The plan for a new House of Representatives building, lavished with a recreational center, swimming pool, fitness center, spa and other leisure facilities, may have stemmed from the amusing idea that it would keep government officials fit and fresh, of course with the help of some rent-seeking contractors.
Being fit and fresh, legislators are expected to be more productive. The fact that the project
would cost around Rp 1.2 trillion (US$133.2 million) may not matter much, for money can always be diverted from the state’s coffers — of course with a little haggling between legislative and executive branches of government.
But in all likelihood, the plan will simply turn into an act of flattering imbecility in the name of suaveness.
Indeed, it is hard in the current political climate to comprehend this plan without hearing the sound of history rotting. As noted, the main issue may not be money, although this doesn’t mean the budget is not a problem — $133.2 million is a huge amount of public money. What is unpalatable has less to do with money than with the vanity that is now surrounding the House of Representatives.
This stems from legislators’ apparent ignorance of why they are there in the first place. It was just over a year ago when they indulged themselves in pledges to win ordinary voters in their constituencies.
Once the dust from the 2009 legislative elections had settled, reality began to bite hard. Some impressively kept their promises by genuinely exercising a sense of public mission. Kudos for them!
But the rest don’t seem to have a clue as to why they are there in the first place. No wonder absenteeism, truancy, torpor, languor, lethargy, corruption, abuse, etc... began to descend onto the legislative office. Thus began a series of habitual scandals based on no other reason than the absence of competence.
For most of these legislators, the act of representing perhaps assumes too much. Despite all disciplinary measures, in the end it is only the memory of the plight and miseries of the represented that guarantees a professional discipline necessary for public office. Once this point is forgotten, the seeds of decay are bound to sprout and a political disconnect becomes the rule. But, how do we know these legislators are driven by the memory of the plight of the represented?
Of course there are many ways of knowing, but the extravagance that is to be lavished on the new building is certainly off track. Like the “aspiration funds” scandal that emerged a few months ago, this plan for extravagance is the latest folly in a series of disconnects in representational claim committed by these legislators.
This brings us to another point that is so vital yet perpetually absent in the conduct of most legislators.
The power of public office is an authority by which a holder can use it, personally or collectively, to get the right things done for the common good. Otherwise, “public power” such as the legislative office merely means the pleasure a legislator gets from a purely personal exercise of will. And in the absence of an institutional commitment to the plight of the represented, what happens is usually a collective disregard for what is demanded by the act of representing. Gone is the office of representation; what the legislators do is no more than guarding the sovereignty of individual care.
The good news is, a string of dissenting views have begun to arise from within, with a growing number of legislators voicing objections to the plan. However, in spite of these dissenting voices, something must be said in a plain language: The fact that the idea of extravagance has ever been conceived from within the House of Representatives is itself a sign of decadence.
To show off such extravagance is simply an insult to public sensibility at a time when more and more people feel unrepresented by legislators. This is the most elementary example of common sense, and there is no need to appeal to a loftier moral standard. All this simply confirms the total absence of civility and, for lack of better term, “culture” among the legislators.
The fact that this uncouth culture is prevalent among legislators reveals a profound flaw in the ongoing democratic reform. Of course, democratic institutions like the House of Representatives are not oblivious to human vices, but neither do they passively accept these vices as they are. When these institutions are incapable of responding to the call of correction on behalf of common sense, they are good neither for democracy nor for the country.
Many concerned parties have rightly pointed out how things should be improved. But, what to do with the recurrent penchant for a bling-bling culture that has been engulfed the House of Representatives? “Bling-bling” is a term for a style of appearance characterized by flashy, ostentatious and elaborately ornamented accessories; it is a derogatory term for the vacuity of substance and bad taste.
With a bling-bling culture, most legislators may have thought that, after miserably failing to represent us, they can at least drag us to rot together in style.
The writer is a lecturer in the postgraduate program at Driyarkara School of Philosophy, Jakarta.
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|