|
Bismillahirrahmannirrahim
Vice
President of the World Bank, Mr. Ian
Goldin,
Distinguished
Parliamentarians,
Ladies
and Gentlemen,
First
of all, let me give you the weather report
from Indonesia. I don’t know what is the
temperature in Helsinki, but here in Jakarta
today, it is bright, and sunny, and warm,
and breezy. I hope you will take this
Presidential weather report into account
when you consider the next venue of your
annual meeting.
I
am pleased to extend my warmest greetings
and best wishes to the Parliamentarians from
all over the world, including from
Indonesia, who are assembling in Helsinki.
And to those of you who are Muslims, please
accept my best wishes to you and your
family, in this holy month of Ramadhan.
I
also extend my special greetings to the
people of Finland. It was in Helsinki that
the Indonesian Government signed a historic
peace deal with leaders of the Free Aceh
Movement (or GAM), which ended the conflict
in Aceh. Many good Fins, especially former
President Martti Ahtisaari, helped us to
achieve that peace.
Today,
the guns are silent in Aceh. GAM members
have come down from the mountains, and have
handed over their weapons to be destroyed,
for a chance to pursue a new life of peace,
prosperity and brotherhood. The people of
Finland should be proud of what you have
done in taking part in the promotion of
peace in Aceh.
I
am glad that Helsinki is now the host of a
prestigious international gathering devoted
to an issue that is dear to my heart: the
Millennium Development Goals or the
MDGs.
Let
me offer several reasons why MDG is our best
hope for humanity as we stepped into the 21st
Century.
First,
the MDG offers clear, concrete, quantifiable
targets of development for the nations of
the world to achieve. This means the
community of nations no longer has to dwell
on abstract concepts such as “world
peace”, “justice for all”,
“prosperity, “freedom”, which all
sounds nice but often do not give us the
luxury of details.
You
could argue all night long about what
“justice” or “world peace” means,
but no one can argue about the need to
reduce maternal death by 75 %, or
infant mortality by two-thirds. No one is
against universal primary education. No one
would be against reducing by 50 % the number
people living on 1 dollar a day or about
reversing the tide of HIV/AIDS. Once you
move beyond abstract concepts into
quantifiable targets, you have a much better
focus on what needs to be done and how to
achieve them. Take this from a military
general, who would prefer clear objectives
any day over vague theoretical
concepts.
It
is also politically pertinent that the MDG
was not the brainchild of any one country or
group of countries. It was not an idea
imposed by any one country. The MDG was the
result of a great collaboration of nations
from all over the world, the condensed
product of a global meeting of the minds.
And it was designed to cater to the needs of
all nations to eradicate poverty, regardless
of political systems, cultural setting,
social conditions, and historical
background. The MDG therefore has universal
relevance : An Indonesian, an Indian, a
Nigerian, a Polish, a Brazilian and an
American, could all have equal ownership of
the MDG without being defensive about
it.
The
third reason is that the MDG sends a message
loud and clear that you are not alone. No
matter which region you belong to and no
matter the size of your economy, if you have
poverty problems, you are part of a global
movement that is trying to collectively rid
poverty anywhere and everywhere. Poverty is
everybody’s problems. Even if you don’t
have pockets of poverty within your borders,
one way or another, you can’t turn your
back on it. We are all in this together.
What a great way to start this new
millennium.
The
fourth point is that the targets of MDG is
completely achievable but only if we are
willing to spend our political capital and
economic resources to achieve it. Remember:
we were able to eradicate small pox several
years ago with a cost of only US$ 17 billion,
which was very cheap compared to the lives
that were saved by it. And look at the price
tag for achieving some of MDG targets. It is
said, for example, that achieving universal
primary education by 2015 would only cost
USD$ 10 billion per year, which is less than
what Americans spend on ice cream per year.
Making child-birth safer for mothers would
cost USD$ 12 billion per year, which is
equal to what Americans and Europeans spend
on perfume each year.
All
of us, therefore, are stakeholders in the
success of the MDG. If we succeed in
reaching the MDG goals by 2015, which is
entirely possible, it will be the
single-most important achievement of our
generation. And it will be an achievement
that will benefit not only your neighbor,
your community, your country, but our
humanity.
Our
common efforts to reach the targets of MDG
reflect the larger challenge of development.
Let me attempt to highlight several recent
challenges that are pertinent to
Indonesia’s experience and I believe they
may also be relevant to your experiences as
well.
