative practices in public services, especially in healthcare and education. Among them are Purbalingga, Solok, Blitar, Sinjai and Sragen. Yet skeptics could argue that the successful regional administrations are simply "a few good men" among 400 local governments across the country. In general, Indonesia has a long way to go to achieve the MDGs by 2015. However, history shows that social reforms in many countries, including Indonesia, start with "a few good men or women". Once an idea is invented and implemented, its spread is only a matter of time or momentum. If this argument is correct, then the lessons for the central government and international aid agencies are simple and plain: support and celebrate those few good local governments. Indonesia is on the right track to have better public services and hopefully will achieve the MDGs. Support and celebrate do not mean disbursing more money, but rather creating meaningful engagement and policy learning for the country's 400 regencies and municipalities. Rather than repeating the mantra of good governance, it is more effective that local governments see for themselves the results of good governance. After all, Indonesia would do well to apply the European Union method of harmonizing the policies of its members, including social policies. This method emphasizes learning from others and learning with others. But this method requires more data and information, so each member/stakeholder (local government) can deliberate policy choices and proposals. Certainly, this is more democratic and egalitarian than imposing policy (either by central government policy or by donor policies) from the top or outside, as a reward for additional money/aid. The writer is associate director of Perkumpulan Prakarsa. He can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
