Smart Cabinet, not ‘slim’ or ‘fat’
There has been ongoing discourse regarding whether the next government should form a “fat” or “slim” Cabinet, but what we really need is a “smart” one.
A smart Cabinet would ensure the government’s workability amid the country’s complexity. In our presidential system, the president is tasked with realizing his/her vision during his/her fixed term of five years. Therefore, the president’s Cabinet is a mere instrument to meet his/her promises.
The idea of a smart Cabinet has become more important than ever as the governance paradigm here has shifted from controlling to steering. Its institutional setup has been highly decentralized.
The central government’s ability to consolidate various policy actors in Indonesia relies more on its ability to inspire and facilitate the regions to pursue their interests through mutual cooperation.
In such soft power play, where command and authority has become less relevant, knowledge plays a much greater role.
The recent presidential election displayed the remarkable mobilization of public knowledge — when well managed public knowledge turns into a formidable political force. Unfortunately, the discourse on forming the next Cabinet has yet to touch on how to use public knowledge to realize the future president’s vision.
In public discourse on the Cabinet, professionals are perceived to be disinterested, more committed to policy performance than political interests, contrary to the image of political party activists. This view prefers a slim Cabinet; regarding the fat cabinet as having overlooked the prime issue of securing the effective delivery of government policy.
The liberal tone of such discourse is in line with the premises of de bureaucratization and liberalization, favoring a minimal role of the state, its association of a large Cabinet with the idea of inefficiency; corruption and so on.
Actually, the minimum role of the state is not what the Indonesian public expects; as revealed by a current collaborative survey led by Gadjah Mada University, titled Power, Welfare and Democracy, launched earlier this year.
Indeed, the public rejects authoritarian rule but maintains old expectations of a broad role of the government in providing and ensuring public services. A large Cabinet is simply seen as too costly. In a smart Cabinet, the main issue is not the number of posts, but the capability of making and delivering the policy and governance scheme effectively.
Learning from Soeharto’s era, a longterm policy is extremely important, and, hence, the formation of the next Cabinet should be treated as an investment in future governance.