WILLEMSTAD - During the hearings of the parliamentary inquiry into the Hospital Nobo Otrobanda (HNO), Suzanne Camelia-Römer, former Minister of Health, Environment, and Nature (GMN) in 2017, delivered a series of statements yesterday that have captured attention. With a blend of determination and indignation, she recounted the challenges she faced upon assuming responsibility for the hospital project. However, some discerning observers may perceive her narrative, akin to those of many other officials appearing before the inquiry committee, as an effort to deflect accountability.
"I've never inherited such chaos before," asserted Camelia-Römer, pointing to the organizational disorder she encountered. While acknowledging project-related issues can signal transparency, it also raises concerns about officials absolving themselves of culpability. By attributing various problems to Sona and the Dutch government, including lapses in oversight and attempts to impede the project's progress, Camelia-Römer positions herself as a determined champion who, armed with determination, fought against adversity to complete the hospital.
The former minister underscored her dedication by expressing her unwavering commitment to advancing the project "at all costs," notwithstanding the identified hurdles. Yet, this steadfast stance prompts questions about the extent to which it hindered a critical examination of alternative solutions or the project's feasibility.
The notion that "if mistakes were made with my decisions, then so be it, and I take responsibility," initially suggests a readiness to be held accountable. However, this assertion loses potency if she fails to acknowledge her own errors. Is she hedging against forthcoming conclusions?
Critics may argue that Camelia-Römer's testimony, while shedding light on significant issues, ultimately resembles a common tactic employed by political figures facing scrutiny: emphasizing dedication and noble intentions while shifting blame for failures onto others. It echoes the sentiments of those already heard by the committee and perhaps forecasts those yet to come.
The committee's comprehensive review of the dossier, delving into officials' decision-making processes, remains unaddressed.