MP offers draft legislation to raise visitor contributions and strengthen worker protections, while pressing government to clear the legislative bottlenecks holding up reforms.
PHILIPSBURG:--- MP Sjamira Roseburg has proposed raising the room tax from five to ten percent as an interim revenue measure, arguing that the government should explore ways to secure greater visitor contributions while preparing broader visitor-tax legislation.
During the 2027 budget debate, Roseburg said she had a draft available for review and asked Finance Minister Marinka Gumbs and TEATT Minister Grisha Heyliger-Marten whether they would support the proposal.
She suggested that the additional revenue could help finance cleaner neighborhoods or targeted assistance with utility costs for seniors and households receiving social assistance.
Her intervention also addressed temporary employment contracts, minimum wage, school breakfasts, second-chance employment initiatives and delays affecting legislation awaiting advice.
Rather than limit her contribution to identifying problems, Roseburg repeatedly offered draft texts and legal assistance to help ministries move proposals forward.
“I know there is a gap. I know that there are not enough people to work,” she said. “So why not use my legal background in contributing?”
A temporary revenue measure while government prepares the visitor tax
Roseburg questioned where the proposed visitor tax stood in the legislative process and whether it appeared on government’s priority list.
She argued that, while that work continued, an amendment to the existing room-tax arrangement could provide an interim option.
Her proposal was to increase the rate she cited from five to ten percent, subject to the necessary review and legislative process.
Roseburg did not present a revenue forecast or assess the effect on accommodation businesses and visitors. She asked whether the ministries were already working on the change and, if not, whether her draft could assist.
She also recognized the need to coordinate the measure with any subsequent visitor tax.
Once that legislation arrived, she said, the room-tax rate could be evaluated to avoid overlap.
The proposal therefore remained an option for government and Parliament to examine, rather than an approved increase.
Cleaner neighborhoods and assistance for vulnerable households
Roseburg linked the revenue discussion to visible community needs.
She pointed to refrigerators, tires and other waste left along roads and requested an update on the illegal-dumping motion she had brought with MP Sarah Wescot-Williams.
She specifically asked about signs and a reporting tip line.
She suggested that additional visitor-related revenue could support a cleaner St. Maarten while also helping households under financial pressure.
She identified seniors and people receiving social assistance as possible beneficiaries of targeted utility support.
Those uses were suggestions she put forward during the debate. She did not announce that the additional revenue had been collected or formally earmarked.
Temporary contracts leave young workers unable to plan
Roseburg challenged VSA to explain the status of reforms concerning temporary employment contracts.
She referred to advice sought from the Social Economic Council in December 2025 and asked where the work now stood.
Was it part of the ministry’s legislative agenda? Had drafting begun? And what priority had it been assigned?
Roseburg described young workers facing repeated short contracts and uncertainty about their future.
“With those temporary contracts, you cannot plan with a family,” she said. “You cannot get a mortgage.”
She also raised concerns about workers without contracts and arrangements involving extended probation periods.
Her statement did not include individual employment records establishing the legal position in those cases. She used the examples to emphasize the need for clearer protections and progress on reform.
Roseburg said she had prepared a draft she could share if the ministry needed assistance.
She acknowledged that changes might be necessary, but argued that offering a working text was more useful than repeatedly recognizing the same problem.
SER bottleneck threatens progress on workers’ issues
Roseburg directed a related challenge to Prime Minister Dr. Luc Mercelina over the Social Economic Council’s functioning.
She requested a concrete timetable to resolve outstanding appointments and restore the council’s full operation.
The issue, she argued, affected legislation with important social and economic consequences.
Roseburg asked VSA when it had sent its request concerning minimum wage to SER and what alternative arrangements it was considering while the institutional difficulty continued.
“Minimum wage is something that needs to be addressed,” she said.
She also referred to other initiatives awaiting advice, including rental legislation, admission and expulsion rules, and changes concerning the use of multiple judges in certain criminal cases.
