During the second round of the parliamentary debate on the AIOF 2026–2027 budget, MEP Member of Parliament Drs. Shailiny Tromp-Lee questioned the lack of transparency, documentation, and oversight in the management of the investment fund.
According to Tromp-Lee, following the response from Minister Geoffrey Wever, crucial questions remain unanswered: the Evaluation Committee has not been appointed, it remains unclear who represents the relevant ministries, Parliament has not received the multi-year investment agenda or all the necessary information to evaluate the projects, and the budget violates the Public Financial Management Act (comptabiliteitswet).
“Government is asking for a blank check of Afl. 33 million and a bounced check of Afl. 26 million.”
The MP criticized the budget for reflecting a gap between available funds and the investment agenda, while individual projects lack the necessary details for Parliament to determine their scope, execution timeline, and objectives. Without this information, it is difficult to assess later whether the investments achieved their intended outcomes.
Tromp-Lee also recalled that the General Audit Chamber (Algemene Rekenkamer), in its report Buiten beeld, buiten controle (“Out of Sight, Out of Control”), issued recommendations to strengthen oversight of budgetary funds. For the MP, the current situation raises serious questions regarding compliance with these recommendations and the Government’s responsibility to ensure transparency.
Budgetary shifts—where funds are removed from one project and allocated to another—further illustrate the issue. During the debate, coalition members themselves questioned the decision to remove Afl. 2 million from asphalt paving and reallocate funds initially designated for parking spaces in the Palm Beach hotel area toward paving.
“If even we as parliamentarians cannot clearly see on what basis these decisions are being made, how can we monitor whether priorities are correct and whether public money is being spent effectively?”
Tromp-Lee also shared that Parliament received a USB drive containing information on reserved project amounts, but without the corresponding project dossiers. According to the MP, this underscores the urgent need for the Government to submit complete documentation, not just financial summaries.
For MEP, public investment is essential for Aruba’s development, but it cannot serve as an excuse to weaken parliamentary oversight. Parliament must be able to evaluate, question, and scrutinize before approving the expenditure of public funds.
“The taxpayers’ money deserves transparency. Without documentation, clear criteria, and proper oversight, Parliament cannot determine whether these investments truly benefit Aruba.”