MP presents draft reforms on utility charges, room tax and temporary contracts, challenging government to replace repeated promises with a coordinated legislative agenda.
PHILIPSBURG:--- MP Sjamira Roseburg has called on the government to pursue a court-backed inquiry into GEBE, establish clear protections against disconnection, and examine legislative changes to make fuel and utility charges transparent and independently reviewed.
Speaking during the 2027 budget debate, Roseburg said she had prepared draft legislation and a draft disconnection policy that she was willing to share with the responsible ministries.
Her contribution centered on using Parliament’s legislative role to help resolve problems rather than repeatedly describe them.
“Sitting still is not an option,” she said.
Roseburg also proposed increasing room tax from five to ten percent as an interim revenue measure, requested action on temporary employment contracts, and demanded a single legislative agenda showing which laws government intended to prioritize.
The proposals she described remain subject to review and the applicable legislative or policy processes. Her statement did not establish that the measures had been adopted.
GEBE and Sol: Time for an inquiry?
Roseburg renewed her request for an inquiry into GEBE, saying she had written to Prime Minister Dr. Luc Mercelina in May 2026 and received an August 5 response emphasizing due diligence and care.
She said she respected that position and gave the government time to proceed.
But she argued that continuing uncertainty surrounding the fuel clause, combined with consumers’ financial distress, made further action necessary.
Roseburg cited the BTP report, which said the fuel clause could not be validated, and asked whether the Council of Ministers’ position on an inquiry had changed.
She urged government, as GEBE’s sole shareholder, to use the legal route she identified rather than wait for the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Her proposed inquiry would examine how fuel costs were calculated, what Sol charged GEBE, what the utility passed on to consumers, and how the relevant agreements were approved.
She also wanted scrutiny of fuel losses and how water-production costs were treated in electricity billing.
Those were questions Roseburg sought to have investigated. Her speech did not establish wrongdoing by particular individuals or companies.
Referring to reports that Sol had retained legal representation, she said the company was entitled to protect its interests.
“But who is protecting the people?” she asked.
Roseburg argued that seeking an inquiry should not be treated as an admission of government failure, but as a means of establishing responsibility for a longstanding problem.
Draft legislation would require closer scrutiny of charges
Roseburg outlined a draft involving changes to the electricity concession framework and price regulation.
As she described it, the proposal would enable maximum prices for fuel and associated storage and throughput charges, require detailed disclosure of underlying costs and strengthen review of changes to GEBE’s fuel clause.
She said changes would first have to be reported to BTP, which would help prevent unsupported adjustments.
Her proposal also contemplated an audit of the fuel clause dating back to March 2022, with amounts found to have been overpaid returned to consumers.
Roseburg said the draft included protections for vulnerable people.
She acknowledged that the text might require changes and offered it as a contribution to work already underway within TEATT, rather than a finished answer to every issue.
“It is a suggestion; it’s not perfect,” she said.
Roseburg calls for immediate relief alongside legislation
Roseburg argued that government should also examine what could be done under existing arrangements while preparing legislative changes.
She proposed requiring a detailed fuel-cost breakdown and using the government’s shareholder position to seek a reversal of the increase she referenced.
She also called for approximately 6.9 million to be returned to consumers through their bills.
That was Roseburg’s proposed response based on her reading of the available information. Her statement did not include a completed reconciliation establishing each consumer’s entitlement or confirm that government had approved refunds.
She further suggested revising the National Decree on Electricity Tariffs within three months.
Her broader position was that consumers should not have to wait for every legislative step before government examined the tools already available.
“Where is this disconnection policy?”
Roseburg pressed Mercelina over the continued absence, as she described it, of a clear, published disconnection policy.
She said a policy had been expected in June 2026 but had still not been provided.
“What is the holdup?” she asked. “Where is this disconnection policy?”
Roseburg said she had prepared a draft drawing on policies elsewhere in the Kingdom and was willing to make it available to GEBE.
She argued that customers needed to understand the circumstances in which disconnection could occur and the procedures that would apply.
Her proposed safeguards included specific consideration for seniors, vulnerable households and people whose medical needs made a loss of electricity particularly serious.
Pending adoption of a clear framework, she asked whether GEBE would stop disconnecting seniors and vulnerable households without an appropriate plan.
She linked the request to accounts raised by other MPs of residents struggling to meet basic living expenses.
One legislative agenda, with priorities and dates
Roseburg asked Mercelina to provide Parliament with a consolidated legislative agenda, even in draft form, before the second round of the debate.
She wanted one list covering the ministries, showing priority laws, their position in the drafting and advisory process and an estimated date for reaching Parliament.
Separate announcements that each ministry was working on legislation did not provide that overview, she argued.
“Without one agenda, we’ll be continuing being all over the place,” she said.
Roseburg also linked the agenda to deploying legislative lawyers and other support. A ranked list, she argued, would allow limited drafting capacity to be directed toward agreed priorities.
