Laws to increase financial provisions face heavy debate
Laws to increase financial provisions face heavy debate . The debates surrounding the laws aimed at synchronizing the financial provisions for the three branches of government have been heated from start to finish in the National Assembly (DNA). The laws were passed with 28 votes in favor and 12 against. The NDP faction heavily criticized the laws, labeling them as unfair and greedy, especially given the current struggle of civil servants to make ends meet. The NDP voted against the laws, while the NPS faction abstained from voting.
Suriname Herald
The debates surrounding the laws aimed at synchronizing the financial provisions for the three branches of government have been heated from start to finish in the National Assembly (DNA). The laws were passed with 28 votes in favor and 12 against. The NDP faction heavily criticized the laws, labeling them as unfair and greedy, especially given the current struggle of civil servants to make ends meet. The NDP voted against the laws, while the NPS faction abstained from voting.

Ivanildo Plein (NPS) explained that his faction refrained from voting against the laws because certain positive elements were included. However, he highlighted that the laws still contain flaws and fail to adequately consider public sentiment. The BEP faction, on the other hand, voted in favor of the laws.

With the approval of these laws, the financial provisions for the three branches are now harmonized. One of the primary reasons for these legislative changes was that the state treasury could no longer sustain the lifelong care for government officials and their families. Additionally, the new laws aim to reduce conflicts of interest and resolve the issue of double salaries for DNA members.

The retirement age is now set at 60 for everyone, with the exception of the judiciary. The automatic entitlement for former DNA members to become policy advisors has been abolished. Furthermore, the practice of purchasing state assets for a symbolic amount has been discontinued, and DNA members can now claim medical provisions for up to one year after their term ends.

A point of contention was the fact that these regulations would apply to the next government and parliament. Members from both the opposition and coalition argued that some measures should take immediate effect to prevent certain issues during the transition of power. Another concern was that the judiciary would only pay taxes on 90 percent of their total salary instead of the full amount.

Asis Gajadien (VHP), the initiator of the law, stated that the constitution allows privileges regarding taxes to be granted, but these must be legislated. According to Gajadien, this requirement has been met through the new laws. He ultimately proposed removing this provision from the law.

Regarding the implementation of certain measures, Gajadien explained that, based on consultations with legal experts, it would not be feasible as the law specifies it will only take effect with the next government. He encouraged members to submit initiative laws if they wished to expedite these measures. He also noted that some issues fall under executive decisions that the government must address.

Acting Minister of Home Affairs Steven Mac Andrew stated that questions regarding the purchase, depreciation, and sale of government vehicles would be better answered by the Minister of Public Works. However, he assured that the government, after consultation, is willing to address such matters through an executive order.
Surinam
Het nieuws uit Suriname lees je op srherald.com
https://www.srherald.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/6903cb0c-9ee2-54ff-e1df-bf6a57479fa0.jpeg
https://www.srherald.com/news-in-english/2024/11/29/laws-to-increase-financial-provisions-face-heavy-debate/
2024-11-29
rss
The debates surrounding the laws aimed at synchronizing the financial provisions for the three branches of government have been heated from start to finish in the National Assembly (DNA). The laws were passed with 28 votes in favor and 12 against. The NDP faction heavily criticized the laws, labeling them as unfair and greedy, especially given the current struggle of civil servants to make ends meet. The NDP voted against the laws, while the NPS faction abstained from voting.
Laws to increase financial provisions face heavy debate