WILLEMSTAD – Opposition party PAR has accused Prime Minister Gilmar Pisas of attempting to blame opposition politicians for a dispute over year-end bonuses for civil servants and other public-sector employees, insisting that the government itself created the problem by including additional payments for ministers and Members of Parliament.
In a strongly worded statement, the PAR parliamentary faction rejected suggestions that opposition parties were responsible for potentially preventing public employees from receiving their promised bonuses.
According to PAR, the controversy arose because the Pisas Cabinet combined the proposed year-end payments for public employees with additional compensation for political officeholders, despite what the party describes as legal restrictions on such payments.
The party argues that the government should have treated the two groups separately from the beginning.
Governor's Refusal to Sign Raises Questions
PAR pointed to the Governor's decision not to sign the decree concerning additional bonuses for ministers and parliamentarians.
The opposition party emphasized that this does not automatically mean the proposed bonuses for civil servants were also rejected.
According to PAR, the distinction is important because the government has presented the situation as though objections to payments for political officeholders prevented the entire arrangement from proceeding.
The party questioned why the Cabinet combined the two categories of payments in the first place.
PAR maintains that civil servants should not face uncertainty over their year-end bonuses because of a government decision to include ministers and parliamentarians in the same arrangement.
The party called on Pisas to separate the payments, correct the administrative process, and provide public employees with clear information about when they can expect their bonuses.
PAR Challenges Pisas to Provide Evidence
The opposition also responded to allegations attributed to Pisas concerning former PAR politicians who allegedly became millionaires while serving in government.
PAR challenged the prime minister to identify the individuals he was referring to and present evidence supporting his accusations.
The party argued that serious allegations against political figures should be substantiated rather than used as part of a political confrontation.
In its statement, PAR also referred to past criminal convictions involving former MFK figures, including cases concerning corruption and money laundering, as well as the murder of politician Helmin Wiels.
The party used these references to challenge the government's criticism of the opposition. However, those historical cases do not, by themselves, establish wrongdoing by the current Cabinet or resolve the dispute over year-end bonuses.
PAR insisted that political integrity should not be compromised in exchange for government positions.
Government Must Take Responsibility
The PAR parliamentary faction, consisting of Quincy Girigorie, Shaheen Elhage, Luigi Fanyete, and Ana Maria Pauletta, called on Pisas to stop shifting responsibility for the bonus controversy.
The party emphasized that the prime minister and his Cabinet are responsible for government decisions and for ensuring that proposed payments comply with the law.
According to PAR, the immediate priority should be resolving the uncertainty facing civil servants and other public-sector workers.
The party wants the government to separate the disputed payments for political officeholders from those intended for public employees and ensure that the necessary procedures are properly followed.
PAR's statement does not provide details of the legal steps required to authorize separate payments or establish whether the government can complete those steps before the end of the year.
Nevertheless, the opposition maintains that public employees should not bear the consequences of what it considers a mistake made by the Cabinet.
PAR concluded by demanding accountability from Pisas, arguing that responsibility for resolving the situation rests with the government currently in office, not with the opposition politicians questioning its decisions.