Coalition MP says aspects of the cannabis document concern her, challenges increased borrowing and asks how economic growth will improve residents’ lives.
PHILIPSBURG:--- Coalition MP Veronica Jansen-Webster raised concerns about a confidential cannabis agreement, inadequate financial assistance funding and the government’s readiness to execute capital projects during the continuation of the 2027 budget debate on Wednesday, November 4.
Her contribution supported the timely presentation of the budget while raising pointed questions about its priorities, implementation capacity and benefits for residents.
Jansen-Webster questioned why proposed borrowing had increased substantially while ministries’ project preparation remained unclear. She also pressed government on overseas medical referrals, unpaid suppliers, outstanding financial statements and the resources available to support vulnerable households.
Explaining her approach as a coalition member, she said direct discussions with ministers sometimes reduced the number of questions she needed to ask publicly. Nevertheless, she emphasized that unresolved matters still required answers before she could make an informed decision on the budget.
Cannabis Agreement Raises Concerns About Access and Confidentiality
Jansen-Webster requested improved parliamentary access to a cannabis agreement discussed in an October 25 newspaper commentary.
She said the document had been submitted confidentially and that she had taken the opportunity to inspect it. However, she explained that the confidential viewing arrangement did not allow her to write down information or make notes.
She identified approximately 12 to 15 points that she considered concerning, without disclosing their substance during her contribution.
Her concern intensified, she said, when some matters she had noticed appeared in the published commentary.
“If a columnist has this information, why can we not have it in Parliament?” she asked.
Her complaint was therefore about the form of parliamentary access and the ability to examine the agreement properly, rather than a claim that she had been denied any opportunity to see it.
She requested that the document be made available through a route that would permit more effective review and note-taking.
Her remarks did not establish how the columnist obtained the information or whether any confidentiality rule was breached. Nor did she identify enough contractual detail publicly to assess the provisions troubling her.
They nevertheless place a significant question before TEATT Minister Grisha Heyliger-Marten: how can MPs scrutinize an agreement effectively when their ability to record and examine its contents is restricted?
Financial Assistance Provision Falls Below Anticipated Need
Jansen-Webster also challenged the proposed financial assistance funding.
VSA Minister Claret Connor had indicated that approximately 8.2 million guilders were budgeted, while anticipated requirements were around 10 million guilders.
She asked how the ministry intended to address that gap.
For Jansen-Webster, the figures had to be considered alongside evidence of hardship. She referred to census findings that she said showed approximately 7% of the population experiencing hunger, linking that concern to the adequacy of social support.
That percentage was cited by the MP during the debate; her contribution did not explain the underlying survey question, reference period or methodology.
Her policy question was clear: why wasn't assistance strengthened in line with the needs the government itself anticipated?
VSA’s Declining Budget Prompts Questions About Priorities
Jansen-Webster described VSA as the ministry losing ground financially while other portfolios received increases.
She identified an approximately 4.6% reduction in its overall budget and questioned the direction of spending when public discussion emphasized economic growth.
The reduction requires context. Connor had earlier attributed most of the overall decline to externally financed reform projects reaching completion or their final phase, rather than an equivalent reduction in every domestic service.
Nevertheless, that explanation does not resolve the separate financial assistance gap.
Jansen-Webster asked how the government intended to protect people who depend on support while advancing reforms in healthcare and social protection.
She also questioned when general health insurance legislation would reach Parliament and whether phased implementation would begin in January 2027.
Her intervention sought to connect the budget’s projections to improvements residents could actually experience.
Why Increase Borrowing Without Clear Project Readiness?
The MP questioned the proposed increase in 2027 borrowing from about 53 million to 94 million guilders.
She wanted to know whether ministries had prepared the projects they were seeking to finance, including procurement, permits, and designs.
If staffing shortages were preventing execution, she asked how government could justify expanding the project portfolio.
She requested an account of which 2026 projects could still start and which had been delayed because preparatory work was not complete.
