The fragmentation of the government process in producing planning documents and their adaptation to complexity, diversity and dynamics in society in the budgeting process has become a problem that the Government of the Republic of Indonesia has continued to face since the reformation period until now. Therefore, the government has made various efforts through government regulations to resolve the fragmentation problem.
“This is because the issue of fragmentation has had several significant impacts, one of which can be seen in the fact presented by Bappenas (2013) that there is an average deviation of 29.4% between the RKP and RKAKL or it does not map back what is in the RKP and RKAKL. This deviation will worsen the quality of planning and budgeting in the regions,” said Suhartono.
This statement was conveyed by Promovendus Suhartono., S.IP., M.PP, at a Doctoral promotion session in the field of Administrative Science, Postgraduate Program in the Faculty of Administrative Sciences, University of Indonesia, Thursday (5/01/2023) morning in the 2020 Edition Auditorium of the FIA UI with the title dissertation Governance of Planning and Budgeting Processes in the Central Government (2015-2017): An Overview of Actors and Institutions Interaction.
Promovendus stated that there was a need for a review of the governance of the planning and budgeting process so that it could be reconstructed. In his research, Suhartono uses the concept of governance developed by Koiman (1993) in looking at governance as a result of interactions between actors and institutions involved in forming and utilizing it for their respective interests.
“A governance is said to fail when it cannot solve public problems that require government authority, duties and responsibilities. The process of implementing government will give birth to governance and the capacity of the governance itself. This capacity is tested again whether it can solve or find solutions to public problems that continue to develop due to society’s complexity, dynamics and differences,” Suhartono added.
Suhartono’s research shows that the factors causing fragmentation in the governance of planning and budgeting processes stem from the different orientations between Law 17/2003 and Law 25/2004. Law 17/2003 is fully oriented towards reforming the country’s financial management to be disciplined in dealing with fiscal constraints and strengthen financial control and accountability. Meanwhile, Law 25/2004 is oriented towards maintaining the continuity of development in the absence of GBHN in the amended constitution.
“The results of the second study show the determinants of the separateness of the settings from the environmental, orientation and process aspects. Of these three aspects, the environmental aspect in the form of institutional rivalry between Bappenas and the Ministry of Finance has a greater role in encouraging separation, compared to the external influence of international institutions which encourage the integration of the two,” he said.
The results of the third study depart from the interaction between the executive-legislature and the interaction between the executive-legislature and the community from the perspective of accountability, transparency and participation. The relationship between transparency and accountability only occurs in the executive and legislative contexts but less in society. This causes the level of community participation in planning and budgeting processes weaker than the practice of several countries in the region. This condition supports patterns of interaction that are distorted towards the public budget, which should prioritize public goods, services, or products above the group or personal interests of the policymakers involved.
Through the results of this research, Promovendus provides recommendations, namely the fundamental integration of planning and budgeting processes by revising UU17/2003 and 25/2004 into one law without having to revive the GBHN in the constitution so that planning and budgeting functions can be united in one process and one control. Institutions to suppress deviation and distortion. A moderate alternative while maintaining the status quo, but integrated through an integrated information system between Bappenas and the Ministry of Finance. Another option is to function the presidential staff office to control deviations as part of supporting the duties and powers of the presidency.
“The second recommendation is to increase the quality of transparency, accountability and participation by transforming the presentation of budget plan information from line items to performance so that the discussion process is more accountable, encouraging transparency as part of the strategy of public organizations to get broad public support for their programs and work plans in serve the community, while participation requires strengthening budgetary literacy and the support of the academic community for the function of NGOs as a driving force for public participation on public issues related to the budget,” said Suhartono closing the summary reading of his dissertation results.
Through this FIA UI Doctoral Promotion Session, Suhartono., S.IP., M.PP became the 25th FIA UI Doctoral Program graduate and the 213th graduate, Doctor of Administration Science with the Promoter Dr. Roy Valiant Solomon, M.Soc.Sc. and Co-promoter Dr. Umanto, M.Sc.