The
first challenge is something we all know too
well about: the dramatic rise in the price
of crude oil. This year, oil price sky
rocketed from around US$ 20 up to US$ 70 per
barrel. This has placed a tremendous burden
on the development budget of many countries,
developed and developing.
This
was particularly problematic for us in
Indonesia, where oil price was heavily
subsidized in a budget that assumed oil
prices at 40 US dollars. With oil prices at
around 60 dollars, we would be spending some
14 billion dollars in oil subsidies. That is
almost a quarter of our national budget and
that money could be better used to build
schools, health care units, roads, and other
programs to help the poor. That money can
stimulate growth and productivity.
What’s
more, the fuel subsidies were enjoyed mainly
by the middle-class up, who CAN afford
higher prices. Studies show that the richest
40 per cent of the population were receiving
70 per cent of the fuel subsidies. And they
were consuming fuel recklessly, dogging up
traffic. This was untenable.
Worse
still, trans-national criminals were
flourishing from the subsidies. Smuggling of
subsidized fuel last year cost our country
nearly one billion dollars. We had no choice
but to rethink our energy policy and work
towards a more targeted approach of helping
the poor.
The
most difficult decision I have taken this
year is to reduce these oil subsidies:
twice! First, in March and recently early in
October. It was a hard decision but it was
definitely a necessary one.
The
funds that we take out from the oil
subsidies are used to directly help the
poor. We are handing out cash assistance
monthly to some 15 million poor and near
poor households. This is one of the largest
programs of this kind in the world. And as
with any program of this size anywhere,
there have been complications in its
implementation but we are tackling those
problems. Those who are trying to cheat the
poor of their payments will be swiftly
punished.
I
realize that cutting the oil subsidies and
increasing the fuel price is not an entirely
popular policy. But I am convinced that the
long-term gain outweigh the undeniable
short-term pain. This subsidy reduction
means that our subsidies next year will drop
by more than 50 per cent to some 5.3 billion
dollars. And already there are signs that
Indonesians are conserving energy.
By
cutting subsidies, the Government now has a
new budget, which will allow us to allocate
more resources to poverty reduction
programs, to raise the living standard of
Indonesians. We can now deliver direct cash
to the poor and near poor, who are living
under 1 dollar a day. We can allocate more
funds to tend to the needs of the poor:
their education, health, employment
creation, low cost housing, the development
of rural areas where 60 % of the poor
reside, and the building of infrastructures
in least developed regions.
In
2006, we will have a development budget that
will give us greater funding resources to
provide for the needs of the poor.
In
health, for example, apart from aiming to
meet MDG targets, we are providing free
medication and health care to the poor. In
education, we are aiming for free education
up to grade 9, which is compulsory in
Indonesia. These health and education
programs are already underway this
year.
Most
importantly, the resources we have conserved
can be used towards meeting the Millennium
Development Goals. Making hard decisions
enables us to focus on our long-term goals
of reducing overall poverty. There are
simply smarter, more targeted and less
expensive ways to help the poor.
But
we are not letting the poor go without a
safety net. Kerosene, which is used by the
poor for cooking, will at the time being
remain at around 40 per cent of the market
price.
Apart
from the suffocating oil price, there is
another global challenge that we should be
aware of. For the past 5 years, we have
talked extensively about this big MDG
project to fight poverty on all fronts and
in every region. But all our development
calculations and projections would be ruined
if humanity were to experience an avian flu,
human influenza pandemic. This could happen
if there is a mutation of the avian flu
virus that can spread between humans. And
this virus can mutate anywhere, in China, in
Europe, in Southeast Asia.
This
pandemic would be worst than the tsunami,
which late last year killed hundreds of
thousands but stopped after a few minutes.
In a pandemic, the virus would spread after
a few minutes it would kill more and more
people in more and more areas. It would be
our worst nightmare. The world has seen 6
pandemics in the last 3 centuries, 3 of them
in the last century alone: the 1918 flu,
which killed between 20 to 50 million
people; the Asian flu in the 1950’s killed
5 million people, and; the Hong Kong flu in
1968, which killed 1 million people.
The
impact of a new pandemic on the economies of
the world would be totally disastrous.
Tourism would be hurt, as would be
transportation, trade, manufacturing,
agriculture, investment, consumer
confidence. Just remember: SARS, which
killed several hundred, brought economic
costs to the tune of US$ 30 billion. The
economic costs of a new avian flu or human
influenza pandemic would be beyond
calculation.
