INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN INDONESIAN : FOR CAPITALIST OR THE PEOPLE ?

 By : Bayu Agung Prasetya

Infrastructure development, which has been planned and operated by the Government of Indonesia since early 2014, has attracted controversy in the community. The study of academics and activists focuses more on the community's rejection of infrastructure development which is considered a waste of funds, burdens the state debt, and does not solve economic problems. It is predicted that the president's decision will create high economic inequality in the future.

Conceptually, infrastructure can be an improvement in Indonesia's economic development going forward. Such is the case with infrastructure development in China. Infrastructure development began in the 80s which is so massive until now. However, the comparison of economic growth is very far compared to Indonesia, this was revealed by the former Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Resources, China experienced 12% economic growth for 25 years. So if China builds fishing rod infrastructure, there will be no problem because its economic growth is 12%, the investment will eventually return," he said when met by reporters at the Auditorium on the 4th floor of the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences UGM, Sleman, Yogyakarta, Thursday.

China's Infrastructure Development

The condition of the previous infrastructure was as bad as the condition of infrastructure in Indonesia. However, Over the past 30 years, the Chinese government has intensively invested in infrastructure. In the transportation sector, infrastructure development means opening up access to markets because the domestic market is integrated. Production, distribution, and transportation costs are reduced. This allows China to compete locally as well as internationally. In addition to contributing to growth, infrastructure investments made by the Chinese government have also succeeded in reducing population poverty and improving economic and banking services.

However, at the level of implementation, there is a fundamental difference between infrastructure development in Indonesia and China. The concept and stages of infrastructure development in China are very clear because it reduces poverty and provides economic services through small businesses, while in Indonesia it is only for capitalist interests. During the seven years from 1994-to 2000, the Chinese government spent 920 million on renminbi to build roads in 529 poor districts in 21 provinces. In that period, 420 thousand km of highways were built every year. In 2002, the total area of ​​highways connecting new cities in China was 1,065 million sq km. From 2001 to 2011, infrastructure investment in China increased tenfold from $7 billion to $74 billion.

In Indonesia, infrastructure is built only for the benefit of investors. Only some of the infrastructure can be used by the community. However, the entire accessibility of large companies is cutting the distribution of goods. This route is vital because it will connect the company and the market. Heavy truck lanes are needed for feeder lanes as well as transport substitutes. Meanwhile, community facilities are only capitalized so that not all people after passing the toll road will reach their final destination. If it is not available, it causes people to choose the city route, so it is impossible for small classes who are used to cheap tariffs to switch through the toll road.

On the other hand, infrastructure development that is sold to the private sector is what creates anxiety in the future. The development will only cause new problems. Until now there has been no sign of the contribution of infrastructure to pay attention to small communities. although from the beginning it was reminded to integrate. What is even more ironic is that the infrastructure itself is built in all regions and some are sold to the private sector so that it can lead to a monopoly of capital from business owners. The problem is the number of infrastructure funds (USD 31.4 billion or 4.7 trillion)[3] rupiah when compared to the principle of benefits received by the community, namely increasing community accessibility and convenience is not very useful.

ROOT OF THE PROBLEM

If we look closely, the root of the problem of infrastructure development is the powerlessness of the State towards investors. The lack of capital owned by the State and the disintegration of development as well as the impartiality of the state towards the community. As a result, the community does not benefit from this development. Long times wide infrastructure was built and then privately owned. Finally, only for large containers and private vehicles.

According to Public Policy, because the root of the problem is clear, the solution is clear. namely how to strengthen the state against a strong grip and dependence on investors, especially large companies, namely by developing a people's economy and good governance of state-owned enterprises.

However, this public policy did not work considering that infrastructure problems are not just technical issues, they are more political and economic so that many people play there: politicians, automotive companies, dealers, technical departments (transportation, PU, ​​finance), military, police, thugs, and others. especially MNC's. The mistake is to look at the infrastructure from a technical point of view only. So, when looking at infrastructure development, for example, we only compare easy accessibility with the number of motorized vehicles, then the solution is to build toll roads or other infrastructure. All of this has become a magnet for companies that are increasingly controlling access to transportation in Indonesia

The dominance of investment development through infrastructure can not be separated from economic policies that are more pursuing high growth. The development of the automotive industry brings a very large multiplier effect, from the absorption of a lot of labor to the motor vehicle tax, so it is very supportive of high economic growth. The government's reluctance to develop good public transportation is inseparable from the interests of the automotive business. If public transportation is good, people will choose public transportation, rarely buying a private car. As a result, the automotive industry is less developed, economic growth is low.

DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, PEOPLE'S ECONOMY, AND NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION

The choice of infrastructure improvement that fell on human resource development seems to be based more on human development considerations, namely compared to the monorail, subway, and KRL, the cost of human development is much lighter even though it takes a long time. However, investment in human resources to develop Indonesia is quite convincing. Initiating the initial steps to fix the people's economy through MSMEs, training, and so on so that they can compete in the market. Meanwhile, for toll infrastructure issues and so on, priority must be given to the development of mass transportation modes via trains, buses, and so on. Forward. the importance of reviving the national train as in the past as a mode of mass transportation and bicycle lanes as a non-motorized mode of transportation, both of which are not included in the transportation master plan. Both are technically very possible to implement when there is political will. Most importantly, do you have the courage to face the country facing the dominance of the automotive industry.

In China, Infrastructure is successful because it is accompanied by several roundabouts that limit private mobile operations. such as: implementing odd and even numbers, weekly car-free days, establishing two-lane busways and imposing PNbadr vehicle taxes. On the other hand, China's infrastructure aims for Chinese community products such as cellphones, agricultural products, and so on to be distributed easily both nationally and internationally. Indonesia also has to learn directly from China, how people initially increase the country's industry. they are happy because the economic income with the presence of investment can make life easier and more prosperous. What is important to remind the Government of Indonesia is to immediately build a people's economy in one whole concept as well as infrastructure development only for the distribution of people's economic wealth to improve people's welfare.

Bayu Agung Prasetya – Head of Political Corruption and Public Policy Division Malang Corruption Watch