Her questions distinguished securing financing from being ready to spend it effectively.
In her view, a larger borrowing request required a credible explanation of implementation capacity and project sequencing.
Ministries Asked to Report Actual Recruitment
Jansen-Webster requested staffing information in a specific format: the number of vacancies budgeted for 2026, how many employees had been recruited and how many further appointments were expected before year-end.
She said that would help Parliament assess preparation and execution following the late budget.
She praised the Justice presentation for clearly distinguishing vacancies, completed recruitment, and appointments still expected.
For General Affairs, she separately asked how many vacancies the personnel department had processed since approval of the 2026 budget.
The request would allow Parliament to compare funded positions with actual recruitment rather than treating vacancy allocations as completed capacity improvements.
Overseas Medical Referrals Need Closer Examination
Addressing Connor, Jansen-Webster raised concerns about patients traveling abroad without accompaniment and about the time required to arrange referrals.
She recalled visiting a woman receiving cancer treatment in Colombia who was alone and asked how frequently patients had traveled unaccompanied during 2025 and 2026.
She wanted to understand the circumstances behind those decisions, including whether patients lacked someone available to accompany them.
Jansen-Webster also questioned referral timeframes she recalled from earlier answers: approximately 11 days for cases described as emergencies and three days for acute cases.
She expressly invited the minister to correct those figures if her recollection was inaccurate. They should therefore be treated as timeframes she questioned, rather than confirmed service standards.
She said she had requested a closed-door meeting involving the minister and SZV to examine referrals and related concerns.
Consultant Contracts and Legal Costs Require Fuller Answers
Jansen-Webster said earlier responses about consultancy contracts remained incomplete.
She asked what services were covered where a consultant’s function was described only as “other,” suggesting that Parliament needed to know whether the work involved purchasing, event coordination, marketing or another activity.
She also requested an explanation for an apparent doubling of a legal advisory allocation and asked how much had actually been paid to the adviser during 2026.
Her questions sought the information needed to compare the proposed increase with expenditure and services already delivered.
The contribution did not establish that any contract was improper or that an increase lacked justification. It challenged government to provide that justification clearly.
Supplier Payments and Financial Statements Also Challenged
To Finance Minister Marinka Gumbs, Jansen-Webster asked whether centralized purchasing had improved visibility over outstanding invoices and unpaid suppliers.
She relayed complaints from departments about lengthy approval processes and asked for the average time required to approve supplier payments.
She also wanted to know how payment priority was determined: whether invoices were handled in order of receipt or according to another ranking system.
Separately, she requested completion dates for the country’s 2023–2025 financial statements, along with outstanding civil servant healthcare accounts and settlements with SZV.
She argued those records are necessary for Parliament to understand actual expenditure and make informed decisions.
Tourism Growth Should Reach Residents’ Pockets
Jansen-Webster asked Finance and TEATT whether they were working together to convert tourism growth into direct benefits, including possible tax reductions.
She requested comparisons showing how the number of individual and business taxpayers had changed over the past decade, alongside concrete measures to broaden participation in the tax system.
On food affordability, she encouraged the proposed essential-goods study to consider suppliers in the Caribbean and South America.
She also called for clearer visitor guidance on local expectations, including dress and respectful coexistence, and asked what ministries were doing together to address traffic ahead of the busy season.
Accountability Questions Extend Across Government
Other requests included the status of the prison building permit, implementation of ASYCUDA, stronger victim support arrangements and school prevention and referral protocols for substance use among minors.
For VROMI, she asked whether additional road resurfacing would take place before year-end and requested an update on suspended senior personnel, given the ministry’s reported capacity shortages.
Jansen-Webster’s contribution ultimately placed a practical test before government: whether its plans, contracts and spending decisions can be explained in enough detail for Parliament to assess their value.
Timeliness earned her praise. Project readiness, social protection and measurable improvements in residents’ quality of life remained the questions requiring answers.