The new 2025 budget was adopted by Parliament (see Wednesday newspaper) almost halfway into the year. It took three days of debate during a plenary session, culminating in a 17-hour continued meeting on Monday that ended early Tuesday morning. Keep in mind this was preceded by Central Committee deliberations from June 9 through 13.
People often say their elected representatives earn too much and don’t work enough, but over the past two weeks they certainly earned their keep. Not only that, but it was the second time legislators needed to handle basically the same budget.
A record number of 15 motions had been submitted, of which more than half were passed. That’s not the case for the two only amendments, with the entire URSM/DP/PFP/SAM coalition voting them down.
Last-minute amendments and their impact on the figures was one of the issues mentioned with the original version of the budget unanimously approved in January. Finance Minister Marinka Gumbs advised against introducing such at this point without a thorough analysis of their ripple effects. This would “put us back in the same situation we are seeking to fix.”
It must be said, the amendments by United People’s party (UP) faction member Francisco Lacroes and National Alliance (NA) leader Egbert Doran involved respectively 18,000 and 50,000 Caribbean guilders. Those hardly seem like huge amounts that would greatly upset the budget.
They both proposed reallocating funds, in the first case from the Ministry of Tourist, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication (TEATT) to that of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport (ECYS). In the second case Cg. 20,000 from TEATT and Cg. 30,000 from the Ministry of Finance were also to go to EYCS.
However, monies for the rest of 2025 have reportedly already been allocated. That’s particularly understandable with just six months remaining.
Some may be surprised at coalition members backing motions by the opposition and vice versa. However, this does not necessarily have to imply a political crisis and could be a sign of maturity in the legislature, also considering that motions are merely expressing a wish of the majority.
What raises questions is a coalition member voting against the budget of her own government. In this case it did not change the outcome because an opposition member supported the budget too and it was still passed with a vote to spare.
