TO REVIEW GOVERNMENT STATE CAPITAL PLACEMENT PLAN IN BUMN

The Government’s plan to spur on infra structure by allocating fund amounting to Rp.48 trillion by inclusion of state’s capital (PMN) to 35 was not running well.

The reason was that there was indication of mis allocation of fund amounting to Rp.3.1 trillion to 14 BUMN as receivers of PMN which were: PT Antam, PT Angkasa Pura,  Bulog, PT Garam, PTPN IX, PT Pelni , PT Pindad, PT KA, PT  Shanghyang Seri, PT Perumnas, Perum Perikanan, PT Industrial Kapal, and PT Pelindo.

Therefore Commission XI of house urged the Government to suspend liquidation of PMN until BPK finding was solved. This was the statement of Chairman of Commission XI of House Fadel Muhammad after Consultative meeting with BPK last week.

The 35 BUMN recommended by the Government to receive PMN in APBN 2015 were: PT Angkasa Pura Rp.3 trillion, PT ASDP 1 trillion, PT Pelni Rp.500 billion, PT Djakarta Lloyd Rp.350 billion, PT Hutama Karya Rp.3.6 trillion, Perum Perumnas Rp.2 trilllion, PT Waskita Rp.3.5 trillion, PT Adhi Karya Rp.1.4 trillion.

Furthermore PTPN III Rp.3.15 trillion, PTPN VII Rp.17.5 billion. PTPN XI Rp.65 billion, PTPN XII Rp.70 billion, PT Permodalan Nasional Madani Rp.1 trillion, PT Garam Rp.300 billion, PT RNI Rp.280 billion, Perum Bulog Rp.3 trillion, PT Pertani Rp.470 billion.

Furthermore PT Sang Hyang Seri Rp.400 billion, PT Perikanan Nusantara Rp.200 billion, Perum Perikanan Indonesia Rp.300 billion, PT Dirgantara Indonesia Rp.400 billion, PT Dok Perkapalan Surabaya Rp.200 billion, PT Dok Kodja Bahari Rp.900 billion.

Besides there was PT Industri Kapal Indonesia Rp200 billion, PT Antam Rp.7 trillion, PT KAI Rp.2.75 trillion, PT Perusahaan Pengelola Asset Rp.2 trillion, PT Pengembangan Pariwisata Rp.250 billion, PT Bank Mandiri Rp.5.6 trillion, PT Pelindo IV Rp.2 trillion. PT Krakatau Steel Rp.956 billion, PT Bahana PUI Rp.250 billion.

Beside low performing BUMN, there were some BUMN not entitled to receiving PMN especially those who already had gone public. The Parliament believed it was not advisable no throw around Rp.72 trillion without strong reason. The Government PMN for BUMN in RAPBNB-P State Budget 2015 be classified into 3 categories, i.e. infra-structure Rp.39.8 trillion, natural resources Rp.14,8 trillion and financing and banking Rp.9 trillion.

Head of BPK Harry Azhar Azis remarked further that BPK’s view was based on examination in 2013 in which there were 14 BUMN categorized as low performing. Previously the Government had injected PMN fund amounting to Rp.48 trillion to 35 BUMN. Besides, the Government also wished to inject capital of Rp.18 trillion for BUMN under the Ministry of Finance.

According to Vice chairman of BPK Achsanul Qosasi, before PMN fund was liquidated the Company was advised to settle all the critical notice made by the Auditor. Achsanul said that PMN was a matter of accountability and transparence of companies to enable commission XI of House to make control.

It seemed very natural that PMN injection to BUMN in fantastic amount would trigger anxiety of possible manipulation. The Government had stated that the PMN was intended for enhancing infrastructure development. This time BUMN was expected to be the Propeller of development so as not to rely too much on private companies, but there was no guarantee there would ne no leaking of fund.

In fact the public supported the Parliament’s stance to be more cautions about approving PMN extention to BUMN. The Government had to make sure that the use of PMN fund was in accordance with the need for mid term development under good governance and accountable management.

Understandable because there had been too many display of state budgeting which was not transparent and not accountable; moreover the nation was disparately in need of economic breakthrough for rebound as expected by the people.

Spontaneously Parliament’s rejection to Commission XI House triggered responses from many circles. One of the protesters demanded BPK to explain the alleged irregularity of the Rp.3.1 trillion. They expected all parties to be objective in making decision because suspension of PMN was feared to hold back national development process.

The protesters said that extention PMN to BUMN was a change in financing mechanism for development financing to capital injection to BUMN. In this case it was BUMN who execute developments. They believed that by injecting PMN the Government did not pay expenses but only rechannel payment to BUMN and BUMN could borrow from banks 70% of project value.

Furthermore they stressed the need for control if PMN were suspended. The Parliament and the public must control the fund so there shall be no program which was not productive or even fund being used for political expenses.

Again BPK stressed the importance of accountability and transparence as prerequirement for BUMN before they could be entitled to receiving PMN. Supposedly BPK encouraged the Government to be more careful about channeling PMN so APBN fund of Rp.72.9 trillion could be more efficient.

Again BPK reminded the public that they had examined 37 BUMN and 40 PMN receivers included in Commission XI of House. 14 BUMN was mentioned as not making any finding and not signed by the said company. So it was not that the BUMN did not deserve to receive PMN but it would be most advisable that before PMN was given to 14 BUMN, the special notice by BPK could be managed by the Management concerned.

Financial examination by BPK BUMN was a form of support to Commission XI of House so they could easily control and maintain Good Corporate Governance in very BUMN. So it was not a matter of rejection by commission XI of House but rater it was some BUMN.

It must be understood that BPK was Auditor of the State and the parliament was Government controlling by the people in taking actions. (SS)

Business News - February 11, 2015