A
pandemic would be a huge setback to the
global community to reach MDGs by 2015. That
is why we must all be on the high alert. We
must develop a contingency plan if such a
mutated deadly virus ever comes to
form.
These
cross-boundaries problems urgently require
considerable aid, as expressed during the
United Nations World Summit this September.
We should not repeat past mistakes of not
doing enough for global ills. More than 11
million children die each year from
preventable diseases. Yet the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has
received only a little more than half of its
operating needs, disabling any new projects
over the next two years. This cannot stand.
We must do more to help initiatives that
address all our families.
Ladies
and gentlemen,
Ultimately,
the challenge of development is the
challenge of governance. International
cooperation is critical to achieving the MDG
targets. But international cooperation is
only half of the equation; the other half
being good governance.
Every
Government must ensure sound policies,
responsive to the needs of its people. Every
government must plan its own development
strategy to reach MDG targets. Every
Government must fight corruption. Every
Government must develop a favorable
investment climate. And most importantly,
every Government must invest in its own
people.
I
am pleased to see that my Government’s
efforts to combat corruption, building good
governance, and making our economy more
efficient, have begun to show tangible
results both in terms of reaching the MDG
targets and in promoting sustainable
development for our country.
The
employment of good governance is the
shortest route towards reaching, even
exceeding, and the MDG targets. We in
Indonesia have learned a lesson from our
past. We must build a climate, which ensures
growth as well as greater investment but we
must also do so in ways, which will empower
the poor in that growth. We cannot let
growth lead to the neglect or
marginalization of the poor. If we do not
manage growth carefully, we will see greater
gap between a sector of a population driven
by progress and another sector stuck in
poverty.
The
total sum of our development strategy must
be to allow the poor to have access to
capital, health, education. They say that
democracy is about equality of
citizens. I say that development is about
providing equal opportunity to
all, especially for the poor.
There
is another challenge of development: and
that is the challenge of
tolerance-building.
Development
means different things to different people.
Development also has many dimensions. But
development these days is more than just the
absence of poverty or the protection of the
environment.
We
now live in a world with rising ethnic and
religious conflicts. In such a world,
economic growth alone would not do. We
cannot have development if hatred thrives,
if bigotry and prejudice rule, if ignorance
prevails, if conflicts flare. Communities
who are constantly bickering with one
another, whether about religion or ethnic
differences, do not thrive: they stagnate
under the weight of prejudice and
ignorance.
That
is why we have to start defining development
also as tolerance building. Our development
strategy must be geared to promote respect
for diversity and to inculcate the values of
tolerance and harmony in our homes, in our
schools, and in our communities.
A
truly sustainable development strategy is
one that considers not just society’s
material needs, but also its heart and
soul.
Ladies
and gentlemen,
Let
me close with one final thought. Last year,
President Lula Da Silva of Brazil, in his
address to this very forum, called for a
bridge to be built between the two worlds of
the rich and the poor.
Since
then, something extraordinary has happened.
When the horrible tsunami struck in December
last year, we witnessed remarkable acts of
sympathy and solidarity on a global scale
that was truly unprecedented. Governments,
corporations, and private citizens the world
over got into the act of caring and
contributing. We also see this during the
hurricane Katrina, and more recently with
the earthquake in Pakistan.
Global
action, global compassion, global
solidarity. These are not just empty
words.
When
I addressed the UN Leaders Summit in
September this year, I stressed that: “We
must form a global partnership for
development. Financing for development must
flow. Exports of developing countries must
gain access to markets in a rules-based
international trading system. The developing
countries must achieve good governance,
fight corruption, make efficient use of
their limited resources, and plan and carry
out appropriate development strategies. The
developed countries must fulfill their
commitment to a genuine and mutually
beneficial global partnership for
development.”
Ladies
and gentlemen,
We
must continue to nurture this spirit of
global solidarity and compassion. In that
same spirit of generosity, we welcome the
recent G-8 proposal to cancel 100 percent of
the debts of 38 poorest countries in Africa
and around the world. It is a good example
of thinking outside the box and a good
display of the kind of global cooperation
and solidarity that we need in the years
ahead.
And
this gives us high hopes, as we discuss and
plan, to reach the goals of Millennium
Development Goals.
Good
luck with your deliberations, and thank you
very much.
Wassalammu
‘alaikum Warrahmatulahi Wabarakatuh
Jakarta,
12 October 2005
PRESIDENT
OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA
Dr.
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
|