Some initiatives, she said, had been in the process since 2024 and 2025.
Her frustration concerned the difficulty of explaining to residents that proposed solutions remained stalled somewhere in the institutional chain.
“They want solutions,” she said.
Roseburg questioned the implications of bypassing SER but did not present that as an adopted course. Her principal demand was for government to resolve the bottleneck and explain the timetable.
School breakfast funding needs continuity
Roseburg asked ECYS Minister Melissa Gumbs what would happen to approximately 60 children benefiting from a breakfast initiative when its existing funding ended.
She referred to a 50,000-guilder allocation supported through a motion in 2025 and said the initiative was in its second year.
According to Roseburg, the funding would be exhausted after the current school year.
She requested an update on a structural breakfast program for children in need.
If no lasting arrangement was in place, she wanted to know what would replace the current initiative.
“It will be very unfortunate if those children will not be able to make use of this project and that there will be no other alternative in place,” she said.
Her question sought a specific continuity plan for children already receiving assistance, rather than a general statement supporting school nutrition.
Food assistance must not be lost through disconnection
Roseburg also raised concern about an electricity disconnection affecting a food-assistance provider and the risk of food spoiling.
She said she had received several messages about the situation and its potential effect on vulnerable residents who relied on the assistance.
Roseburg understood that a temporary solution had been found but asked for an explanation of the long-term arrangement.
She worried that food meant for people in need should not be lost while the underlying problem remained unresolved.
The issue reinforced her wider argument that decisions affecting electricity, social assistance and community services needed to account for their practical consequences.
Second chances should lead to jobs and training
Roseburg asked Justice and VSA whether they could develop second-chance initiatives through cooperation with businesses.
She requested the status of a project she said had appeared in the 2026 Crime Fund program and was being carried forward into 2027.
Had it started? If not, when would it begin? Had its activities expanded beyond the original description?
Roseburg asked whether Crime Fund resources could support or co-finance job-market preparation and training.
She also sought the ministries’ positions on a second-chance employment initiative involving private businesses.
Her questions focused on implementation and collaboration: which institution would act, what work would take place and when participants could benefit.
Youth pilot needs an evaluation
Roseburg requested an update on the CRT pilot as it approached its first year in December.
She asked whether it had been successful and whether it needed adjustments.
She also renewed her proposal to incorporate role models and mentorship, referring to correspondence she had sent to ECYS, VSA and Justice.
Several months had passed since the initial response that the program’s progress first needed to be assessed, she said.
Roseburg wanted to know whether the additional elements were now being considered.
Update outdated government fees
Alongside the room-tax proposal, Roseburg offered a draft amendment to the government fees ordinance, the Legesverordening, together with an explanatory memorandum.
She said she had raised the matter during earlier budget discussions and had repeatedly been told work was underway.
Roseburg argued that the existing amounts were outdated and asked where the revision stood on the legislative agenda.
She acknowledged an earlier caution that fees should not simply become a means of extracting money from applicants. Nevertheless, she maintained that the framework's age justified reviewing it.
Her contribution did not specify a new schedule of charges or establish how much additional revenue a revision would generate.
She offered the draft to the responsible ministry for examination and adjustment.
One list to show what government intends to deliver
Underlying Roseburg’s proposals was a request for a single legislative agenda covering all ministries.
She wanted Parliament to receive the list before the second round, even if it remained in draft form.
The document, she said, should identify priority measures, show where each stood in the process and indicate when it could reach Parliament.
That would also help determine how limited legislative drafting capacity should be deployed.
Without an agreed agenda, Roseburg warned, ministries and MPs risked pursuing separate initiatives without a clear work order.
Her message was that the country’s financial and social pressures required more than recognition of the problems.
She had offered draft legislation and practical assistance. She now wanted government to identify which proposals it would examine, who would move them forward, and when residents could expect decisions.