Former finance minister questions legal review, outstanding annual accounts, ENNIA accounting and financing risks, while demanding ministers face the media and explain their results.
PHILIPSBURG:--- MP Ardwell Irion has challenged the credibility of the draft 2027 budget, arguing that the government’s celebration of an early submission conceals unresolved questions about the document’s quality, financial accountability and ability to deliver projects.
The former finance minister told Parliament that being on time matters, but the government must also show its budget is accurate, properly reviewed, and executable.
Irion cited concerns he attributed to the Council of Advice and the Committee for Financial Supervision, Cft, including errors, shortcomings in the preparation process and unresolved financial reporting.
He said the Council of Advice had raised concerns about the omission of a Legal Affairs review and the effect on budget quality. He also referred to questions about figures and methodology, including matters relating to ECYS.
These were Irion’s descriptions of the advisory findings during the debate. The supplied transcript does not contain the underlying reports.
Where are the annual accounts?
Irion demanded a timetable for formally establishing the 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 annual accounts.
He argued that Parliament cannot properly assess government expenditure or hold ministers accountable when the financial reporting process remains incomplete.
Defending his own record, he said the previous administration brought a series of overdue annual accounts forward during its tenure, including during the COVID period.
He also asked whether Parliament had received the second-quarter financial report, which he said members expected before the budget debate.
His objection went to a basic oversight requirement: projected spending must be assessed alongside reliable information about what government has already spent.
ENNIA provision comes under scrutiny
Irion questioned the placement of an approximately two-million-guilder ENNIA-related provision in the budget’s ordinary service.
He argued the amount belonged in the capital service and asked the finance minister whether she acknowledged the classification needed correction.
He referred to arrangements involving Curaçao and to guidance he attributed to Cft in support of his position.
Irion also requested any agreement showing that Sint Maarten’s terms differ from the existing arrangement.
His remarks raised a technical accounting question with wider implications for how the government’s budget balance is presented. The supplied statement does not include the finance minister’s explanation of the provision or a resolution of the dispute.
Capital projects without certainty of financing
Irion warned that placing capital expenditure in the budget does not guarantee that projects will receive financing or be delivered.
He asked whether government had received any indication that borrowing associated with the 2026 budget would secure favorable advice, including if execution extends into 2027.
He also questioned whether a process under Article 15 could follow if government failed to address Cft’s advice, and asked the finance minister to explain the possible consequences.
Irion’s comments expressed concern about that possibility; he did not announce that an instruction had been issued.
He asked whether Finance had clearly explained the financing risks to ministers who included capital projects in their budgets. Those colleagues, he argued, should know whether their plans could be delayed because existing investment funds were not being spent quickly enough.
“The government has an execution problem,” he said.
The criticism went beyond securing new money. Irion argued that government must demonstrate its ability to complete work already funded.
Collect revenue already owed
Irion demanded answers about revenue measures he said the previous administration had begun.
He questioned why a task force on land lease collections had stopped, what collection work replaced it, and whether Finance intended to restart the effort.
He also asked for the status of lottery and casino fee collections, including outstanding amounts and expected revenue in 2027.
Alongside those questions, he sought details on the government’s cost-saving measures and vehicle fuel spending.
He argued the government should account for its collection efforts and control its own spending while residents face pressure to meet their obligations.
Face the media
One of Irion’s strongest attacks concerned access to ministers.
He challenged what he described as the finance minister’s prolonged absence from regular government press briefings and criticized recurring cancellations.
He argued that accountability includes answering questions from the media, which he identified as the fourth estate.
“How much does it cost to have a press briefing every week?” he asked.
Irion accused the government of preferring information it controls over direct questioning. He also said the prime minister is responsible for ensuring ministers participate.
For the former finance minister, references to integrity and accountability carry little weight if ministers do not regularly explain their decisions in public.
Put the inherited bills on paper
Responding to remarks he said the prime minister’s chief of staff made on social media about inherited unpaid bills, Irion demanded a documented breakdown.
He asked for the amounts, dates and responsible officials associated with outstanding expenses for vehicle rentals, repairs, cleaning, mechanics, printers and ink.
He also sought the legal advice given to the Council of Ministers on paying older bills.
Irion argued that a written record was necessary to establish when the obligations arose and who was responsible, rather than allowing political claims about inherited debt to stand without supporting detail.
Parliament’s decisions must produce action
Irion requested updates from every ministry on the execution of motions and amendments passed in 2024, 2025 and 2026.
He also raised practical questions about the legal basis for road cameras, possible number plate recognition, the cost of a government presence at the borders, recruitment at ECYS and opportunities for civil servants to pursue further education.
He asked whether solar lighting could be installed in dark government parking areas.
Taken together, those questions tested whether the budget’s promises translate into functioning services, completed projects and visible improvements.
Irion’s criticism left government facing a demanding standard for the next stage of the debate: show that the accounts are in order, explain the risks attached to planned borrowing, demonstrate what revenue is being collected and identify what has actually been delivered.
An early budget can establish a better timetable. Irion argued that public confidence will depend on the accuracy, answers and results that follow.
