The Prabowo-Gibran administration is undertaking significant cost-cutting measures by implementing budget efficiency in the State Budget (APBN) and the Regional Budget (APBD).
As a result, many government ministries and agencies, both national and regional, have faced budget cuts. However, 17 ministries/agencies have escaped these reductions.
This policy has drawn sharp criticism from various sectors of society, as it has the potential to impact the delivery of public services.
UGM professor of public policy and management, Professor Wahyudi Kumorotomo, stated that this skewed cost-saving program would affect sectors considered more fundamental for public services.
“This cost-saving program is imbalanced, with certain sectors that are more crucial for public services being cut,” he said on Friday (Feb. 14).
He regretted that many of the more strategic and important ministries for the public, such as the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology, the Ministry of Human Rights, and the Ministry of Culture, were subject to budget reductions.
Meanwhile, the Ministry of Defense was spared, and arms procurement continued.
According to Professor Kumorotomo, these expenditures could be postponed, and the funds could be allocated to education, healthcare, and social services.
“It’s not that we are against savings, reallocations, or efficiencies, but the efficiency must be appropriate,” he explained.
The professor emphasized the need for the government to reconsider this efficiency strategy seriously. He further noted that cost-saving is challenging given the swollen profile of the current cabinet.
He pointed out that the budget has nearly doubled compared to the previous year’s budget, which covered only 34 ministries.
He noted that, under the same regulations, the cabinet will continue to consume a significant portion of the budget.
He provided an example, stating that ministers and deputy ministers receive similar allowances, with deputy ministers receiving 85% of a minister’s allowance.
“We already have many ministers and deputy ministers, not to mention the growing number of special staff, which certainly drains the budget. Additionally, many of these special staff do not directly relate to the ministry’s mission and do not always enhance the government’s performance,” he explained.
Nevertheless, Professor Kumorotomo agreed that budget cuts could be made in areas not directly related to public services, such as reducing unnecessary business trips, using office supplies that are still in good condition, reducing hotel-stay seminars, and postponing building renovations.
“I think cuts in these budget areas wouldn’t cause problems,” he clarified.
However, Professor Kumorotomo admitted that the real issue lies in critical sectors like healthcare, where reduced service hours, medical equipment, and medicines could negatively impact the public.
He reminded the government that these budget-saving measures should be collective and not one-sided, meaning that the public and government officials should feel the impact. At the very least, officials should set an example of frugality for the public.
“Officials shouldn’t pressure the public to save while maintaining extravagant lifestyles. If officials continue lavish lifestyles and remain oblivious to the real situation, it will hurt the public’s feelings. We are all facing a tough situation,” he added.
Professor Kumorotomo is confident that the public would understand if savings are necessary, provided all parties, especially the government, are genuinely serious and committed to restraining themselves from extravagance and wastefulness.
Finally, he urged officials to examine society’s realities more closely. He noted that these savings measures affect some people, such as recently laid-off employees, and these matters need attention.
“The government must consider how these children’s parents can still find work, support their families, and continue living,” he concluded.
Author: Leony
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Post-editor: Afifudin Baliya
Photo: Freepik