She offered her legal background and draft texts as additional assistance, saying government could review, amend or take over the initiatives where useful.
Room tax proposal would seek revenue while visitor levy is prepared
Roseburg questioned the timetable for the proposed visitor tax and suggested an interim increase in room tax from five to ten percent.
She said she had a draft available if the ministries had not already advanced the measure.
Roseburg proposed using the additional revenue for purposes such as cleaner neighborhoods or targeted assistance with household utility costs, including support for seniors and people receiving social assistance.
Those were possible uses she raised, rather than allocations already established in the budget.
She also said the rate could be reviewed when the broader visitor-tax legislation arrived to prevent overlapping charges.
Her questions to Finance and TEATT were whether the proposal formed part of their legislative priorities and whether they would support examining it.
Temporary contracts leave workers unable to plan
Roseburg asked for an update on temporary employment contracts, referring to advice she said she had sought from the Social Economic Council in December 2025.
She described young workers facing repeated short contracts, uncertainty about their employment and difficulty planning family life or obtaining a mortgage.
She also raised concerns about arrangements involving extended probation periods and workers without contracts.
Her contribution did not include individual employment files establishing the legal position in those cases. She used the examples to press VSA for the reform’s status and priority.
Roseburg said she had prepared a draft in this area as well and offered to assist if the ministry needed support.
SER delays are holding up legislation
Roseburg asked the Prime Minister for a concrete timetable to resolve outstanding SER appointments and restore the council’s full functioning.
She described its advisory role as important to the country’s institutional framework and warned that stalled advice was affecting legislative progress.
She referred to initiatives involving rental legislation, admission and expulsion rules, and the use of multiple judges in certain criminal cases.
Roseburg said some initiatives had been in the process since 2024 and 2025.
She questioned how MPs could explain ongoing delays to residents expecting solutions, while also emphasizing the need for a proper process.
She asked VSA when it had sent its request concerning minimum wage to SER and what alternative arrangements it was considering while the council’s functioning remained unresolved.
Screening legislation and police facilities
Roseburg requested an update on the screening legislation Mercelina had said he was working on.
She asked whether it was on the legislative priority list and when a draft could reach Parliament.
Her concern was the need for clear rules rather than uncertainty about the procedures applied when prospective ministers were assessed.
She also asked about assistance requested from the Netherlands in December 2025 concerning police facilities.
Roseburg cited leaks, mold, and criticism of holding cells, and asked for an update on the assistance and what resulted from it.
Justice back pay, second chances and victim support
Roseburg asked Justice to confirm the November 30, 2026 deadline she said had been provided for written clarity on completed personnel files and the timing of back-pay payments.
She also requested the promised staffing plan.
Turning to the Crime Fund, she questioned whether an updated project plan was being prepared and whether resources could support second-chance employment and training initiatives in cooperation with VSA and businesses.
She asked whether the second-chance project carried forward from 2026 had started and, if not, when implementation would begin.
Roseburg also sought updates on the Drive Safe campaign, the tourist-police pilot and whether officers under that proposal would be armed.
On criminal procedure reform, she asked whether the first-quarter 2027 timetable still applied.
She questioned the adequacy of victim compensation arrangements, citing the maximum amounts described in her statement and asking whether the advance-payment mechanism could be expanded.
Her concern was that victims could face further hardship when people ordered to compensate them lacked the means to pay.
Breakfast assistance needs a lasting plan
Roseburg asked ECYS what would happen to approximately 60 children benefiting from a school breakfast initiative when its existing funding was exhausted.
She referred to a 50,000-guilder allocation supported through a 2025 motion and said the initiative was in its second year.
She requested clarity on whether a structural breakfast program was in place and what alternative would protect the children if the current funding ended.
She also requested an evaluation of the CRT pilot as it approached its first year in December, including whether it would incorporate role models and mentorship.
Separately, she raised concern about an electricity disconnection affecting a food-assistance provider and the potential loss of food intended for vulnerable residents.
She said she understood a temporary arrangement had been found but wanted the lasting solution explained.
Garbage tender: Explain the process in plain language
Roseburg asked VROMI Minister Patrice Gumbs Jr. for a step-by-step explanation of the garbage collection tender process.
She wanted to understand how the previous procedure worked, how the current electronic system operated, and what the terminology displayed to bidders meant.
She referred to public screenshots and reports of messages using words such as “winner” and “awarding,” while emphasizing that she did not want to rely on hearsay.
She asked the minister to explain the difference between the system’s messages and the formal decisions the government had taken.
She did not declare that the screenshots proved contracts had been awarded.
Roseburg also requested progress on the illegal-dumping motion she had brought with MP Sarah Wescot-Williams, including signs and a reporting tip line.
Her closing message returned to the approach she had outlined at the start: Parliament should scrutinize government, but MPs could also contribute draft solutions.
She said the texts she had prepared could be reviewed and adjusted to help move the work forward, and she awaited ministers’ responses to both her questions and her offers of assistance.
