Editorial: Reallocating subsidies

Mon, 05/26/2008 10:19 AM  |  Opinion

The public acceptance of the 28.7 percent increase in fuel prices which the government announced Friday evening, will hinge on perceptions of how the upcoming economic burdens will be shared, and how well the distribution of income-support for affected families will be managed.

The government must therefore go all-out to convince people (with concrete measures and examples) that its painful fuel policy is really a necessity and is in the public's best interest.

It needs to affirm that the move is based on genuine principles of equitable burden-sharing, otherwise the bitter pills could cause a wave of social unrest at the expense of economic and political stability.

At a time when an increasing number of people have been suffering economic hardships, and when unemployment -- already at a potentially explosive level -- would likely worsen, the additional burdens caused by the price rise look likely to incite public anger.

But the government has made thorough preparations with special social-safety net programs to cushion the impact of the fuel reform on poor people. It has attempted to protect the poor from the brunt of the price increases through the distribution of income support (cash transfers), subsidized rice and educational grants for 19.1 million families (almost 75 million people). The government has also expanded poverty alleviation programs -- with more than Rp 150 trillion (US$16 billion) budgeted for this year alone.

The fuel-price increase may double inflation, to 12 percent throughout this year, which will no doubt hit low and fixed-income earners and the poorest bracket of the community the hardest. But the various forms of income support and massive poverty alleviation programs will help cushion the adverse effects.

The public's sense of fairness will also depend on perceptions of whether the government is taking its full share of the burden by minimizing waste caused by inefficiency and corruption and by truly behaving and acting out of a sense of urgency and crisis.

The strict expenditure guidelines issued by the Finance Minister for senior officials (such as severe restrictions on official travel) will serve to help strengthen the spirit of austerity within the public sector. Such an example would also serve to improve the social and political environment during the implementation of this painful measure.

Favorable public opinion is necessary to smoothen the transition period of the fuel reforms, but the government must also realize that it is not the poor majority but the middle- and top-income earner groups who often dominate public debates. Vested-interest politicians in the House could make a lot of noise, deceiving the public to advance hidden political agendas.

Former presidents and former presidential candidates who have opposed fuel reform -- and who will try to exploit the current situation to increase their popularity in next year's general and presidential elections -- are well advised to note that fuel subsidies have nothing to do with voter support nor a voter backlash.

Just look at how then incumbent president Megawati Soekarnoputri failed miserably in the 2004 presidential elections, even though she had refused to increase fuel prices.

She chose to leave a "fiscal time bomb" for President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was then forced to defuse it with a cumulative price increase of more than 155 percent in 2005.

Even the common people understand that fuel reforms, however painful, are firmly grounded in sound economic rationale and a sense of justice because the huge fuel subsidies have, so far, been enjoyed by the middle and top-income bracket.

Instead of attacking the Yudhoyono administration, we should commend it for its courageous decision to take on such a bold move, however unpopular it is.

Yudhoyono could choose the easier populist measure, by continuing the wasteful subsidy spending, but this would risk leading the economy into a much more devastating crisis within one to two years.

If opponents to the fuel price increase truly want to help the poor, they should help supervise the implementation of the social-safety net and poverty alleviation programs to ensure that the billions of dollars of additional funds derived from the fuel reform reach their target beneficiaries (poor families).

Comments (3)  |   Post comment
A  |   A  |   A  |   Mail to a friend  |  Printer Friendly Version |  Digg it!  |  Add to Del.icio.us!  |  Add to Reddit!  |  Stumble it!   |  Share on facebook  

Well said. Perhaps another avenue to pursue would be to enforce tax laws so that the upper classes pay a bit more of the freight. Lax tax collections have been more than hidden by strong (and ill applied) oil sales revenues and other resource royalties. Now that oil revenues and royalties are insufficient to cover the fuel subsidies, the only fair answer is to apply the tax laws and collect the taxes. The Finance Minister has acted to improve the collection mechanism to minimize graft. Is it not time to push ahead with balancing the pain of the middle class by asking others to pay their fair share?

As long as Indonesians will spend so much money on cigarettes
i refuse to accept the term poor , that what goes in smoke can feed many, time to take care of the country health and stop burning the income and feed the people .Stop corruption too. subsidies are not a solution.

You refer to the delay in raising fuel price rises metaphorically as a "fiscal time bomb". "Time-wasting fiasco" would be a literal description.

President Yudhoyono deserves no praise for his "courage". Instead of building on the 2005 price rise to begin the phase-out of subsidies, he dallied for three years making untenable promises and repeatedly risking the budget by underestimating international oil prices. Instead of using taxpayers' money to develop the nation's economy he has used it to pull the old Suharto trick- appearing generous to all while actually pouring money into the tanks of the rich and powerful.

Even now, he still refuses to renounce fuel subsidies completely. Instead we have the half-baked "smart card" program which will increase administrative costs and expand opportunities for corruption. Rationing subsidised fuel means subsidising foreign ambassadors to trundle around Jakarta while truckers bringing farm produce for hours over potholed roads in remote parts of Indonesia buy most of their fuel at market price. This is not removing the folly of fuel subsidies but only intensifying the absurdity.

What's On

Corporate News


  • Bridgestone Tire Safety Campaign
    Mr. Agus Sarsisto, Mr. Shigeru Niho (President Director), Mr. Shinya Hisada (Marketing Director), Mr. John M. Arsyad Hold a place in the Tire Safety Campaign, Rest Area 57 KM ...