MPs Roseburg, Jansen-Webster and Labega Focus on continuity, if Brug can still function

GREAT BAY--Members of Parliament Sjamira Roseburg, Veronica Jansen Webster and Dimar Labega responded to Minister Richinel Brug’s presentation in Parliament on Tuesday by focusing on whether he can still function effectively as Minister of Public Health, Social Development and Labor amid the accusations he has levied, the breakdown in trust with the Prime Minister, the URSM board and parts of the governing coalition.

While the MPs differed in tone and emphasis, their comments centered on the same central question: after the serious allegations, public letters, internal party conflict and accusations of interference, can Brug still carry out his ministerial responsibilities in a way that protects the people of St. Maarten?

MP Jansen Webster, who served as Minister of VSA before Brug, opened by saying she had generally avoided questioning him in Parliament out of respect for the difficulty of taking over the ministry after her. She stressed that her questions were not intended as an attack, but as an effort to clarify key issues.

Jansen Webster focused on the timeline of the contract involving the husband of Brug’s chief of staff. She noted that Brug was sworn in on November 26, 2024, and that by early December 2024, according to his own presentation, advice had already been sent to Legal Affairs concerning a contract involving the chief of staff’s husband.

She questioned how the ministry proceeded without awaiting formal legal advice, especially given Brug’s own statement that his chief of staff signed all advices. Jansen Webster said that, as a former civil servant, she found it concerning that a minister would proceed without Legal Affairs advice, particularly when the matter involved a potential conflict of interest.

She also questioned Brug’s explanation of urgency, noting that during her tenure funds had been secured for the mental health project, including funds for the new building and operational costs. She asked why the situation was treated as so urgent that Legal Affairs advice could not be awaited.

Jansen Webster further clarified that the current adjunct director of SZV was not her personal appointment, as suggested in public discussions. She said the candidate was proposed by the SZV Supervisory Board and had already been functioning in the position for years. The appointment process, she explained, was already underway during her time as minister, pending the required VDSM screening.

She also asked Brug to identify which law the Prime Minister allegedly asked him to break, and whether, after everything he had said about the Prime Minister, there was still a workable relationship inside government. If not, she asked whether the country was now facing a breakdown in government.

MP Labega also approached the matter from the standpoint of governability. He said Brug had clearly spoken from a place of deep frustration and that the matter appeared to have weighed on him for a long time. However, Labega said much of what had reached the public sphere appeared personal and internal, involving the Minister, the party board and the Prime Minister.

Labega said the situation had now gone too far to be viewed only as an internal party matter. He asked Brug how he sees himself moving forward after the URSM board publicly distanced itself from him and expressed a lack of confidence in his ability to continue.

Labega questioned whether Brug still wanted to move forward in the current political environment and whether he could fulfill his function independently of the support of his party. He said the central issue was not simply whether Brug wanted to remain minister, but whether he could still be effective within the Council of Ministers and the coalition.

MP Roseburg, speaking as URSM faction leader, said the situation was unfortunate for the party, for Parliament and for the country. She said she had not entered politics to spend hours in Parliament discussing internal party matters, but acknowledged that the issue was now before Parliament and had to be addressed.

Roseburg said the public must be safeguarded and that every MP must consider the effect of any decision on the country. She stressed that the principle of “country above self” must guide Parliament, but said the practical meaning of that principle becomes difficult in a situation where every possible outcome carries consequences.

She pushed back against criticism from opposition MPs who accused the coalition of creating confusion, saying she was present in Parliament to fulfill her responsibility and would not be led by anyone. Roseburg said she takes her role seriously and will vote her conscience.

Roseburg asked Brug to explain, in practical terms, how he could continue functioning if a motion of no confidence fails and he remains minister. She said it was not enough to say that one wants to continue, because government requires cooperation, support and the ability to execute decisions.

She asked whether Brug believes it is still feasible to achieve his goals in the current political climate, given the apparent disconnect between him, the Prime Minister, the party board and other stakeholders. Roseburg said the country still has major issues that require government action, including GEBE, health care, the hospital and other matters requiring urgent decisions.

Roseburg also questioned the status of Brug’s complaint to the Integrity Chamber and asked what actions he would take depending on whether the Chamber proceeds with an investigation.

‍